I. The Name. As is often the case, so here the name describes a later development, not the original, nor the essential, idea.

(a) SOME POSTPOSITIVE. Prepositions may indeed be postpositive like the Latin mecum, the Greek tou,tou ca,rin├ te,knwn pe,ri (anastrophe). In the Turkish tongue1 they are all postpositive. And Giles (Manual, p. 341) thinks that ovmma,twn a;po is earlier than avpo. ovmma,twn.

(b) NOT ORIGINALLY USED WITH VERBS. Moreover, the name implies that they properly belong with verbs (prae-verbia, proqe,seij). But we now know that the use with verbs was a much later development. There are indeed in Greek no "inseparable" prepositions, which are used only in composition with verbs. In the Attic, outside of Xenophon, su,n, was used mainly in composition.2 In the N. T. avmfi, is found only with compound words like avmfiba,llw├ avmfie,nnumi. In the Sanskrit most of the verbal prefixes can be traced to adverbs with cases.3

(c) EXPLANATION. Hence the name must be explained. The later grammarians used the term for those adverbs which were used in composition with verbs and in connection with the cases of nouns. Both things had to be true according to this definition. But it will be seen at once that this definition is arbitrary. The use with verbs in composition was the last step, not the first, in the development. Besides, what is to be said about those adverbs that are used, not with verbs, but with cases, and no longer appear as mere adverbs? Take a;neu, for instance, with the ablative. It is not found in composition with verbs nor by itself


apart from a noun. It is, of course, a preposition. The grammars call it an "improper" or adverbial preposition. It is only "improper" from the standpoint of the definition, not from that of the Greek language. The truth seems to be that by preposition one must mean a word used with cases of nouns and many of which came to be used in composition with verbs. The facts do not square with the other definition.

II. The Origin of Prepositions.

(a) ORIGINALLY ADVERBS. This is now so well recognised that it seems strange to read in Winer4 that "prepositions e.g. often assume the nature of adverbs, and vice versa," even though he adds "that the prepositions are adverbs originally." Giles5 puts the matter simply and clearly when he says: "Between adverbs and prepositions no distinct line can be drawn." Thus even in Homer avmfi, peri,, etc., appear still as adverbs.6 Delbruck7 goes a bit further and says that originally the prepositions were placeadverbs. Brugmann8 qualifies that to "mostly," and he adds that we cannot draw a sharp line between the use as adverb and the use as pre-verb or preposition.9

(b) REASON FOR USE OF PREPOSITIONS. "The preposition is, therefore, only an adverb specialized to define a case-usage."10 This definition gives the reason also. The case alone was enough at first to express the relation between words, but, as language developed, the burden on the cases grew heavier. The analytic tendency in language is responsible for the growth of prepositions.11 The prepositions come in to help out the meaning of the case in a given context. The notion, therefore, that prepositions "govern" cases must be discarded definitely. Farrar12 clearly perceived this point. "It is the case which indicates the meaning of the preposition, and not the preposition which gives the meaning to the case." This conception explains the use and the non-use of a preposition like evn├ for instance, with the locative, avpo, or para, with the ablative, etc. In the Sanskrit the prepositions do not exist as a separate class of words, though a good many adverbs are coming to be used with the oblique cases (except the dative) to make clearer the case-idea.13


(c) VARYING HISTORY. The adverbs that come to be used with the cases vary greatly in their history. Some cease to be used as adverbs, as su,n, for instance. Others continue (besides the use with cases and with verbs) to be employed occasionally as adverbs ( avna. ei-j, Rev. 21:21; kata. ei-j, Mk. 14:19; u[per evgw,, 2 Cor. 11:2). Some are used both with nouns, and in composition with Verbs, like evn├ peri, and the other seventeen "proper" classical prepositions. vAmfi, occurs only in composition. Others are not used in composition with verbs, but are no longer mere adverbs like a;neu. Others are employed both as adverb and with cases of noun's, like a;ma├ e;xw, etc. Some occur both as preposition and conjunction, like a;cri├ me,cri├ e[wj├ plh,n. Some figure as substantive, adverb and preposition with case, like ca,rin.

III. Growth in the Use of Prepositions.

(a) ONCE NO PREPOSITIONS. As already noted, in the Sanskrit there is no separate class of prepositions, though a number of adverbs are already coming to be used as prepositions, and verbs have some prefixes. Some adverbs in Greek are occasionally used with eases, like avxi,wj and the genitive, but are not prepositions. Here we see the use of prepositions started, tentatively at any rate. We may suppose a time further back in the history of the JudoGermanic tongues when no adverbs were used with cases, when the cases stood All alone.

(b) THE PREPOSITIONS STILL USED AS ADVERBS IN HOMER. Not only do the "adverbial" prepositions have their usual freedom, but a considerable number of adverbs are found in composition with verbs. Homer marks a distinct advance over the Sanskrit in the increase of prepositions. There is in Homer a real class of prepositions. But in Homer the limitation of the preposition to cases of nouns aid composition with verbs is far from being established. vAmfi,├ evn├ etc., may be simply adverbs, 'on both sides,' 'inside.'14 So common is the separation of the preposition from the verb that the term tmesis is used for it, but no strict line can be drawn between this usage and the ordinary adverb.15

(c) DECREASING USE AS ADVERBS AFTER HOMER. It is not common thereafter for the eighteen classical prepositions, those used in composition with verbs as well as with cases of nouns, to occur separately as adverbs. It is not common, but still possible. This list comprises avmfi,├ avna├ avnti,├ avpo,├ dia,├ eivj├ evx├ evn├ evpi,├ kata,├ meta,├ para,├ peri,├ pro,├ pro,j├ su,n u`pe,r├ u`po,. Now these words were used with steady increase so that one of the marks of later


Greek is the abundance of compound verbs as well as the more extensive use of these prepositions with the various cases. Not only is this true, but continually new adverbs joined the already large list of adverbial prepositions employed with cases. In a word, as Blass16 remarks, the use of a preposition with nouns was "a practice which in the course of the history of the language became more and more adopted in opposition to the employment of the simple case." The Emperor Augustus was noted for his excessive use of prepositions in his effort to speak more clearly (quod quo facilius exprimeret, Suetonius).17 Other Latin writers show the same tendency.

(d) SEMITIC INFLUENCE IN N. T. The N. T. writers were once supposed to make such free use of prepositions because of the Hebrew and Aramaic. But the N. T. does not make abundant use of all the prepositions. vAmfi, has dropped out entirely save in composition, and avna,, is nearly confined to the distributive use and avna. me,son, a sort of compound preposition.18 It occurs only 12 times, omitting the adverbial use in Rev. 21:21. vAnti, appears 22 times, but as Moulton19 explains, five of these are due to avnq v w-n. But avpo, is very abundant in the N. T., as are dia,├ eivj├ evk├ evn├ evpi,├ kata,├ meta,├ pro,j. But para,├ peri,├ pro,├ su,n├ u`pe,r├ u`po, are, like avna, already going the way of avmfi,. Krebs has made a careful study of the prepositions in Polybius,20 as Helbing has done for Herodotus21 and Johannessohn for the LXX.22 They show the same general tendency towards the increased use of some prepositions to the disuse of others. For the N. T., Moulton23 has made a careful calculation which is worth reproducing. vEn and eivj far outnumber any of the other prepositions in the N. T.24 And evn leads eivj by a good margin. Moulton takes evn as unity and finds the other N. T. prepositions ranging as follows: avna, .0045, avnti, .008, avpo, .24, dia, .24, eivj .64, evk .34, evpi, .32, kata, .17, meta, .17, para, .07, peri, .12, pro, .018, pro,j .25, su,n .048, u`pe,r .054, u`po, .08. The three commonest prepositions in Herodotus 10 are eivj├ evn and evpi, in this order. In Thucydides and Xenophon the order is evn,

10 See Helbing, Prap. bei Herod., p. 8 f., for the facts here used.


eivj and evpi,. But Xenophon varies the order of frequency in his various books. In Polybius the three chief prepositions are kata,├ pro,j├ eivj; in Diodorus; eivj kata,├ pro,j; in Dionysius evn evpi,├ eivj; in Josephus (War) pro,j├ eivj kata,, (Ant.) eivj├ evpi,├ pro,j; in Plutarch evn, pro,j├ eivj; in Dio Cassius evn eivj├ evpi,. In the N. T. the three main ones, as seen above, are evn├ eivj├ evk, though evpi, is not far behind evk. In the literary koinh, it will be seen that the use of eivj is nearly double that of evn, whereas in the N. T. its is ahead of evn only in Mark and Hebrews.25 In the vernacular koinh,, evn makes a rather better showing. The large increase of the adverbial prepositions in the N. T., as in the koinh,├ calls for special treatment a little later. It may be here remarked that they number 42, counting varying forms of the same word like o;pisqen├ ovpi,sw.

(e) IN MODERN GREEK. The varying history of the eighteen prepositions goes still further.26 Thus avnti,$j% survives in the vernacular as well as avpo, $avpe,%├ dia, $gia,%├ eivj $evj├ se,├ vj%├ meta, $me,%├ kata, $ka,% and w`j. Cf. Thumb, Handb., pp. 100 if. The bulk of the old prepositions drop out in the mediaeval period. Their place is supplied largely by the later prepositional adverbs, as avna, by a;nw, evx by e;xw, but partly also by a wider use of the remaining prepositions, as eivj for evn and pro.j├ me, for su,n. Then again all prepositions in the modern Greek use the accusative case as do other adverbs, and sometimes even with the nominative ( gia. sofo,j, 'as a sage').

