CASE CLOSED … what really happened in the 2001 anthrax attacks?

* what can we do to help Congressman Holt make his proposed Anthrax Commission a reality?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 8, 2009

CASE CLOSEDCASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … Here’s an excerpt from the CASE CLOSED story; the (fictional) DIA team reviews the connection between the anthrax attack and the subsequent invasion of Iraq …

“After the nationwide panic caused by the anthrax mailings settled down, pretty much nothing happens in the FBI’s anthrax investigation. The next we hear about anthrax is in February 2003, when Secretary of State Abner Grant goes to the United Nations and holds up a vial of something – it wasn’t actually anthrax – claiming that Saddam can deliver biological weapons of mass destruction to the eastern seaboard of the U.S. Of course, we learn later that Saddam had neither WMD nor any way to reach our shores. U.N. arms inspector Blix said something much like that a few days before we invaded Iraq.”

*** click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

******

what can we do to help Congressman Holt

make his proposed Anthrax Commission a reality?

******

Holt

Congressman Holt

I sent the following email to Congressman Rush Holt (11/8/09) …

I am the author of the novel CASE CLOSED and the blog of the same name, both based on the premise that the FBI has failed to make its case that Dr. Bruce Ivins is the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks (or even involved) and is withholding vital information from the Congress and the American people. I support your legislation to create an Anthrax Commission. My question is: what can I and those who frequent my blog do to help you get that legislation passed?

see related posts …

* Congressman Rush Holt meets with NAS panel, says their work is important but their mandate is too narrow; calls for passage of Anthrax Investigation Commission legislation he introduced in March 09

* In addition to asking the Attorney General to act, Congressman Conyers should move Congressman Rush Holt’s bill to create an Anthrax Investigation Commission

* the FBI’s answers to questions posed by members of the House Judiciary Committee in September 2008 as to certain aspects of the FBI’s investigation of the 2001 anthrax attacks are insulting and demeaning to the U.S. Congress and to the American people

******

Advertisements

130 Responses to “* what can we do to help Congressman Holt make his proposed Anthrax Commission a reality?”

  1. DXer said

    As I best recall the names offhand, these authors of this new study are the same folks who tested the threat of mailed anthrax relating to the anthrax threat in late January 2001 upon the announcement of the bail hearing of Vanguards of Conquest #2 Mahmoud Mahjoub. Their report issued on September 10, 2001 but had previously been briefed to certain members of the US government earlier in the year. At the time of the anthrax mailings, there were a reported 16 people in US government familiar with the then still-classified study. It found that the mailed anthrax immediately distributed across the room upon opening of the letter. The authors e-mailed the head of the CDC’s response to the anthrax mailings the results of the study after the first anthrax mailing. The lead investigator, however, did not read his email. Critics argue that postal officials would have made different decisions in protecting postal workers (and closed sorting facilities sooner) if it had been known how readily the anthrax simulant had dispersed upon opening of the envelope.

    J Occup Environ Hyg. 2010 Feb;7(2):71-9.
    Anthrax letters: personal exposure, building contamination, and effectiveness of immediate mitigation measures.
    Kournikakis B, Ho J, Duncan S.

    Defence R&D Canada – Suffield, Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada.

    This report is the first detailed and quantitative study of potential mitigation procedures intended to deal with anthrax letters using a simulated anthrax letter release within an actual office building. Spore aerosols were created by opening letters containing 0.1 g of dry powdered Bacillus atrophaeus spores. Culturable aerosol samples were collected using slit-to-agar and filter-based samplers. Five test scenarios were designed to determine whether simple mitigation procedures or activities carried out by the person who opened the letter made a significant difference to aerosol concentrations in comparison to a control scenario where no activity took place. Surface contamination of the letter opener was measured at 10 body points for Scenarios 1 to 4. A sixth scenario, based on published Centers for Disease Control and Prevention anthrax letter response guidelines, used letters containing 1 g of spores. Results demonstrated that the spore aerosol spread throughout the building in less than 4.5 min. Potential mitigation techniques such as closing the office door or shutting off the ventilation system were not effective. Activities carried out by the letter opener including moving, walking to another location, and spraying water onto the contaminated desk with a hand sprayer all resulted in significantly higher aerosol concentrations in comparison to control. The potential total inhalational hazard for the letter opener during the five test scenarios ranged from 4.1 x 10(5) to 1.6 x 10(6) colony forming units (CFU) compared to 3.9 x 10(5) CFU for the control. Surface contamination of the letter opener (Scenarios 1 to 4) was highest on the right hip (4.8 x 10(4) to 1.0 x 10(5) CFU/cm(- 2)) and lowest on the right or left side of the head (2.2 x 10(2) to 3.7 x 10(3) CFU/cm(-2)). The statistically based methodology used in this study provided the means to objectively assess anthrax letter protocols to determine their effectiveness under realistic conditions. Potential mitigation procedures tested in this study did not reduce aerosol hazard or surface contamination.

  2. The enjoyment of the post on Greek is enhanced by viewing the page html source code directly.

  3. DXer said

    The bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills and resolutions first go to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills and resolutions never make it out of committee. It was referred to referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on August 19, 2009.