In a sense then the Greek prepositions mark a cycle. They show the return of the accusative to its original frequency. They have lost the fine distinctions that the old Greek prepositions once possessed when they were used to help out the ideas of the cases. They drop out before the rise of other prepositions which more clearly exhibit the adverbial side of the preposition. The so-called improper prepositions are more sharply defined in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., pp. 107 ff.). But in the N. T. the prepositions have not gone So far in their history.

IV. Prepositions in Composition with Verbs.

(a) NOT THE MAIN FUNCTION. As has already been shown, this was not the original use of what we call prepositions, though this usage has given the name to this group of words. Besides it debars one technically from calling those numerous adverbs prepositions which are used with cases, but not used in composition with verbs. But no "inseparable" prepositions were developed


in Greek,27 apart from the similar use of avmfi, already mentioned. In most dialects avmfi, was obsolete (Buck, Gk. Dialects, p. 102). In modern Greek avna,──├ para,── and evk- $xe% are used chiefly in composition (Thumb, Handb., p. 99), but ovc occurs with accusative.

(b) PREPOSITION ALONE. Sometimes indeed the preposition is used alone (ellipsis) and the verb has to be supplied, as in ouvk e;ni (Gal. 3:28) for ouvk e;nesti. So u[per evgw, in 2 Cor. 11:23. Cf. avll v a;na ('but up!') in Homer. This ellipsis does not differ greatly from the common use of tmesis in Homer, where the preposition is regarded more as an adverb.

(c) INCREASING USE. The use of prepositions in composition increased with the history of the Greek language. One characteristic of the later Greek is the number of compound verbs employed.28 This is a matter partly of impression and will remain so till one calike,nteroj grammarian" arrives "who will toil right through the papyri and the koinh, literature."29 No one is anxious for that task, but Krebs30 is able to say that verbs compounded with prepositions play a noteworthy role in the later Greek. This is not simply true of new compounds like evn─kake,w, etc., but there is a growing tendency to use the compounds, especially those with dia,├ kata, and su,n├ to express what in the oldest Greek could be sufficiently indicated by the simplex."31 The N. T. does not indeed show as lavish a use of compound verbs as does Polybius, the chief representative of the literary koinh, of his time. But these dipla/ belonged to the language of the people in Aristotle's time32 and the papyri show a common use of compound verbs.33 As compared with Polybius the N. T. makes less use of certain verbs, but the matter varies with different verbs and different Wiriters.34


(d) REPETITION AFTER VERB. Sometimes the preposition is repeated afterverb, as in the older Greek. The prepositions most frequently repeated are avpo,├ evx├ eivj├ evn├ evpi,. This is partly because these prepositions are so common in the N. T. and partly because they emphasize the local notions of 'from,' 'in,' or 'upon,' and 'to' or 'into.' Perhaps also the preposition in composition is, a bit worn down. The papyri and inscriptions show the same repetition of the preposition, though hardly so frequently, if One may judge by his impressions. See avph/lqen avp v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:42). With avpo, indeed Winer35 finds that for the most part the preposition is repeated in the N. T. Thus we note also avparqh|/ avp v auvtw/n (Mt. 9:15), avfairei/tai avp v evmou/ (Lu. 16:3, but not so in 10:42), avphlla,cqai avp v auvtou/ (Lu. 12:58), avpeqa,nete avpo. tw/n stoicei,wn (Col. 2:20), avp v auvtw/n avpoba,ntej (Lu. 5:2), avpe,pesan avpo. tw/n ovfqalmw/n (Ac. 9:18), avporfanisqe,ntej avf v u`mw/n (1 Th. 2:17), avfori,sei avp v avllh,lwn (Mt. 25:32), avpespa,sqh avp v auvtw/n (Lu. 22:41), avpostre,yei avpo. vIakw,b (Ro. 11:26), avpocwrei/te avp v evmou/ (Mt. 7:23), avpo,sthte avp v evmou/ (Lu. 13:27, but not 2:37).

Likewise evk may be repeated as with evkba,llei evk tou/ qhsaurou/ (Mt. 13:52), evk sou/ evxeleu,setai (Mt. 2:6), evxairou,menoj evk tou/ laou/ (Ac. 26:17), evxelexa,mhn evk tou/ ko,smou (Jo. 15:19), evk th/j kata. fu,sin evxeko,phj (Ro. 11:24), evxe,pesan evk tw/n ceirw/n (Ac. 12:7), evkporeuo,menon evk tou/ sto,matoj (Mt. 15:11), evkfugei/n evk tou/ oi;kou (Ac. 19:16).

Verbs compounded with eivj "uniformly repeat eivj" (WinerThayer, p. 430). So, for instance, eivsh,gagon (Lu. 22:54), eivsie,nai (Ac. 3:3), eivsh/lqen (Mt. 2:21), eivsporeu,ontai (Mk. 1:21), eivsfe,reij (Ac. 17:20), but see Ac. 28:30 ( eivs- pro,j).

With evn we observe the repetition in some verbs appears, though often eivj occurs instead both where motion is implied and where the idea is simply that of rest (pregnant construction). As is well known, evn and eivj are really the same word. Hence the rigid distinction between the two prepositions cannot be insisted on. There are two extremes about eivj and evn, one to blend them entirely because of alleged Hebraism, the other to insist on complete distinction always. As a rule they are distinct, but eivj frequently encroached on evn, where one has to admit the practical identity, like eivj oi=ko,n evstin (Mk. 2:1, marg. in W. H.), o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ ptro,j (Jo. 1:18), etc. For the frequent LXX examples see Conybeare and Stock, p. 81. Still, for the sake of uniformity, only examples of evn are here given, like evmba,yaj evn tw|/ trubli,w| (Mt. 26:23), evmbrimw,menoj evn e`autw|/ (Jo. 11:38), evngegramme,nh evn tai/j


Addenda 2nd ed.

Addenda 3rd ed.

kardi,aij (2 Cor. 3:2), evndhmou/ntej evn tw|/ sw,mati (2 Cor. 5:6), evnergw/n evn u`mi/n (Ph. 2:13), evne,meinan evn th|/ diaqh,kh| (Heb. 8:9), evnoikei,tw evn u`mi/n (Col. 3:16), evntrufw/ntej evn tai/j avpa,taij (2 Pet. 2:13).

A number of verbs have evpi, repeated, such as evpibebhkw.j evpi, with accusative (Mt. 21:5), evpiba,llei evpi, with accusative (Lu. 5:36), evph/ren evp v evme, (Jo. 13:18), evfalo,menoj evp v auvtou,j (Ac. 19:16), evpeleu,setai evpi. se, (Lu. 1:35), e;pide evpi. ta.j ktl) (Ac. 4:29) evpe,keito evp v auvtw|/ (Jo. 11:38), evpe,bleyen evpi. th.n ktl) (Lu. 1:48), evpe,pesen evp v auvto,n (Lu. 1:12), evp v ouvdeni. auvtw/n evpipeptwko,j (Ac. 8:16), evpiri,yantej evp v auvto,n (1 Pet. 5:7), evpitiqe,asin evpi. tou.j ktl) (Mt. 23:4), evpoikodo─ mei/ evpi. to.n ktl. (1 Cor. 3:12), evpoikodomhqe,ntej evpi. tw|/ ktl) (Eph. 2:20).

As to dia, not many verbs have it repeated, but note diapo─ reu,esqai auvto.n dia. spori,mwn (Lu. 6:1), diesw,qhsan di v u[datoj (1 Pet. 3:20), die,rcetai di v avnu,drwn (Mt. 12:43), dih,rceto dia. me,son (Lu. 1:11).

A similar rarity as to repetition exists in the case of kata,, but we note kathgorei/te kat v auvtou/ (Lu. 23:14), katakauca/sqe kata. th/j avlhqei,aj (Jas. 3:14).

Very seldom is para, repeated as in parela,bete par v h`mw/n (1 Th. 4:1, cf. 1 Th. 2:13; 2 Th. 3:6).

Peri, is repeated with more verbs than para,. Thus periastra,yai peri. evme, (Ac. 22:6), periezwsme,noi peri. ta. ktl) (Rev. 15:6), peri,─ keitai peri. to.n ktl) (Lu. 17:2), periespa/to peri. pollh,n (Lu. 10:40).

Pro,, like meta,, shows no example of repetition in the critical text, though some MSS. read proporeu,sh| pro. prosw,pou (for evnw,pion) in Lu. 1:76.

As examples of pro,j repeated take proskollhqh,setai pro.j th.n ktl. (Eph. 5:31), prose,pesen pro.j tou.j ktl) (Mk. 7:25), prosete,qh pro.j tou.j ktl) (Ac. 13:36). It is seldom repeated.

As a lonely example of su,n repeated see sunezwopoi,hsen su.n auvtw|/ (Col. 2:13).

We have no example of u`po, repeated and but one of u`pe,r in some MSS. (not the critical text) for Ro. 8:26 ( u`perentugca,nei u`pe.r h`mw/n).

(e) DIFFERENT PREPOSITION AFTER VERB. Once more, a different preposition may be used other than the one in composition. This is, of course, true where the meaning differs radically, as in sunakolouqou/sai avpo, (Lu. 23:49), but even when the prepositions do not differ very greatly. Thus eivj frequently follows compounds of evn as evmba,ntieivj ploi/on (Mt. 8:23), evmbalei/n eivj th.n ge,ennan (Lu. 12:5), evmbapto,menoj eivj to. ktl) (Mk. 14:20), evmble,yate eivj to. ktl.


Addenda 2nd ed.

(Mt. 6:26), evmpeso,ntoj eivj tou.j ktl) (Lu. 10:36), evne,ptusan eivj to. ktl. (Mt. 26:67), evnekentri,sqhj eivj kalie,laion (Ro. 11:24). here is little cause for comment here.

In general the varying of the preposition is pertinent and is to be noted. So, for instance, avpo,├ evk├ para,. Here para, calls attention to the fact that one is beside the place or person whence he starts; avpo, merely notes the point of departure, while evk distinctly asserts that one had been within the place or circle before departing. Cf. therefore Mt. 3:16 avne,bh avpo. tou/ u[datj and Mk. 1:10 avnabai,nwn evk tou/ u[datoj. Thus avpo, follows parabai,nw in Ac. 1:25, paralam─ ba,nw in 1 Cor. 11:23, parafe,rw in Mk. 14:36, and pare,rcomai in Mt. 5:18. Verbs compounded with evk (besides evk) may have avpo, as evkkli,nw in 1 Pet. 3:11, or para, as evxe,rcomai, in Lu. 2:1, while evkporeu,omai shows either evk (Mt. 15:18), avpo, (Mt. 20:29) or para, (Jo. 15:26). So compounds of kata, use either avpo, as katabai,nw (Lu. 9:54) or evk as ib. (Jo. 6:41). See further discussion under separate prepositions.

Compounds of avna, likewise are followed by eivj as with avnabai,nw (Mt. 5:1), avna,gw (Lu. 2:22), avnable,pw (Lu. 9:16), avnalamba─ nomai (Mk. 16:19), avnapi,ptw (Lu. 14:10), avnafe,rw (Lu. 24:51), avne,rcomai (Gal. 1:18); or by evpi, as avnabai,nw (Lu. 5:19), avnabiba,zw (Mt. 13:48), avnaka,mptw (Lu. 10:6), avnakli,nomai (Mt. 14:19), avnapi,ptw with accusative (Mt. 15:35) or genitive (Mk. 8:6). avnafe,rw (1 Pet. 2:24); or by pro,j as avnabai,nw (Jo. 20:17), avnaka,mptw (Mt. 2:12), avnape,mpw (Lu. 23:7). As a rule pro,j refers to personal relations while eivj and evpi, differ in that evpi, more distinctly marks the terminus. But the line cannot be drawn hard and fast between these prepositions, because evpi, and pro,j show a variation. Thus verbs compounded with evpi, may be followed by eivj as in evpiba,llw (Mk. 4:37), evpibai,nw (Ac. 20:18), evrai,rw (Lu. 18:13), evfikne,omai (2 Cor. 10:14). evpigra,fw is even followed by evn in Ac. 17:23. On the other hand, pro,j may be followed by evpi, as in prosti,qhmi (Mt. 6:27) or evn as in prosme,nw (1 Tim. 1:3). And even ei;seimi has pro,j in Ac. 21:18 and eivsfe,rw has evpi, (Lu. 12:11). Dia,, in composition may be followed by eivj as in diabai,nw (Ac. 16: 9), pro,j (Lu. 16:26) or avna, (1 Cor. 6:5), etc.

Compounds with meta, usually have eivj, like metabai,nw (Lu. 10:7 both evk and eivj%├ metalla,ssw (Ro. 1:26), metanoe,w (Mt. 12:41), metape,mpomai (Ac. 10:22), metastre,fw (Ac. 2:20), metaschmati,zw (1 Cor. 4:6), metati,qhmi (Ac. 7:16), metatre,pw (Jas. 4:9), metoi─ ki,zw (Ac. 7:4). But metadi,dwmi (Ro. 12:8) and metalla,ssw (Ro. 1:25) have evn)


Peria,gw is followed by evn in Mt. 4:23. As to pro, in Lu. 1:17 we have proeleu,setai followed by evnw,pion.

Verbs compounded with su,n may have meta, (cf. the displacing of su,n by meta,, in modern Greek) as in sunai,rw (Mt. 25:19) sullalw/ (Mt. 17:3), sumpe,mpw(2 Cor. 8:18), sumfwnw/ (Mt. 20:2) and even sunkateyhfi,sqh meta. tw/n e[ndeka avposto,lwn (Ac. 1:26). But note suna,gw eivj (Mt. 3:12), evpi,grk grk(27:27) and pro,j (Mk. 7:1), evpi, (1 Cor. 11:20) and eivjgrk grk(11:33 f.).

For u`perfornei/n para, see Ro. 12:3. Cf. u`porba,llw evpi, in 2 Cor. 9:14 and u`perai,romai evpi, in 2 Th. 2:4.

With u`po, we find a number of prepositions especially with u`pa,gw, as meta, (Mt. 5:41), eivjgrk grk(9:6), avpo,grk grk(13:44), pro,j (Jo. 13:3), evn (Jas. 2:16), with which compare ovpi,sw (Mt. 16:23) and metaxu, grk grk grk(18:15). Cf. also u`postre,fw with eivj (Lu. 1:56) and evpi, (Ac. 8:28). Delicate shades of meaning will be found in all these prepositions without undue refinement. See Conybeare and Stock, p. 88, for different prepositions with verbs in the LXX.

(f) SECOND PREPOSITION NOT NECESSARY. But it is not always necessary for any preposition to follow the compound verb. Often the preposition with the verb may be followed by the case that is usual with the preposition without much regard to the verb itself. That is to say, the preposition in composition may be tantamount in result to the simple verb followed by that preposition. This is not always true, but it sometimes happens so. It is not necessary to give an exhaustive list. As examples we may note the following: vEpipi,ptein auvtw|/ (Mk. 3:10) with the dative may be compared with th/j ca,ritoj evxepe,sate (Gal. 5:4) with the ablative. Here the two prepositions and the cases correspond exactly. The instrumental case is illustrated by sunca,rhte, moi (Lu. 15:6). Cf. also the ablative in Lu. 10:42 with avfaireqh,setai. As an example of the locative take evmme,nein th|/ pi,stei (Ac. 14:22). An example of the genitive is seen in sou katamarturou/sin (Mt. 26:62. Cf. also Mt. 16:18) and of the accusative in th.n a[lusin tau,thn peri,─ keimai (Ac. 28:20) where a change of standpoint takes place, since the chain is around Paul. Cf. Heb. 12:1. In a case like diepo─ reu,onto ta.j po,leij (Ac. 16:4) one may either regard the accusative as loosely associated with the preposition (cf. dia. me,son in Lu. 17: 11) or consider that the preposition has made an intransitive verb transitive (see next point). See ch. XI for further exx.

(g) EFFECT OF PREPOSITION ON MEANING OF THE VERB. Sometimes there is no effect at all. The preposition is merely local as in evxe,rcomai, 'go out.' The preposition may be "perfective" and


merely intensify the meaning of the verb, as in katesqi,w ('eat up'), katadiw,kw) ('hunt down'). The preposition is sometimes weakened in idea as in avpode,comai├ avpokri,nomai. Prepositions in composition sometimes change the meaning of the verb and blend with it. A resultant meaning arises with a new construction. The use of dia, alluded to above may be a case in point. Thus take diabai,nw with accusative (Heb. 11:29), die,rcomai (Lu. 19:1). The use of diaple,w with the accusative in Ac. 27:5 is probably the result of the preposition in composition. See also proa,xw u`ma/j in sense of 'go before' (Mt. 26:32). Cf. further avpodekatou/n, metadi,dwmi sugklei,ein. These examples will suffice, though they could be multiplied easily.

(h) DROPPING THE PREPOSITION WITH SECOND VERB. Winer36 denies that we have in the N. T. an instance of the old Greek idiom of using the preposition with the first verb and dropping it with the repeated verb though really retained in sense. But Moulton37 seems to show that the N. T. does offer some examples of this construction, like the kath/gon├ h=gon├ h=gon, of Euripides' Bacchides, 1065 (English 'pulled down, down, down,' Moulton).38 He cites pare,labon├ e;labon (Jo. 1:11 f.); proegra,fh├ evgra,fh (Ro. 15:4); evxhrau,nhsan├ evraunw/ntej (1 Pet. 1:10 f.); evpendu,sasqai├ evndusa,menoi (2 Cor. 5:3); avntisth/nai├ sth/nai (Eph. 6:13); kate,garon├ e;fagon (Rev. 10:10). These are certainly possible illustrations, though I have doubts about 2 Cor. 5:3 and Eph. 6:13. In Eph. 6:13 especially sth/nai, is stronger alone than with avnti,. I do not agree that in 1 Cor. 12:2 we have an illustration in h;gesqe avpago,menoi.