  4. BugMaster said

    Lew:

    Did you get a response to your email from Representative Holt or a member of his staff?

    Does it appear that he has in fact shelved this legislation for the time being?

    • Lew Weinstein said

      BUGMASTER … There has been no response; I am planning a follow-up call to Congressman Holt’s office this week … LEW

      • BugMaster said

        At the very least, he or his office should be able to issue a generic statement as to where this legislation stands at this time.

  5. DXer said

    November 10, 2009
    Lawrence Livermore National Lab Expert to Speak at CSU Stanislaus on November 18

    California State University Stanislaus issued the following news release:

    John P. Knezovich, Science & Technology Principal Directorate at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, will talk about forensic science applications using carbon dating methods in cases like the anthrax letter cases of 2001 during a guest lecture presentation at California State University, Stanislaus on Wednesday, November 18.

    ***
    “We are honored that one of the top scientists at one of world’s foremost research laboratories will make a presentation on the CSU Stanislaus campus,” said Dr. Jane Bruner, Interim Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs. “We look forward to developing a cooperative working relationship and partnership with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the near future.”

    The use of carbon dating in the recent Amerithrax investigation that sought clues in letters laced with anthrax and sent in the U.S. mail soon after the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01 will be presented by Knezovich to illustrate the process by which research scientists bring state-of-the-art methods to bear on criminal investigations. New scientific methods developed by Knezovich and his team at the Livermore Laboratory using carbon dating helped lead to the identification of a suspect in the anthrax case. Such innovation could have a far-reaching impact on future investigations.

    Knezovich’s presentation will highlight the principles of carbon dating and include examples of how carbon isotope measurements can be used to determine the age of biological items of relatively recent origin. Carbon dating is a scientific method developed in 1949 by Nobel Prize in chemistry winner Willard Libby that has traditionally used the naturally occurring radioisotope carbon-14 to determine the age of materials up to more than 50,000 years old.

    Knezovich is the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s Director of the Center for Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (CAMS) and has been a staff scientist at the Alameda County facility since 1983. He oversees scientific programs at the Livermore Lab that are applying state-of-the-art isotope analysis techniques to environmental and biomedical problems.

  6. DXer said

    Obama on Al Qaeda-anthrax threat:

    Obama: Terrorist networks largest threat to US

    (AP) – 4 hours ago

    SHANGHAI — President Barack Obama is telling Chinese students that the greatest threat to the United States’ security is terrorist networks such as al-Qaeda.

    Obama on Monday met with students in Shanghai and said al-Qaeda has crossed from Afghanistan into Pakistan and is in contact with other organizations. Obama says the United States must stabilize that part of the world and reduce the power of extremist networks.

    Obama says the groups are small in number but are dangerous because they have no conscience. Obama says terrorist organizations armed with nuclear or biological weapons could kill hundreds of thousands of people with just a few individuals.

    Obama says the United States is trying to give civilians greater hope and limit the influence of leaders like Osama bin Laden.

  7. DXer said

    FBI data on Fort Hood suspect is scrutinized
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2009-11-16-fort-hood-probe_N.htm

    “A lot of the dots were not connected,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said Sunday on CBS’ Face the Nation. Leahy’s committee will question Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday. The Senate homeland security committee opens its probe Thursday.

    The FBI has defended its actions, and former security officials say the case illustrates constraints on exchanging investigative results.

    “There are limits on sharing information on U.S. persons,” said former Department of Homeland Securityintelligence chief Charles Allen. “There are issues of privacy, civil rights and civil liberties, and those are taken very seriously.”

    Task forces cannot give records to other agencies unless an agency requests them and the task force approves, the FBI said in its statement. No one asked for information about Hasan, the FBI said.

    • DXer said

      FBI Counterterrorism consultant and witness Evan Koehlmann:

      A Web of Lone Wolves
      http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/11/13/a_web_of_lone_wolves?page=0,1

      “With such a generalized threat, it will be a continuing challenge for Western governments and societies to draw the fine line between what is protected under the freedom of speech and what is criminalized as direct incitement to murder. In order to help address those critical determinations and intercept potential threats, the FBI and other government agencies must redouble their efforts at sharing intelligence in a timely and effective manner. They must train and empower agents and analysts, who are on the frontlines of the battle against terrorism, by training them about the players and issues peculiar to the blight of international terrorism. Surely, if homegrown extremists can train themselves to be al Qaeda aficionados using only their own home computers, then it is within the capabilities of a determined U.S. government to thwart them.”

  8. DXer said

    Perhaps a more basic question is: Will KSM be willing to testify himself regarding his anthrax planning?

    KSM has admitted to being “directly in charge” of “managing and following up on the Cell for the Production of Biological Weapons, such as anthrax and others, and following up on dirty bomb operations on American soil.”

    It seems that the USG’s strongest witness might be KSM himself.

  9. DXer said

    Is Aafia Siddiqui willing to testify against KSM? To include regarding his anthrax planning and recruitment efforts? She has said that she was tasked to study germ weapons under a fatwa. Although the defense psychiatrist affidavit that made the mention did not identify the imam in the unredacted portion, it perhaps was one by Abu Ghaith who has addressed the subject (most notably in a June 2002 fatwa).