(i) INTENSIVE OR PERFECTIVE. There is still another very common use of the preposition in composition. It is that of mere adverb and intensifies or completes the idea of the verb. Sometimes the frequent use of the compound form tends to obscure this adverbial idea. Thus in avpokri,nomai the force of avpo, has largely faded and in avpoqnh,skw it is quite obscure. Doubtless 'die off' was the original idea for the one, as 'answer back' for the other. The appeal to the original usage will explain the force of the preposition. But in most instances the idea is very clear, as in sunkalei/ tou.j fi,louj (Lu. 15:6), 'calls his friends together.' This common function of the preposition in all the Indo-Germanic tongues was probably the original use with verbs. At any rate it is common enough in English, though we usually separate verb and preposition. We say "up-set" as well as "setup," but they


mean different things. We all see the adverbial force in "come home," "come back," "come away," etc., but it is the adverb just as truly in "fore-close," "pre-clude," etc. Indeed, prepositions when compounded are etymologically pure adverbs. The English may be compared with the Homeric Greek in the separateness of the adverb from the verb.39 In German the compound use of the preposition is very extensive, but later Greek and Latin illustrate it abundantly.40 The German prepositions are either inseparable or detachable. As applied to the meaning of the verb the term "perfective" is used for the force of the preposition, but it is not a very happy designation, since one is at once reminded of the perfect tense with which it has nothing to do.41 Moulton gives a number of luminous examples such as qnh|,skw 'to be dying,' avpoqanei/n, 'to die (off) '; feu,gein 'to flee,' diafugei/n 'to escape (flee clean through) '; diw,kw 'to pursue,' katadiw,kw 'to hunt down'; threi/n 'to watch,' sunth─ rei/n 'to keep safe';'to work,' evrga,zesqai 'to work,' katerga,zesqai 'to work out (down to the end),' etc. The preposition in this "perfective" sense does have a bearing on the present and aorist tenses of any given verb, but that phase of the matter belongs to the discussion of the tenses. Indeed, not all of the N. T. verbs by any means show examples of this "perfective" use of the preposition. Moulton42 notes this absence, as compared with Polybius, in the case of a;rco─ mai├ qea,omai├ qewre,w├ logi,zomai├ kinduneu,w├ me,llw├ ovrgi,zomai├ pra,ssw He finds that the papyri support this "perfective" use of the preposition as between simplex and compound. N. T. illustrations are interesting. Thus spa,omai (Mk. 14:47) is used of Peter's drawing his sword (note voice), but diaspasqh|/ (Ac. 23:10) expresses the fear that Paul may be drawn in two. So evrga,zomai is a common verb for doing work (as Mk. 14:6), but katerga,zomai accents the carrying of the work through as in Ph. 2:12, and in verse 13 evnergei/n is used for the idea of in-working as contrasted with the out-working or development taught by katerga,zesqai. Cf. also mhde.n evrgazome,nouj avlla. periergazome,nouj (2 Th. 3:11) where the whole idea turns on peri,, 'doing nothing but doing about' is a free rendering. The same distinction is seen between evsqi,w 'to eat' (Mt. 15:2) and katesqi,w 'to eat up (down)' in Lu. 20:47. Cf. also e;fagon (Mt. 6:25) and kate,fagon (Mt. 13:4). As one further illustration note a;rti ginw,skw evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:12) and to,te de. evpignw,somai kaqw.j kai. evpegnw,sqhn (ib.). In general, on the whole subject of prepositions in composition see Delbruck, Ver-


gleichende Syntax, I, pp. 660 ff. Cf. also Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 431 f. See also ch. XVIII for further remarks.

(j) DOUBLE COMPOUNDS. It is always interesting to note the significance of both prepositions. As noted in chapter V, Word Formation, iv, (c), these double compounds are frequent in the koinh, and so in the N. T. The point to emphasize here is that each preposition as a rule adds something to the picture. There are pictures in prepositions if one has eyes to see them. For instance, note avnti─par─h/lqen (Lu. 10:31 f.), sun─anti─la,bhtai grk(10:40. Cf. Ro. 8:26. First known in LXX, but now found in papyrus and inscriptions third century B.C. Cf. Deissmann, Light., p. 83), u`per─en─tugca,nei, (Ro. 8:26), avnt─ana─plhrw/ (Col. 1:24), sun─para─la─ bei/n (Ac. 15:37), pros─ana─plhrw/, (2 Cor. 9:12), avnti─dia─ti,qemai, (2 Tim. 2 : 25), etc.

V. Repetition and Variation of Prepositions. A few words are needed in general on this subject before we take up the prepositions in detail.

(a) SAME PREPOSITION WITH DIFFERENT CASES. Sometimes the same preposition is used with different cases and so with a different resultant idea. Take dia,, for instance. In 1 Cor. 11:9 we have; ouvk evkti,sqh avnh/r dia. th.ngunai/ka, while in verse 12 we read avnh.r dia th/j gunaiko,j. In Heb. 2:10 the whole point turns on the difference in case, di v oa}n ta. pa,nta kai. di v ou- ta. pa,nta. In Heb. 11:29 the verb with dia, in composition has the accusative while dia, alone has the genitive, die,bhsan th.n vEruqra.n qa,lassan w`j dia. xhra/j gh/j. Cf. dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30) and dia. me,son (Lu. 17:11). But the resultant idea is here the same. vEpi, is a pertinent illustration. In Rev. 5:1 we find evpi. th.n dexia,n and evpi. tou/ qro,nou, while in Rev. 11:10 observe evpi. th/j gh/j and evp v auvtoi/j. Cf. also Rev. 14: 6. So again in Mt. 19:28 note evpi, qro,nou and evpi. qro,nouj and in Mt. 24:2 evpi. li,qon, but li,qoj evpi. li,qw| in Lu. 21:6. Cf. evpi, tou/ and evpi. th.n in Rev. 14:9. So evlpi,zw evpi, with dative in 1 Tim. 4:10 and accusative in 5:5. This is all in harmony with the ancient Greek idiom.

For an interesting comparison between the Synoptic and the Johannine use of prepositions and the varying cases see Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, pp. 357-361. The variation is especially noticeable in dia,├ evpi, and para,. The LXX shows abundant use of the preposition after verbs. Cf. Conybeare and Stock, Selections from the LXX, p. 87 f., and Johannessohn, Der Gebrauch etc. In some stereotyped formulm one notes even in modern Greek avpo. karadi,aj├ meta. bi,aj├ kata. diabo,lou (Thumb, Handb., pp. 103 ff.).


Addenda 3rd ed.

(b) REPETITION WITH SEVERAL NOUNS. When several nouns are used with the same preposition the preposition is repeated rather more frequently than in the earlier Greek.43 Winer44 thinks that the repetition occurs only when the two or more substantives do not come easily under the same category. Within limits this is true (cf. repetition of the article), but there is rather more freedom in the later Greek on this point. In Jo. 4:23 we do have a similar idea in the phrase evn pne,mati ka. avlhqei,a| as in avpo. fo,bou kai. prosdoki,aj in Lu. 21:26 Cf. evn Lu,stroij kai. vIkoni,w| (Ac. 16:2), but in verse 1 observe kai. eivj De,rbhn kai. eivj Lu,stran, where perhaps the double conjunction plays some part. Indeed with kai. - kai, or te - kai, the preposition is commonly repeated. Thus kai. evn ovli,gw| kai. evn mega,lw| (Ac. 26:29), e;n te toi/j desmoi/j mou kai. evn th|/ avpologi,a| (Ph. 1:7). With disjunctive conjunctions the repetition is usual also, as avpo. avkanqw/n h' avpo. tribo,lwn (Mt. 7:16). With antithesis the repetition is the rule, as mh. evn sofi,a| avll v evn duna,mei (1 Cor. 2:5. Cf. also verse 4). But one cannot properly insist on any ironclad rule when he considers a case like avpo. Mwuse,wj kai. avpo. pa,ntwn tw/n profhtw/n (Lu. 24:27), pro.j Si,mwna Pe,tron kai. pro.j to.n a;llon (Jo. 20: 2), evn duna,mei kai. evn pneu,mati a`gi,w| kai. evn plhrofori,a| (1 Th. 1:5). In a comparison again the preposition is repeated, as evp v auvtou.j- w[sper kai. evf v h`ma/j (Ac. 11:15). But even with disjunctive conjunctions the preposition is not always repeated, as evpi. dusi.n h' trisi,n (Heb. 10:28). In Ac. 26:18 avpo, is not repeated, though eivj occurs in one member of the sentence and evpi, in the other. In Jo. 16:8 peri, is repeated for rhetorical reasons, peri, a`marti,aj kai. peri, dikaiosu,hj kai. peri, kri,─ sewj. Cf. Eph. 6:12 where the repetition occurs without a conjunction, pro.j ta.j avrca,j├ pro.j ta.j evxousi,aj├ pro.j tou.j kosmokra,toraj├ etc. Cf. also Jo. 17:9.

(c) REPETITION WITH THE RELATIVE. The preposition is not always repeated with the relative. Usually the classic authors did not repeat the preposition with the relative when the antecedent had it.45 So the N. T. shows similar examples, as evn h`me,raij ai-j evpei/den (Lu. 1:25), eivj to. e;rgon oa} proske,klhmai (Ac. 13:2), avpo. pa,n─ twn w-n (Ac. 13:39), etc. But the repetition is seen in such examples as eivj th.n gh/n tau,thn├ eivj h[n(Ac. 7:4); avpo. prw,thj h`me,raj├ avf v h-j (Ac. 20:18). In Jo. 4:53, evkei,nh| th|/ w[ra| evn h|- the preposition occurs with the relative, but not with the antecedent. However, there is very little difference between the mere locative case and evn added. Especially noticeable46 is a case where the antecedent is


not expressed and the relative has the preposition of the antecedent. So peri. w-n (ii, in Jo. 17:9 is equal to peri. tou,twn oua}j de,dwka,j moi. Cf. eivj o[n (Jo. 6:29).

(d) CONDENSATION BY VARIATION. Once more, the variation of the preposition is a skilful way of condensing thought, each preposition adding a new idea. Paul is especially fond of this idiom. Thus in Ro. 3:22 we note dikaiosu,nh de. qeou/ dia. pi,stewj vIhsou/ Cristou/ eivj pa,ntaj. Cf. verses 25 f. A particularly striking example is evx auvtou/ kai. di v auvtou/ kai. eivj auvto.n ta. pa,nta (Ro. 11:36). Cf. also Col. 1:16 evn auvtw|/ evkti,sqh ta. pa,nta - di v auvtou/ kai. eivj auvto.n e;ktistai. Cf. evpi,├ dia,├ evn, in Eph. 4:6. In Gal. 1:1 Paul covers source and agency in his denial of man's control of his apostleship by the use of avpo, and dia,. See Winer-Thayer, p. 418 f. Cf. also u`po. Kuri,ou dia. tou/ profh,tou (Mt. 1:22) for mediate and intermediate agent. One should not make the prepositions mere synonyms. Cf. u`pe,r (Ro. 5:6), avnti, (Mt. 20:28), and peri, (Mt. 26:28) all used in connection with the death of Christ. They approach the subject from different angles.

VI. The Functions of Prepositions with Cases.

(a) THE CASE BEFORE PREPOSITIONS.47 Both in time and at first in order. In the Indo-Germanic tongues at first the substantive was followed by the preposition48 as is still seen in the Greek e[neken├ ca,rin, etc. The Greek, however, generally came to put the preposition before the substantive as with compound verbs.

(b) NOTION OF DIMENSION. The prepositions especially help express the idea of dimension and all the relations growing out of that,49 but they come to be used in various abstract relations also. Indeed it was just the purely "local" cases (ablative, locative and instrumental) that came to lose their independent forms (Moulton, Prol., p. 60 f.), due partly to the increase in the use of prepositions.

(C) ORIGINAL FORCE OF THE CASE. The case retains its origitial force with the preposition and this fundamental case-idea must be observed. The same preposition will be used with different cases where the one difference lies in the variation in case as already noted. Take para,, for instance, with the ablative, the locative or the accusative. The preposition is the same, but the case varies and the resultant idea differs radically.50


(d) THE GROUND-MEANING OF THE PREPOSITION. This must always be taken into consideration.51 It is quite erroneous to say that para,, for instance, means now 'from,' now 'beside,' now 'to.' This is to confuse the resultant meaning of the preposition, case and context with the preposition itself. It is the common vice in the study of the prepositions to make this crucial error. The scientific method of studying the Greek preposition is to begin with the case-idea, add the meaning of the preposition itself, then consider the context. The result of this combination will be what one translates into English, for instance, but he translates the total idea, not the mere preposition. It is puerile to explain the Greek prepositions merely by the English or German rendering of the whole. Unfortunately the Greeks did not have the benefit of our English and German. Kuhner-Gerth52 well observe that it is often impossible to make any translation that at all corresponds to the Greek idiom.

(e) THE OBLIQUE CASES ALONE WITH PREPOSITIONS. See also ch. XI. The vocative was obviously out of the question, and the nominative only appeared with pure adverbs like avna. ei-j (Rev. 21:21). Cf. Mk. 14:19; Ro. 12:5, kaq v ei-j. But not all the six oblique cases were used with equal freedom with prepositions. Certainly in the original Indo-Germanic tongues the dative was not used with prepositions.53 The dative is not originally a "local" case and expresses purely personal relations. Delbruck thinks that the Greek dative did come to be used sometimes with evpi, in Homer, evpi. Trw,essi ma,cesqai.54 Indeed some N. T. examples of evpi, may naturally be datives like evspla─ gcni,sqh e`p v auvtoi/j (Mt. 14:14), makroqu,mhson evp v evmoi, (Mt. 18:26). But usually even with evpi, the case is locative, not dative. We do have two examples of evggu,j with the dative, as Ac. 9:38; 27:8. Originally again the genitive was not used with prepositions,55 but the Greek undoubtedly uses the genitive, though not a "local" case, with some prepositions like avnti,├ dia,├ evpi,)

(f) ORIGINAL FREEDOM. That is to say, most of the prepositions could be used with ablative, locative, accusative and some with the genitive or instrumental. But the three first mentioned ('whence,' 'where,' 'whither' cases) called upon most of the prepositions. The dialect inscriptions give many proofs of this matter. Thus avpo, and evx both appear in the Arcadian and Cyprian dialects


with the locative as well as the ablative.56 vAmfi, originally occurred with locative, accusative and genitive. The same thing was true of evpi,├ meta, peri, and u`po, (possibly with ablative, not genitive). Indeed peri, once used the ablative also. Para, and pro,j were used with locative, accusative or ablative. It is possible indeed that pro,j may have been used with five cases, adding true dative and true genitive to the above.57 In the case of four cases occur (Delbruck) since it apparently used the dative also. Other prepositions once were used with two cases, as avna, and evn with locative and accusative (even the gen. with evn and eivj like eivj a|[dou), whereas kata, seems to use accusative, genitive, ablative. Pro, originally had locative as well as ablative, while u`pe,r had ablative (genitive?) and accusative and dia,, accusative and genitive. vAnti, has only genitive, while su,n has only instrumental. vAmfi, still occasionally occurs in the papyri as a free preposition.

(g) NO ADEQUATE DIVISION BY CASES. It is very difficult, therefore, to make any adequate division of the prepositions by the cases. There were indeed in early Greek two with only one case, eight with two, and eight with three cases. But the point to observe is that the usage varies greatly in the course of the centuries and in different regions, not to say in the vernacular and in the literary style. Besides, each preposition had its own history and every writer his own idiosyncrasies. For the detailed comparison of the prepositions see Helbing,58 and for the history of the cases with the prepositions see Krebs.59 But in the Ptolemaic times prepositions are more and more used with the accusative to the corresponding disappearance of the other oblique cases.60 In particular one must note (cf. ch. XI) the disappearance of the locative, instrumental and dative before the accusative and the genitive, until in the modern Greek eivj and the accusative have superseded evn and the locative and the dative proper also. Even su,n and the instrumental disappear in the modern Greek vernacular before me, ( meta,) and the accusative.61

(h) SITUATION IN THE N. T. But in the N. T. the matter has not developed that far and the cases are not so much blurred,


Addenda 3rd ed.

though the range of the prepositions in the matter of cases is greatly limited. The seventeen "proper" prepositions ( avmfi,, drops out) in the N. T. use the cases as will be now shown.

1. Those with One Case. vAna,├ avnti,├ avpo,├ eivj├ evk├ evn├ pro,├ su,n use only one case, eight as opposed to two in the early Greek ( avnti, and su,n). The cases used are not the same (accusative with avna, and eivj; genitive with avnti,; ablative with avpo,├ evk and pro,; locative with evn instrumental with su,n), but nearly half of the prepositions have come to one case in the N. T. In the modern Greek all the prepositions occur usually with the accusative (or even the nom.). The use of the genitive (abl.) is due to literary influence. The common proper prepositions in modern Greek are eivj├ avpo,├ me,├ gia,├ and less commonly kata,├ para,├ avnti,j, and in dialects pro,j (Thumb, Handb., p. 98). This tendency towards case simplification is well illustrated by the so-called improper prepositions which use only one case (abl., gen. or dat.), though they do not feel the movement towards the accusative.

2. Those with Two Cases. Five (as opposed to eight) use two cases: dia,├ meta,├ peri,├ u`pe,r├ u`po,. The cases used are genitive and accusative each with dia,├ meta,├ peri,; ablative and accusative with u`pe,r and u`po,. In the case of peri, some of the examples can be explained as ablative (from around), while u`po, seems, like u`pe,r, to use the ablative (cf. Latin sub) and possibly the genitive also.

3. Those with Three Cases. Only four prepositions (as against eight) retain three cases: evpi,├ kata, para,├ pro,j, unless peri,├ u`pe,r and u`po, have both ablative and genitive. Kata, in Mt. 8:32, w[rmhsen kata. tou/ krhmnou/, is used with the ablative. Pro,j indeed only has the ablative once (Ac. 27:34) and that is due to the literary influence on the N. T.62 If pro,j drops out, only three prepositions still use three cases, barring peri,├ u`pe,r and u`po,. Of these para, is not very common (gen. 78, acc. 60, loc. 50), still less kata,, while evpi, is still frequent (acc. 464, gen. 216, loc. 176).

4. Possibly Four with evpi,. In the case of evpi, indeed we may have to admit four cases, if there are examples of the pure dative like Mt. 18:26, makroqu,mhson evp v evmoi,. But at any rate evpi, and para, alone show the old freedom in the use of the cases.