    She walked by the virulent Vollum US army strain everyday in the Volen complex at Brandeis and so it will be interesting to learn the details of her recruitment.

    In news this month she says she wants to contact the FBI directly and is not appreciative of the attorneys provided (for $2 million) by the Pakistani government. She similarly has not wanted to cooperate her defense counsel. As I vaguely recall, at her hospital bedside, her best rapport reportedly was with an FBI agent after her arrest.

    Given a sympathetic argument could be put on regarding the fracas at the conference room in Afghanistan (in terms of the stress the woman was under by any account), she perhaps could enter into a plea with the US that would allow to walk and return to her children in Pakistan.

    She’s certainly highly intelligent although it seems that she should let her defense counsel (either team) argue that she was illegally brought to the United States. She could make all the decisions while tasking her lawyers with making certain technical arguments that could lead to her release.

    Aafia Siddiqui expresses no confidence in Pakistani lawyers

    NEW YORK : Dr Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani scientist languishing in US jail on charges of attacking US forces in Afghanistan, has expressed no confidence in lawyers provided by the Pakistani government and refused to appear before the US federal court.

    However, the court directed the defense lawyers to continue pursuing the case.

    Aafia Siddiqui, who was arrested one and half years ago in Bagram, Afghanistan on charges of attacking US forces there told the court on Wednesday that neither she has trust in lawyers provided by the Pakistani government nor she would appear before the court.

    Before the trial, the federal judge said facility of videoconference to Aafia could be provided in the wake of reservations she has about corporeal searching, so that she had not to come to court in person.

    The court rejected her objection in lawyers and directed them to continue their working.

    According to reliable sources, Aafia also expressed her desire of contacting directly Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), while sources also claimed that she challenged the government case and demanded to present those army personels in front of her, who she blamed had attacked her.

  10. DXer said

    Will Al-Marri be available to testify against KSM? He was the one working with KSM on the cyanide plot. He had his computer shipped to “Washington.” To whom did he have his computer with the recon material on it?

    Counterterrorism, Obama Style
    After Justice’s sweetheart deal, judge gives al-Marri a slap on the wrist

    By Andrew C. McCarthy

    Five months ago, when al-Qaeda jihadist Ali Saleh Kallah al-Marri pleaded guilty, it was obvious that the Justice Department had given him a sweetheart deal. On Thursday, a federal judge in Illinois dutifully finished the job. Al-Marri, a committed sleeper operative sent by our enemies to carry out a post-9/11 second wave of mass-murder attacks inside the United States, was given an appalling sentence: He’ll be eligible for release in about six years.

    ***

    In stark departure from prior Justice Department practice, Holder permitted al-Marri to plead guilty to providing material support for terrorism. The material-support offense is generally reserved for non-terrorist sympathizers who facilitate the jihad but are unlikely to carry out atrocities themselves. It is a significantly less serious charge than the crimes — the acts of war — that Marri had actually committed, such as full-fledged membership in the al-Qaeda conspiracy to kill Americans, as well as conspiracies to use weapons of mass destruction.

    Because of Holder’s abandonment of past DOJ practice, al-Marri was looking at a maximum sentence of 15 years. Had the Justice Department filed appropriate charges and taken the case to trial, the 43-year-old al-Marri would have been looking at a life sentence.

    the government would prove at trial that his research into cyanide compounds is consistent with research conducted by persons trained in camps teaching advanced poisons courses to terrorist organizations, including al-Qaeda. He also agreed that the government would prove at trial that his research into cyanide compounds is consistent with research conducted by persons trained in camps teaching advanced poisons courses to terrorist organizations, including al-Qaeda. He also agrees that the government would prove at trial that an almanac recovered in his residence was bookmarked at pages showing dams, waterways, and tunnels in the United States, consistent with al-Qaeda planning for the use of cyanide gases.

  11. DXer said

    Would Mohammed Abdel-Rahman be available to testify against KSM?

    Authorities closed in on KSM in Spring 2003. When arrested, US citizen and NYC resident Uzair Paracha said he had met in February 2003 a chemistry professor who was supposed to help Al Qaeda with biological and chemical weapons. It was a big break, therefore, when the son of the imprisoned blind sheik, Abdel Rahman, was captured in Quetta, Pakistan in mid-February 2003. Mohammed Abdel-Rahman from Aghanistan spoke alongside Ali Al-Timimi at IANA conferences in 1993 and 1996. The blind sheik’s son Mohammed Abdel-Rahman had recently had been in contact with Khalid Mohammed, Al Qaeda’s #3. Two weeks after Mohammed’s capture, authorities raided microbiologist Ali Al-Timimi’s townhouse in Alexandria, VA, and searched the residence of a couple of PhD level drying experts in Idaho and Upstate NY, along with various others associated with IANA. Mohammed Abdel-Rahman then provided information that led authorities to the home of the bacteriologist that had harbored KSM. Anthrax spray drying documents were found, both on a computer and in hard cop

    One report indicates that authorities, with the help of American communications experts, traced an email that Mohammed Abdel-Rahman had sent to an email associated with the home of bacteriologist Qadoos in Rawalpindi. Yet another report says that some unidentified Egyptian collected a $27 million reward for informing on KSM and then relocated first to Great Britain and then to the US. (Perhaps this is a different Egyptian or perhaps the intelligence officials are seeking to cause turmoil among the blind sheik’s supporters). According to Amnesty, Abdel-Rahman Jr. was “whereabouts unknown” as of 2006. He is not on the list of Gitmo detainees. Mohammed Abdel-Rahman is one of the missing prisoners whose absence from Guantanamo leads human rights researchers to believe that the CIA is still operating secret prisons. There is a possibility that he was rendered to Egypt. The US has refused to comment on where he is.

    In June 2003, a UN report explained that Al-Qaeda has a “WMD Committee,” which according to the report, “is known to have approached a number of Muslim scientists [] to assist the terrorist network with the creation and procurement of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons.” Mohammed Abdel Rahman, a member of the 3-member WMD committee, knew Ali Al-Timimi. Ali Al-Timimi conducted a summer camp at a park in Frederick, Maryland over the years. The kids liked the outdoors and ponds. Ironically, the FBI searched the park’s ponds more than once claiming that Dr. Hatfill had once suggested that someone could weaponize anthrax and discard the equipment in a pond.

    The very well-informed Pakistani journalist Zahid Hussain says in his book, Frontline Pakistan that KSM was actually captured in February from a house in Quetta — presumably the same one where Abdel-Rahman was captured. Supposedly he had been tracked for four weeks before that. Zahid Hussain says that they did not make his arrest public because they wanted to capture other al-Qaeda members or sympathizers, such as the Qadoos family. This would be consistent with the strident denials by the bacteriologist’s family that KSM was captured at their home. The timing of the raid on Al-Timimi’s house two weeks later — and the arrest of animal geneticist and experienced PhD researcher expert at mixing with silica — certainly suggests that it was connected. They had been engaged in surveillance and “trashing” and interception of targets related to the charity for many months. The investigation — including arrests, searches, and some convictions — apparently did not produce any prosecutable evidence of anyone’s involvement in Amerithrax. The timing of the February 26, 2003 raids, however, perhaps related to what Mohammed Abdel-Rahman and KSM told authorities, for example, about Aafia Siddiqui, who was connected to the blind sheik’s Al Kifah organization. An AUSA has said that Aafia was prepared to participate in an anthrax attack if asked. She opened up a mailbox in Gaithersburg, Maryland as part of operations.

  12. DXer said

    One conspiracy KSM participated in involved a plan to poison New York City’s water supply. It involved Jabarah who may be available to testify. For a while, he was living with federal agents while planning to kill them after a friend of his was killed in battle.

    Young Canadian Mohamed Mansour Jabarah was part of the plot. He the courier and connection between Karachi and Kuala Lumpur — between anthrax planner KSM and anthrax planner Hambali. In 2002, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) delivered the former St. Catharines man to U.S. authorities, upon his written consent. St. Catherines is near Niagara Falls. He had been arrested in Oman, Jordan in June 2002, after being implicated in the plot to bomb American and Israeli embassies in Singapore. He was first taken to Brooklyn where he has been questioned by the FBI. Khalid Mohammed reports that Bin Laden was reportedly said to value Jabarah’s fluent English and his clean Canadian passport. He served as a go-between between the leaders in Karachi and operatives in Kuala Lumpur, and had a leadership role in a bombing plot there. He was let out of jail and while cooperating, lived with some FBI agents. After he learned that a childhood friend was killed in an attack on US Marines in Kuwait, he vowed to kill his captors. In a search of his room, agents found he had a plan for a steak knife that did not involve cutting his porterhouse. Authorities also found pictures of bin Laden, maps of Fort Dix, documents about New York’s drinking water supply and letters that lamented the fall of the Taliban and railed against America. The reference to New York’s drinking water supply brings to mind KSM’s plot to poison a reservoir in Upstate New York. Bloomberg explains: “He also had a U.S. Army memo describing New York City’s drinking water system, a map of the city’s water supply and testing results.”

    Jabarah spent 3 weeks living with KSM in August 2001. KSM taught him how to travel and conduct surveillance in stealth mode. Jabarah was a go-between Khalid Mohammed in Karachi and Hambali in Kuala Lumpur. He delivered the money for the bombing attacks planned for Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines. Arrested in March 2002, he had joined Al Qaeda in May 2001. In his interrogation, the Catholic-schooled youth said that KSM had asked him to “go to Malaysia to meet with individuals who were planning an operation against the US and Israeli embassies in the Philippines.” KSM told the young man that he must leave Karachi to deliver the money to Hambali, Al Qaeda’s point man in Southeast Asia and the military chief for Jemiah Islamiyah, before September 11. He flew out to deliver the money on September 10, 2001. The picture of his home in St. Catherines, Ontario, brings to mind the movie “Arlington Road” about the terrorist who lived next door. In January 2008, Jabarah was sentenced to life in prison. His father urged that since 2002, when he made those private notes about how he would seek revenge against the agents and prosecutors, and would kill until killed, he has reformed. Jabarah’s father said he had taken an interest in biology and medicine and was applying himself to his studies.