(i) EACH PREPOSITION IN A CASE. Like other adverbs the prepositions are fixed case-forms, some of which are still apparent. Thus avnti,, is in the locative case, like evn$i,%├ evpi,├ peri,) Cf. also proti, ( pro,j). The forms diai, and u`pai, occur also (datives). The old dative parai, occurs, while para, is instrumental. So avna,├ dia,├ kata,├ meta, are


in the instrumental case. What u`po, is we do not know. But the case in which the preposition may be itself has no necessary bearing on the case with, which it is used. It is just a part of the word's own history, but still it is always worth observing.

VII. Proper Prepositions in the N. T.

(a) vAna,. The case of avna, is not clear. Originally it was a;na and may be the same as the Lesbian, Thessalian and Cyprian o;n) Cf. English "on." It may be compared with the Old Persian and Gothic ana, the Latin and German an. One may compare the Greek a;n and Sanskrit ana.63 The fundamental idea seems to be "on," "upon," "along," like German auf, and this grows easily to "up" like a;nw in contrast with kata, ( ka,tw). Homer uses the adverb a;na as an ellipsis to mean "up." The locative was once used with avna,, but in the N. T. only the accusative occurs. The distributive use may be up and down a line or series, and MSS. give kata, in several of these instances (a common use of kata, also). While avna, is very common in composition with verbs in the N. T. (over ten pages of examples in Moulton and Geden's Concordance), only thirteen examples of the preposition alone occur in the N. T. One of these (Lu. 9:3) is absent from W. H. (Nestle retains it), while in Rev. 21:21 ( avna. ei-j) the word is merely adverb (cf. Homer), not preposition.64 Of the remaining eleven instances, four are examples of avna. me,son with the genitive, a sort of compound prepositional phrase with the idea of "between" (like Mt. 13:25), similar to the modern Greek avna,mesa, and found in the LXX, Polybius, etc. One (1 Cor. 14:27, avna. me,roj, means 'in turn,'65 while the remaining six are all examples of the distributive use, like avna. du,o (Lu. 10:1). The distributive use is in Xenophon. For examples in papyri and inscriptions see Radermacher, p. 15. Cf. our "analogy." In Ac. 8:30, ginw,─ skeij aa} avnaginw,skeij, the point turns on avna-, but it is not clear how avna- turns "know" to "read." See Ac. 10:20 avnasta.j kata,─ bhqi for contrast between avna,, and kata,. Abbott, Johannine Gr., pp. 222 ff., argues at length to show that the one example in John (2 : 6) is distributive. vAna, does not survive in modern Greek vernacular (Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366). In the papyri avna, shows some new compounds not in the N. T., like avnaporeu,omai (Mayser,


Addenda 3rd ed.

Gr. d. Griech. Pap., p. 486). Delbruck, Vergl. Syntax, I, p. 734, considers avna,, like avnti,, one of the "proethnic" prepositions. It is rare in the papyri and the inscriptions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 115). But avnastatoi/ me, 'he upsets me' (P. Oxy. 119, ii/iii A.D.), is strangely like Ac. 17:6; oi` th.n oivk) avnastatw,santej.

(b) This preposition is in the locative case of a;nta. Cf. Sanskrit anti, Latin ante, Lithuanian ant, Gothic and, German ant (-ent), Anglo-Saxon andlang, and-swerian ('answer'). The rootidea is really the very word "end." Brugmann (Griech. Gr., p. 437) thinks it may mean "front." If so, "in front of " would be the idea of the word in the locative. Cf. ante-room, avnti,oj├ avnta,w $avp─├ u`p──%├ evnanti,oj, 'at the end' ( avnti,). Suppose two men at each end of a log facing each other. That gives the etymological picture, "face to face." The case used with it was originally the genitive and naturally so, though in modern Greek the accusative has displaced it.66 It is obviously the real adnominal genitive and not ablative (cf. Sanskrit adverb anti) that we have with avnti, and is like the genitive with the adverbs a;nta├ avnti,on├ avnti,a, and the adjective avnti,oj, etc.67 In Homer indeed avnti, has just begun to be used in composition with verbs so that it barely escapes the list of the "improper" prepositions.68 Blass69 calls it "one of the prepositions that are dying out," but as a matter of fact it survives in modern Greek. In the N. T. it is used in composition with twentytwo verbs (single compounds) and occurs twenty-two times also with nouns and pronouns. It is not therefore very flourishing in the N. T. It does not occur often in the indices to the papyri volumes, and Mayser70 gives papyri support for some of the N. T. compounds like avnqomologe,w├ avnti,keimai├ avntilamba,nomai. It is absent from the inscriptions of Magnesia and Pergamon (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 115). In some of the compounds the original idea of the preposition comes out finely. Thus in avnt─ofqalmei/n tw|/ avne,mw| (Ac. 27:15) the preposition merely carries on the idea of the ovfqalmo,j. The boat could not look at ('eye, face to face') or face the wind. This root-idea is always present in avnti, and is the basis from which to discuss every example. It is equally plain in a word like avnti─par─h/lqen (Lu. 10:31 f.). The priest and Levite passed along on the other side of the road, facing ( avnti,) the wounded traveller. Note avnti─ba,llete in Lu. 24:17, where the two dis-


Addenda 3rd ed.

ciples were exchanging words (casting them from one to the other as they faced each other, avnti,) with one another, an intimate and vivid picture of conversation. Cf. also the contrast between avnti, and kata, e`no.j avnqe,xetai, ('cleave to,' 'cling to,' 'hold one's self face to face with') kai. tou/ e`te,rou katafronh,sei (Mt. 6:24). In the double compound sun─anti─lamba,netai th|/ avsqenei,a| h`mw/n (Rom. 8:26; cf. Lu. 10:40) the fundamental meaning is obvious. The Holy Spirit lays hold of our weakness along with ( su,n) us and carries his part of the burden facing us ( avnti,) as if two men were carrying a log, one at each end. Cf. avnti─lamba,nesqai in Ac. 20:35. The English word "antithesis" preserves the idea also. Note kathnth,samen a;nti─ kruj Ci,ou (Ac. 20:15) where in both verb and preposition the idea of face-to-face appears. So avp─anth,sei (Mk. 14:13), avnti,─pera (Lu. 8:26), evn─anti,─on grk(20:26). Now the various resultant ideas grow out of this root-idea because of different contexts. Take the notion of opposition (against). The word does not mean that in itself. The two disciples were talking in a friendly mood ( avnti─ba,llete%, but if a man makes himself king he avnti─le,gei tw|/ Kai,sari (Jo. 19:12) in a hostile sense. It is the atmosphere of rivalry that gives the colour of hostility. We see it also in the word avnti,─cristoj (1 Jo. 2:18) avnti─pi,pete tw|/ pneu,mati (Ac. 7:51). In Lu. 21:15 three instances occur: avnti─sth/nai├ avnt─eivpei/n├ avnti─kei,menoi. Cf. avnti,─dikoj (Mt. 5:25). There is no instance of the uncompounded preposition in this sense. The idea of "in the place of " or "instead" comes where two substantives placed opposite to each other are equivalent and so may be exchanged. The majority of the N. T. examples belong here. In ovfqalmo.n avnti. ovfqalmou/, (Mt. 5:38; cf. also avnti. ovdo,ntoj) there is exact equivalence like "tit for tat." So also kako.n avnti. kakou/ (Ro. 12:17; 1 Th. 5:15; 1 Pet. 3:9), loidori,an avnti. loidori,aj (1 Pet. 3:9). None the less does the idea of exchange (cf. avnt─a,llagma, Mk. 8:37) result when a fish and a snake are placed opposite each other, avnti. ivcqu,oj o;fin (Lu. 11: 11) or one's birthright and a mess of pottage (Heb. 12:16). In Mt. 17:27, avnti. evmou/ kai. sou/, there is a compression of statement where the stater strictly corresponds to the tax due by Christ and Peter rather than to Christ and Peter themselves. But in lu,tron avnti. pollw/n (Mt. 20:28; Mk. 10:45) the parallel is more exact. These important doctrinal passages teach the substitutionary conception of Christ's death, not because avnti, of itself means "instead," which is not true, but because the context renders any other resultant idea out of the question. Compare also avnti,lutron u`pe.r pa,ntwn by Paul (1 Tim. 2:6) where both avnti, and u`pe,r combine with lu,tron


in expressing this idea. Cf. avnti,─tupoj (Heb. 9:24). In Mt. 2:22 avnti. tou/ patro,j the substitution takes the form of succession as son succeeds father on the throne. Cf. avnq─u,patoj (Ac. 13:7). In Jas. 4:15 avnti. tou/ le,gein the result is also substitution, the points of view being contrasted. In Heb. 12:2 the cross and the joy face each other in the mind of Jesus and he takes both, the cross in order to get the joy. The idea of exchange appears also in 1 Cor. 11:15 h` ko,mh avnti. peribolai,ou. Blass71 considers ca,rin avnti. ca,ritoj (Jo. 1:16) as "peculiar," but Winer72 rightly sees the original import of the preposition. Simcox73 cites from Philo ca,ritaj ne,aj avnti. palaiote,rwn evpidi,dwsin as clearly explaining this "remarkable" passage. But really has not too much difficulty been made of it? As the days come and go a new supply takes the place of the grace already bestowed as wave follows wave upon the shore. Grace answers ( avnti,) to grace. The remaining examples are five of avnq v w-n in the sense of 'because' ('therefore'), when two clauses or sentences correspond to each other, one the reason for the other. This is indeed classical enough (LXX also). Similar is avnti. tou,tou, (Eph. 5:31) where the LXX (Gen. 2:24), which Paul does not quote, has e[neken tou,tou (cf. Mk. 10:7; Mt. 19:4). There is yet another idea that comes out in composition like avnt─avpo─di,dwmi (Lu. 14:14) where avpo, has the meaning of 'back' and avnti, of 'in return' (cf. "in turn"). Cf. avnt─apo─kri,nomai (Lu. 14:6) and avnq─omologe,w (Lu. 2:38). In Col. 1:24, avnt─ana─plhro,w, Paul uses avnti, in the sense of 'in his turn' (answering over to Christ). As Christ, so Paul fills up the measure of suffering. One may remark that prepositions in composition often best show their original import.

(c) vApo,. The etymology of this preposition is very simple. We note the Sanskrit apa, Latin ab, Gothic af, English of, off. Some of the older dialects used the form avpu,, (Arcad., Cypr., Thess.) and the avpai, is to be noted.74 We may compare a;y ( avp─j) with Latin aps (ab; cf. evk├ evx%) The case of avpo, cannot be determined, but observe avpai,, above. In the Arcadian and Cyprian eoni is found with the locative, but in the literary Greek only the ablative is used with avpo,, a case in perfect harmony with the meaning of the word. The nominative avpo. o` w;n in Rev. 1:4 is,


of course, for a theological purpose, to accent the unchangeableness of God. It is one of the most tenacious of the prepositions, being extremely frequent in the N. T. both with nouns and in composition with verbs. Jannaris75 gives an interesting sketch of the history of avpo, in the later Greek. In the modern Greek it is used with the accusative (the ablative only in set phrases). This accusative usage is found as early as Hermas.76 vEk finally vanished before avpo, (cf. evn before eivj), but in the modern Greek avpo, also supplants to some extent avna,├ pro,j├ and u`po,. The explanation of avpo, is somewhat complicated therefore77 since the increase of its use is due partly to the general tendency regarding prepositions (cf. avpo, with ablative instead of the "partitive genitive") and partly to its supplanting other prepositions like evk├ para,├ u`po,.

1. Original Significance. It can be easily perceived in the N. T. It is clear enough in avpo─ko,ptw, for instance, 'to cut off,' as avp─e,koyen Pe,troj to. wvti,on (Jo. 18:26). Cf. avpo─kalu,ptw, 'to take the veil off,' 'unveil' (cf. Mt. 10:26 for contrast between kalu,ptw and avpokal)). So avpo─qh,kh, 'a treasure-house for putting things away' (Mt. 3:12). Cf. avp─edh,mhsen (Mt. 21:33) for 'a man off from home.' So avp─ e,blepen in Heb. 11:26 and avf─orw/ntej in 12:2. It is needless to multiply examples from the compound words78 like avpo─cwre,w. Moulton79 seems right against Blass80 in considering w`j avpo. stadi,wn dekape,nte (Jo. 11:18) not a real Latinism, but a mere accidental parallel to a millibus passuum duobus. The same idiom occurs in Jo. 21:8 and also in Rev. 14:20. It is indeed rather late Greek (Strabo, Diodorus and Plutarch), but it is not such a manifest Latinism as Jannaris81 supposes. It is not the meaning of airs that is unusual here, but merely the position. We say ten miles off, not off ten miles. Cf. avpo. w[raj q v, 'at 9 o'clock,' P. Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). The idea of "off " or "away from" is enough to explain the bulk of the N. T. passages. The context as a rule does not alter this simple idea. Thus avpo. th/j Galilai,aj (Mt. 3:13), avpo. tou/ u[datojgrk grk(3:16), avpo. avnatolw/ngrk grk(2:1), ba,le avpo. sou/,grk grk(5:29), avpo. tou/ ponhrou/grk grk(6:13), avpo. tou/ mnhmei,ou, (Lu. 24:2), avp v evmou/ (Mt. 7:23), kate,pausen avpo. pa,ntwn (Heb. 4:4), avpo. th/j w[raj evkei,nhj (Mt. 9:22), avpo. tw/n a`martiw/n (Mt. 1:21), a;fantoj evge,neto avp v auvtw/n (Lu. 24:31), avna,qema avpo. tou/ Cristou/ (Rom. 9:3). Here the ablative case and


Addenda 2nd ed.

the root-idea of the preposition make all clear. The question of place, time, person or abstract relations cuts very little figure in the matter. Wherever the ablative case is natural in Greek, there avpo, may appear to make clearer the case-idea of source or separation. Conybeare and Stock (p. 84) consider the idiom avpo. vAbraa.m e[wj Dauei,d (Mt. 1:17) a Hebraism. The construction is in the LXX, but there is nothing un-Greek about it. For avpo, in expressions of time take avf v h-j h`me,raj (Col. 1:9). In Mt. 7:16, avpo. tw/n karpw/n evpignw,sesqe, the notion of source is the real idea. Cf. diele,xato auvtoi/j avpo, tw/n grafw/n, (Ac. 17:2). In Ac. 16: 33, e;lousen avpo. tw/n plhgw/n, it seems at first as if the stripes were washed from Paul and Silas and not, as here, Paul and Silas washed from the stripes. Winer82 suggests the addition in thought of "and cleansed." Cf. kaqri,swmen e`autou.j avpo. panto.j molusmou/, (2 Cor. 7:1), which idiom Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 216) illustrates from the inscriptions, and on p. 227 he further cites from the inscriptions three examples of lou,omai avpo, in illustration of Ac. 16:33. Cf. avp─eni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24). In Ac. 15:38, to.n avposta,nta avp v auvtw/n avpo. Pamfuli,aj, no difficulty should be found in the threefold use of avpo., since the Greek, unlike the English, loves to repeat words in varying relations. Here we have avpo, in composition, with persons, with place. See vAqw|/oj avpo. tou/ ai[matoj (Mt. 27:24). Certainly there was never any reason for thinking kaqaro.j avpo. tou/ ai[matoj (Ac. 20:26) a Hebraism, since it is the pure ablative idea, and the usage is continuous from Demosthenes to late Greek writers and papyri.83 We even find platu.j avpo. tw/n w;mwn, Pap. Par. 10, 20 (Radermacher, p. 116). The Pastor Hermae shows avpo, after evgkarateu,omai├ kaqari,zomai├ pau,omai├ fula,ssomai, (Radermacher, p. 113). Many similar examples of this simple use of avpo, occur in the N. T. Cf. the mere ablative with avfi,stato (Lu. 2:37) and then with avpo, grk(4:13). Cf. avpeqa,nete avpo, (170 (Col. 2: 20), metano,hson avpo, (Ac. 8:22), etc. Like other prepositions avpo, may occur with adverbs, like avpo. to,te (Mt. 4:17).

2. Meaning 'Back.' We see it clearly in avpo─di,dwmi, 'give back' (Mt. 16:27). But even here the point of view is simply changed. The giver gives from himself to the recipient. In the case of a debt or reward from the recipient's point of view he is getting back what was his due. This idea appears in avpolamba,nw as in Lu. 6:34. A particularly good example is found in ar-


evcousin to.n misqo.n auvtw/n (Mt. 6:2). Cf. avp─e,cei (Mk. 14:41). This notion of receipt in full is common ("in countless instances," Deissmann) for avpe,cw in the ostraca, papyri and inscriptions. Cf. Deissmann, Light fr. the Anc. East, pp. 110 ff. Cf. ta.n teima.n avpe,cw pa/san (i/A.D., Delphi Inscr., Bull. de Corr. Hell., 22, p. 58), 'I have received the whole price' for the slave's manumission. Cf. avpe,laben ta. trofei/a, P. Oxy. 37 (A.D. 49). Cf. evxedo,mhn th.n avpo─ doch,n, P. Oxy. 1133,16 (A.D. 396). This idiom seems to be confined to composition (cf. avpo,─krima, 2 Cor. 1:9) and avp─arch, (Ro. 8:23).

3. "Translation-Hebraism" in fobei/sqai avpo,. Cf. Lu. 12:4.84 In Mt. 10:28, fobei/sqe to.n dun), we have the usual accusative, and in verse 26 we even see fobhqh/te auvtou,j; but verse 28 again shows fobei/sqe avpo,. In Lu. 12:1, prose,cete e`autoi/j avpo. th/j zu,mhj, we have the usual ablative as above. Cf. ble,pw avpo, in Mk. 8:15. vApo, in the LXX was used to translate the Hebrew !mi85 but not all the examples in the LXX are necessarily pure Hebraisms, as Conybeare and Stock imply.86 Besides, the papyri show bele,pe sato.n avpo. tw/n vIoudai,wn, B.G.U. 1079 (A.D. 41), the first reference to the Jews as money-lenders. Some of the N. T. examples are merely for the so-called "partitive genitive." Thus evklexa,menoj avp v auvtw/n dw,deka (Lu. 6:13), evne,gkate avpo. tw/n ovyari,wn (Jo. 21:10), evkcew/ avpo. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ac. 2:17), evsqi,ei avpo. tw/n yici,wn (Mt. 15:27), pi,w avpo. tou/ genh,matoj (Lu. 22:18), ti,na avpo. tw/n du,o (Mt. 27:21), etc. The point is not that all these phrases occur in the older Greek, but that they are in perfect harmony with the Greek genius in the use of the ablative and in the use of avpo, to help the ablative. Moulton (Prol., p. 246) cites w' avpo. tw/n Cristianw/n, Pelagia (Usener, p. 28) as fairly parallel with ouvai. - avpo. tw/n skanda,lwn (Mt. 18:7). The partitive use of the ablative with avpo, does come nearer to the realm of the genitive (cf. English of and the genitive), but the ablative idea is still present. One may note to.n avpo. Keltw/n fo,bon in Polybius XVII, 11, 2 (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 116). Cf. e;nduma avpo. tricw/n (Mt. 3:4) with the old genitive of material.