    KSM identified Majid Khan and Aafia Siddiqui as Al Qaeda operatives. KSM allegedly asked former Maryland resident Majid Khan to research contaminating a reservoir. What contaminant would have been used? Anthrax? Cyanide? Was it cyanide such as the thwarted attack against the US embassy in Rome in 2002? Some identified chemical intended to be smuggled in using the Paracha shipping container? Would the koran permit such indiscriminate murder of innocents? A recent study shows that anthrax is resistant to chlorine, but the officials typically think anthrax would be ineffective given the dilution. In February 2003, Majid Khan had met with Uzair Paracha and someone described as a “chemistry professor.” (Paracha and his father Saifullah had meetings with al-Qaeda members Majid Khan and senior operative Ammar al-Baluchi, who about that time married Aafia. In the prosecution of Uzair Paracha, the AUSA said Aafia Siddiqui was willing to participate in an anthrax attack if asked. She opened up a P.O. Box to facilitate Majid Khan’s reentry into the country. Did she know Majid Khan? What was the name of the relatives — a cousin and an uncle — that introduced Majid Khan to KSM? His father said it was a relative but more distant than “uncle.” What was the name of the “local Islamic organization” with which Majid Khan was affiliated? Was it the same party associated with Abdul Qudus Khan? The Washington Post reports that “Khan also is accused of delivering money to an operative for Jemaah Islamiyah, the Indonesian extremist group affiliated with al-Qaeda.”

    New water-surveillance systems are being tested that promise to detect biological attacks more quickly and accurately than is possible today.

  13. DXer said

    The indictment in the coming weeks of KSM raises an interesting question: Who would be the witnesses against him? For example, would anthrax lab tech Sufaat be available for a trial? At last report at the beginning of the year, his whereabouts were unknown. After release from a Malaysian prison, the anthrax lab tech reportedly went to Pakistan and then disappeared.

    George Tenet in his May 2007 In the Center of the Storm says Sufaat was “the self-described ‘CEO’ of al-Qai’da’s anthrax program.” Tenet reports that “Sufaat had impeccable extremist credentials” and “[i]n 2000 he had been introduced to Ayman al-Zawahiri personally, by Hambali, as the man who was capable of leading al-Qai’da’s biological weapons program.”
    The 9/11 Commission Report explained:

    “Hambali played the critical role of coordinator, as he distributed al Qaeda funds earmarked for joint operations. In one especially notable example, Atef turned to Hambali when al Qaeda needed a scientist to take over its biological weapons program. Hambali obliged by introducing a U.S.-educated JI member, Yazid Sufaat, to Ayman al Zawahiri in Kandahar. In 2001, Sufaat would spend several months attempting to cultivate anthrax for al Qaeda in a laboratory he set up near the Kandahar airport.”

    Participants at a key meeting in Kuala Lumpur in January 2000 included Hambali, Yazid Sufaat, two of the 9/11 hijackers, Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almidhar, Cole planner Attash aka Khallad (one of the defendants in the planned NYC prosecution), and others. Tawfiq Bin Attash was a long time Bin Laden operative. The Yemeni first went to Afghanistan in 1989. He came to lead Bin Laden’s bodyguards and was an intermediary between Bin Laden and those who carried out the bombing of the Cole in October 2000. Attash also had been a key planner in the 1998 embassy bombings, serving as the link between the Nairobi cell and Bin Laden and Atef. Khalid Almhidhar, one of the 9/11 hijackers, was from Saudi Arabia but was a Yemeni national. Almhidhar was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the indictment against Zacarias Moussaoui. Al-Hindi, who along with Jafar the Pilot would later case the NYC landmarks, had gone to Kuala Lumpur with Khallad. While not at the meeting with the hijackers, he met Hambali shortly after that meeting

    Zacarias Moussaoui was alleged, at least initially, to have received his money from Yazid Sufaat, under the cover of a company managed by his wife named Infocus Tech. A legitimate company, the company has eight employees and virtually no connection to the US. The company was an importer of US computer software and hardware. After authorities found a letter signed by Yazid Sufaat purporting to authorize Zacarias Moussaoui as its marketing representative, authorities went looking for Sufaat. But by then, he had left for Pakistan and Afghanistan. According to his wife, he went to Pakistan in June 2001 because he wanted to do his doctorate in pathology at the University of Karachi. Dursina had attended Sacramento State with Sufaat. It was her mother who encouraged Yazid’s religious studies. According to his wife, Sejarhtul Dursina, “He had planned to set up a medical support unit in Afghanistan, near Kandahar.” Kandahar is where Al Qaeda established its anthrax lab and where extremely virulent (but unweaponized) anthrax was found at a home identified by Hambali after his capture.

    Sufaat graduated from California State University, Sacramento in 1987. He received a bachelors degree in biological sciences, concentrating on clinical laboratory technology, with a minor in chemistry. Sac State biological sciences professor Robert Metcalf taught Sufaat a food microbiology class in the spring of 1986. The first lesson in class was to teach students how German physician Robert Koch proved that anthrax was caused by a specific bacterium. “All of my students know how to isolate anthrax in soil samples,” Metcalf told the Chicago Tribune. “Anthrax was the first organism we talked about.” Sufaat joined the Malaysian army, where he was a lab technician assigned to a medical brigade. After five years, he left the service with the rank of captain and worked for a civilian laboratory. In August 1993, he set up his own company, Green Laboratory Medicine. The 9/11 Commission Report notes that Sufaat started work on the al Qaeda biological weapons program after he participated in JI’s December 2000 church bombings. In December 2001, Sufaat was arrested upon returning from Afghanistan to Malaysia where he had been serving in a Taliban medical brigade.

    Malaysian officials, at the time, have long sought to minimize Sufaat’s role. Sufaat merely was a foot soldier who provided housing and false identification letters and helped obtain explosives. “I would put it this way: If Hambali [Al Qaeda’s point man in Southeast Asia] was the travel agent, Sufaat was the guy at the airport holding up the sign.” Sufaat admits to having purchased 4 tons of ammonium nitrate to build a truck bomb for the Singapore cell. The 9/11 Commission Report indicates Zacarias Moussaoui was also involved in arranging the purchase — one plan was to load the explosives on a cargo plane. The ammonium nitrate eventually was found buried throughout the grounds of a plantation. The ammonium nitrate actually had never been part of a plan by KSM — Moussaoui, eager to be involved in an attack in the region, lied to Sufaat and told him it was. When Hambali found out, he was furious and flew to Pakistan to demand (unsuccessfully) that Moussaoui be recalled. The Malaysian officials report that they believe that Sufaat had no knowledge of what the hijackers who stayed at his condominium or Zacarias were planning. That is consistent with the principles of cell security ordinarily followed — also evasion in interrogation. At a minimum, however, the established facts relevant to the Amerithrax investigation show that in the Summer and Fall of 2001 an Al Qaeda supporter who had assisted in the 9-11 operation — and who was a lab technician working with anthrax — was in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Was he the fellow perceived as Filipino who the journalist met in Afghanistan in the Fall of 2001 bragging about his ability to manipulate anthrax? According to Sufaat’s attorney, Sufaat gave two FBI agents no fresh evidence during a 30-minute interrogation finally conducted in November 2002 (where they mainly wanted to know how he knew Zacarias). The U.S. has asked for his extradition in connection with hosting of the two 9/11 hijackers, but Malaysia has refused. President Bush reports that US officials did not fully appreciate Sufaat’s role in Al Qaeda’s anthrax program until after KSM’s capture in March 2003.

    As described in US News, a former reporter from the Kabul Times actually may have met a Filipino carrying papers from Zawahiri and bragging about his ability to manipulate anthrax. The man may have been Hambali’s lieutenant, Muklis Yunos, who had been Hambali’s right-hand man and was in charge of special operations for the Philippine Moro Islamic Liberation Front (“MILF”). British reporter Philip Smucker explained that the Afghan reporter working with him spoke fluent Arabic and made regular undercover trips into Afghanistan from Pakistan. He had visited three functioning al Qaeda camps at grave risk to his life. Smucker explains that his colleague had landed in a Kabul hotel with a Filipino scientist who had a signed letter from al Qaeda’s number two, Dr. Ayman al Zawahiri, authorizing him to help the network develop biological weapons. The man at the hotel had described his own efforts to develop an “anthrax bomb.” Filipino Muklis Yunos was an explosives expert who had participated with Yazid Sufaat in the December 2000 church bombings. Upon his arrest in May 2003, Philippine intelligence said he had received anthrax training in Afghanistan. Perhaps he was who the journalist encountered.

    The last report was that Sufaat had disappeared. Did he disappear or was he disappeared?

  14. anonymous scientist said

    # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
  15. anonymous scientist said

    # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
  16. anonymous scientist said

    # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
  17. anonymous scientist said

    # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
  18. anonymous scientist said

    # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
  19. anonymous scientist said

    # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
  20. anonymous scientist said

    # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
  21. anonymous scientist said

    # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
  22. anonymous scientist said

    # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
  23. DXer said

    Among the correspondence written by Rauf Ahmad seized in Afghanistan, there are handwritten notes about the plan to use NGOs, technical institutes and medical labs as cover for aspects of the work, and training requirements for the various personnel at the lab in Afghanistan. Two Pakistani nuclear scientists founded Ummah Tameer-e-Nau in June 2000. “Reconstruction of the Muslim Ummah,” or “UTN,” an Islamabad-based organization whose stated purpose was to conduct relief and development work in Afghanistan. UTN built a flour mill in Kandahar and purchased land in the Kandahar region. UTN business cards from the organization carry the motto “Build to Help, Help to Build.” After the fall of the Taliban, coalition forces and the media began to search UTN facilities in Kabul. It was in November that it was reported by The Economist that the “House of Anthrax” had been found. Documents found by journalists in November 2001 at a villa in Kabul occupied by UTN suggested brainstorming seminars on anthrax had been held to include diagrams suggestive of a plan to use a helium-filled balloon to disperse anthrax across a wide area. The nondescript two-story villa occupied by the Pakistani aid group was in a quiet residential neighborhood of Kabul where a number of international charities were located. One downloaded document had the picture of former Secretary Cohen holding up a 5 pound bag of sugar. There were details about the U.S. military’s vaccination program downloaded from a Defense Department site on the Internet and other Defense Department documents relating to anthrax. There were 10 copies each of most of the documents. On the floor, there was what appeared to be a disassembled rocket alongside a helium canister, as well as two bags of powder. A detailed diagram scrawled in black felt tip pen on a white board shows what appears to be a balloon rising at various trajectories, alongside a fighter jet that is apparently shooting at the balloon. Beside the jet are the words, “You are dead, bang.”

    There were also pictures of ground missiles linked by lines to the balloon. Mathematical calculations indicated the height at which the balloon would fly, the distance from which it would be shot down and the area over which its contents would be dispersed. Beside one of the balloons is the word “polystyrene” and beside another the word “cyanide.” Loose sheets of paper containing scribbles of missiles and balloons were strewn around the house, indicating those attending the seminar had been taking notes and doing calculations. Although people can reasonably disagree on the conclusion to be drawn of the drawing on the white board showing aerial dispersal of anthrax by balloon, the drawings should be understood in the context of Ayman’s research and reading on the subject. One email from Ayman to Atef lists Peace or Pestilence as one of the books he had read. (The author argued that said science should combat disease, not find devious ways to spread it. That book included a description of the Japanese research on anthrax leading up to WW II and the US concern that anthrax was being dispersed by balloons being sent to the US on high hot air currents. Unit 731 experimented extensively with anthrax bombs and hot-air balloons filled with the deadly disease. In late 1944, aerosol scientists at Ft. Detrick (then known as Camp Detrick) were alarmed when news of some large balloons, as large as 150 feet around, had been sighted silently floating over populated areas. Within a few months, over 250 balloons had been discovered in nine western states. The balloons are known only to have been armed with an incendiary device and killed and injured only a very few people.

    A senior CNN producer who visited many UTN and Al Qaeda houses in Afghanistan, found the documents linking UTN to Jaish e Muhammad, the Army of the Prophet Mohammad, the Pakistani militant group that had been listed as a terrorist organization by the US on October 12, 2001. Other documents linked UTN to the Pakistan-based Saudi charity WAFA Humanitarian Organization and Al Rashid Trust, two other non-governmental organizations with ties to al-Qaeda that were designated on September 23, 2001 as supporters of terrorism. The New York Times reported on the search of the home by US personnel. A group of men armed with pistols, reportedly Americans, wearing gas masks, rubber gloves and boots, then came to remove powdered chemicals. The men had instructed the guards posted by National Alliance to not go in the home because the chemicals could be dangerous. The room that had been littered with papers was empty and had been swept or vacuumed by the Americans. Even after the second group visited the home, and cleaned it, several bags of chemicals were still strewn in the yard. Two small plastic bags each appeared to hold two to three pounds of brown powder. On the outside of one appeared the name “Mahlobjan” and the number 436. A second bag had the numbers 999 — or 666 — along with a crescent moon, the symbol of Islam. The New York Times reported that there was also a small seal stamped on the corner of the bag, with an eagle in its center. The worker at a charity next door, “Save the Children,” said that Mehmood had been a quiet neighbor and it was impossible to tell whether the men visiting the house were aid workers or not.

    The manager of the Kabul WAFA office explained that Abu Ghaith was the founder of WAFA before the Combat Review Status Tribunal. Shortly before September 11, he helped Abu Ghaith to leave Afghanistan. and his family leave for Karachi, Pakistan. He had known Abu Ghaith from Kuwait. Before 9/11, he had been in Kandahar working with WAFA. He was paid $200 a month but had been willing to work for free as a volunteer. After a month, however, he got a new supervisor he did not like. He would get upset when medical supplies came and it was broken or crooked. He complained about the expensive long distance calls young people would make, but his supervisor disagreed with his complaints. When the supervisor rifled through his and his wife’s things, he had reached his limit. His supervisor, in any event, said he only wanted people from Mecca working for him and kicked him out on about August 1, 2001. After bringing his family to Pakistan, he returned to Kabul where he met Abu Ghaith. He spent 16 days in what has been described as a “safe house” in Kabul while waiting to go safely back to Pakistan. “I am not a combat fighting animal. It is just a charity organization. What is my mistake? Why are you mentioning Al Qaida and fighting when I worked for a charity organization?” He says he did not know Abu Ghaith was an Al Qaeda spokesman until after 9/11. The Tribunal found his statements to be self-serving and unpersuasive. Abu Ghaith, as Al Qaeda’s spokesman at the time, later claimed that Al Qaeda had the right to use their military, nuclear, and biological equipment to kill hundreds of thousands of people.” In short, although the unclassified evidence relating to the unlawful combatants associated with WAFA in Afghanistan tended not to be rocket scientists, Al Qaeda’s practice of using charities as cover was well-established.

    • anonymous scientist said

      # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
    • anonymous scientist said

      # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
    • anonymous scientist said

      # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
    • anonymous scientist said

      # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
    • anonymous scientist said

      # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajà o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.). IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.18 It distinguishes: (a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.19 A goodly list of such sins is given in “The Revision of the New Testament,”20 such as ‘a pinnacle’ for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not ‘a mountain.’ On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said ‘the woman.’ It was ‘a woman,’ any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757 find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionà th.n lucni,anà the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. (b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejà ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jà ta. avsqenh|/à etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).21 Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class 758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,à h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,à o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijà evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jà ta,jà ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff. V. Varied Usages of the Article. (a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES. 1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of “the special God.”. Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759 Addenda 3rd ed. distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4). 2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n – to,n – to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4). 3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.22 It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den 760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 2nd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. “Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,”23 but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only24 in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f. Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our ‘King George.’ So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.25 Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1. In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,26 illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon’s Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761 mentioned.27 In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and “marks the turning of attention to a person,”28 rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. “In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines.” But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.29 For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve “completely the problem of the article with proper names.” Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man’s father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke’s list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.30 Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionà ku,irojà Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later. 762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. 4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri. (b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11). 1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott31 thinks that this reduplication of the article “adds weight and emphasis to the article.” Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott32 considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article “repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word.”33 Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). 2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1: THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763 27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/à evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass34 notes as “a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)” and considers that “this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular.” But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo35 and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,36 show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262. 3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,37 who 764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte – o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10). (c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou (‘my belongings’) in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.38 In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5). Winer39 makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).40 He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34), THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765 Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives. (d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey41 and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.42 Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, “almost non-existent.”43 It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5). (e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.44 It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone ‘neighbour’ in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. 766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde45 compares to. nu/n with Scotch “the noo.” (f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.46 Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264. (g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).47 Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.48 Blass49 remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a’n qe,loi kalei/sqaià 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a’n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinà 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinà 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hà 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/à Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaià 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767 (h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.50 The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of “affairs” or “things.” So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for ‘house of my Father.’ Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21). (i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, “invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj.”51 As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.52 Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,53 indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojà the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have 768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT been Sabellianism.54 See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). “God” and “love” are not convertible terms any more than ” God” and “Logos” or “Logos” and “flesh.” Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,55 in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.56 The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.57 If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,58 that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton’s rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel’s many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouà tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769 h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326. (j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our “by the yard,” “by the pound,” etc.). It is found in the papyri.59 But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51. (k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,à o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3). (1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j’ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.60 The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See, 770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).61 Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41. (m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.62 The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns. (n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns. (o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojà evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer63 tou/ton to.n a;nalton= ‘this man,’ a;naltoj, ‘that he is.’ Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.64 The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.65 The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30). THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771 In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21). (p) WITH [Olojà Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass66 fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), ‘the total sum of his long-suffering.’ Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33). The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.67 In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of ‘every.’ So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass68 distinguishes between e[kastoj= ‘each individual’ and pa/j =’any one you please.’ Pa/j o`= ‘all.’ So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = ‘all the city’ (die ganze Stadt).69 This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n 772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be ‘all,’ if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one “house of Israel,” so that ‘all’ is the idea. Winer70 says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word “every” and “all” amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).71 But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf’B’-lK’ (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of ‘every created thing.’ But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably ‘every building’ because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is ‘every family,’ though ‘all the family’ is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is ‘every Scripture,’ if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is ‘every,’ ‘whatever be the will of God for you’ (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have ‘every,’ as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).72 Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is ‘every,’ and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o` THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773 Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39. The idiom o` pa/j= ‘the whole,’ ‘the totality,’ is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.73 See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.74 Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ ‘the entire law,’ ‘the whole law.’ It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek75 as pa/j o`. In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass76 considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= ‘the total number of the men,’ as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= ‘we the whole number of us.’ Cf. Ac. 21:21. But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenà note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for ‘the sum of things,’ the all.’ Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta 774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT Addenda 3rd ed. Addenda 3rd ed. and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment. The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= ‘a whole year.’ Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, ‘a whole man sound.’77 Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22). (q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom78 as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton79 finds “a curious misplacement of the article.” Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jà o[lojà ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775 with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV. (r) ;Akrojà [Hmisujà ;Escatojà Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).80 The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.81 So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have ‘Jesus in the midst.’ There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).82 See also ch. XIV. (s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of ‘the rest of,’ like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass83 776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= ‘the remaining cities’ (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) “incorrect” for ‘the next’ city, as well as o` e[teroj= ‘the third’ in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns. (t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.84 Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV. VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us. (a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= ‘a good work,’ though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive. 1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.85 Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.86 2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order87 o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.88 Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777 17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).89 Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives. 3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jà o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,. 4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n – kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.90 So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).91 See further (c), 5. 5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.92 It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13). 6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5), 778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.93 Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n – toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jà avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jà as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense.
    • anonymous scientist said

      # For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart1: “Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung.” It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. II. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.2 Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is “a new Greek departure.”3 It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic4 and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.5 But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejà oi` a;ristoi, etc.6 And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.7 The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.8 In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.9 But Volker10 finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox11 points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article. THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755 (b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`à h`à to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a “mere enfeeblement” of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.12 Even Brugmann13 gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve’s Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against “the substantive use of the article” (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses “article” in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, ‘to fit,’ ‘join’). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro14 thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. “In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person.”15 In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive. III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well 756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not “otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum,” as Scaliger16 called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.17 The word itself may be definite, like gh/à ouvrano,jà vIhsou/j. The use of a preposi