4. Comparison with evk) But avpo, needs to be compared more particularly with evk which it finally displaced save87 in the Epirot avc or ovc. But the two are never exactly equivalent. vEk means 'from within' while avpo, is merely the general starting-point. vApo, does not deny the "within-ness"; it simply does not assert it as evk does. Thus in Mk. 1:10 we read avnabai,nwn evk tou/ u[datoj when


the assertion is made by evk that Jesus had been in the water (cf. kata, - eivj├ avna, - evk in Ac. 8:38 f.). But in Mt. 3:16 we merely read avne,bh avpo. tou/ u[datoj├ a form of expression that does not deny the evk of Mark. The two prepositions are sometimes combined, as evxelqei/n avp v auvth/j (Ac. 16:18) and avforiou/sin evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49). Even with the growth in the use of avpo, it still falls behind evk in the N. T.88 Both avpo, and evk are used of domicile or birthplace, but not in exactly the same sense.89 Thus in Jo. 1:44 see h=n de. o` Fi,lippoj avpo. Bhqsaida,├ evk th/j po,lewj vAndre,ou, where avpo, corresponds closely with the German von and French de which came to be marks of nobility. So in verse 45, vIwsh.f to.n avpo. Nazare,t, where (in both verses) no effort is made to express the idea that they came from within Nazareth. That idea does appear in verse 46, evk Nazare,t. In Lu. 2:4 both airs and k are used for one's home ( avpo. th/j Galilai,aj evk po,lewj Nazare,t). Indeed evk in this sense in the N. T. seems confined to polij.90 Both appear again in Jo. 11:1. Cf. also Jo. 7:41 f., evk th/j Galilai,aj├ avpo. Bhqlee,m, where the two prepositions are reversed. The Latin versions render both avpo, and evk here by a.91 Cf. avpo. `Arimaqai,aj (Jo. 19:38). Abbott92 is clear that John does not mean to confuse the two prepositions, but uses each in its own sense, though situ is not found in the older writers for domicile. The sense of variety, as in English, may have led to the use of now one, now the other, since at bottom either answers. So Luke in Ac. 23:34 has evk poi,aj evparcei,aj, but avpo. Kiliki,aj. Cf. Ac. 1:4. Blass93 notes that outside of John the N. T. writers use avpo, for one's country. So even Luke in Ac. 24:18, avpo. th/j vAsi,aj. The MSS. indeed vary in some instances between avpo, and evk as in Ac. 16:39 with th/j po,lewj. Cf. MS. variation between avpo, and para, in Mk. 16:9. Cf. also Ac. 13:50 for evk- avpo,. In a case like of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24) the preposition does not determine whether the persons are still in Italy or are outside of Italy. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 237. But Deissmann (Light, etc., p. 186) thinks that avpo, here means 'in,' like avpo. Fmou/ in an ostracon from Thebes, A.D. 192. Cf. tw/n avp v vOxuru,gcwn po,lewj, P. Oxy. 38, A.D. 49. vApo, is also, like evk (Ac. 10:45, etc.), used for members of a party in Ac. 12:1, tinaj tw/n avpo. th/j evkklhsi,aj, an un-Attic usage. But on the whole the two prepositions can be readily distinguished in the N. T.

5. Comparison with para,) As to para,, it suggests that one has


been by the side of the one from whom he comes. In relation to God we find evk tou/ qeou/ evxh/lqon, (Jo. 8:42), para. tou/ patro.j evxh/lqongrk grk(16:27), avpo. qeou/ evxh/lqejgrk grk(16:30). Cf. pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1). It would he overrefinement to insist on a wide and radical difference here between avpo,├ evk and para,; and yet they are not exactly synonymous. In the older Greek para, was the common preposition for the conscious personal departure.94 But in N. T. avpo, occurs also with persons. So avkhko,amen avp v auvtou/ (1 Jo. 1:5), maqei/n avf v u`mw/n (Gal. 3:2), pare,labon avpo. tou/ kuri,ou (1 Cor. 11:23). One must not, however, read too much into avpo,, as in Gal. 2:12, where tina.j avpo. vIskw,bou does not mean 'with the, authority of James,' though they doubtless claimed it. Cf. Mk. 15:45; 1 Th. 3:6. One doubts if we are justified in insisting on a radical distinction between para. tou/ patro,j (Jo. 10:18) and avpo. tou/ kuri,ou (1 Cor. 11:23) save as etymology throws light on the matter.95

6. Compared with u`po,. The MSS. of ancient writers,96 as of the N. T., varied often between avpo, and u`po,. As instances of this variation in the N. T. take Mk. 8:31; Ac. 4:36; 10:17; Ro. 13:1. The MSS. often vary where avpo, is the correct text. The use of avpo, with the agent is not precisely like though one has only to compare avpo, with Latin ab and English of to see how natural it is for avpo, to acquire this idiom. Observe katenecqei.j avpo. tou/ u[pnou (Ac. 20:9). So in Jas. 1:13, avpo. qeou/ peira,zomai, we translate 'tempted of God.' The temptation, to be sure, is presented as coming from God. Cf. also o` misqo.j o` avfusterhme,noj avf v u`mw/n, (Jas. 5:4), where the keeping back of the reward is conceived as coming from you. Cf. Ac. 4:36. In Mt. 16:21, paqei/n avpo. tw/n presbute,rwn, 'at the hands of,' is a free rendering of the idea of agency or source. In Lu. 16:18, avpolelume,nhn avpo. avndro,j, note the repetition of avpo,. This idea of removal is present in ivaqh/nai avpo, (Lu. 6:17) and in evnoclou,menoi avpo,grk grk(6:18) it is agency. There may be a zeugma in the last clause. In Lu. 9:22, avpodokimasqh/nai avpo. tw/n presbute,rwn├ we have the same construction as in 16:18 above (cf. 17:25). Cf. h`toimasme,non avpo. tou/ qeou/ (Rev. 12:6) and Ac. 2: 22 avpodedeigme,non avpo. tou/ qeou/. The use of avpo, after substantives throws some light on this matter. Thus th.n avpo. sou/ evpaggeli,an (Ac. 23:21), avpo. sou/ shmei/on, (Mt. 12:38). This use of avpo, after passive verbs came to be the rule in the later writers. Cf. Wilhelm, 1. G. XII. 5, 29.

But it is not alone a form of agency that avpo, comes to express.


Addenda 2nd ed.

It may also be used for the idea of cause, an old usage of avpo,. For instance, take avpo. th/j cara/j auvtou/ u`pa,gei (Mt. 13:44), avpo. tou/ fo,bou e;kraxangrk grk(14:26), ouvai. tw|/ ko,smw| avpo. tw/n skanda,lwngrk grk(18:7), koimwme,nouj avpo. th/j lu,phj (Lu. 22:45), ouvke,ti i;scuon avpo. tou/ plh,qouj (Jo. 21:6), ouvk evne,blepon avpo. th/j do,xhj (Ac. 22:11). Cf. further Lu. 19:3; 24:41; Ac. 12:14; 20:9; Heb. 5:7, etc. The LXX gives abundant illustration of the same idiom,97 the causal use of avpo,. As a matter of sound see evf v o[n and avf v h-j in Heb. 7:13.

(d) Dia,) Delbruck98 says: "Of the origin of dia, I know nothing to say." One hesitates to proceed after that remark by the master in syntax. Still we do know something of the history of the word both in the Greek and in other Indo-Germanic tongues. The form dia, may be in the instrumental case, but one must note diai, (dative) in the lyric passages of AEschylus, not to say the Thessalian di,e)99 But there is no doubt about dia, being kin to du,o├ di,j. Sanskrit dva, dvi (cf. trayas, tri), dvis; Latin duo, bis (cf. Sanskrit dvis, Greek di,j, b= u or u); German zwei; English two (fem. and neut.), twain (masc.), twi-ce, twi-light, be-tween, two-fold, etc.

1. The Root-Idea. It is manifest in dia─ko,sioi├ dis─ci,lioi├ di,─dracma├ di─plou/j (cf. a`─plou/j). The etymology of the word is 'two,' du,o, as shown in these three words as well as in di,j├ di─plo,w, all of which occur in the N. T. Thus it will be seen how persistent is the etymological force in the word. Cf. Mk. 6:37; Rev. 18:6; Mk. 5: 13. See also di.j muria,dej (Text. Rec., du,o m. Rev. 9:16), di,─logoj (1 Tim. 3:8), di,─stomoj (Heb. 4:12), di,─yucoj (Jas. 1:8), di,─dracmon (Mt. 17:24), Di,─dumoj (Jo. 11:16). Cf. evsci,sqh eivj du,o (Mt. 27:51).

2. 'By Twos' or 'Between.' But the preposition has advanced a step further than merely "two" to the idea of by-twain, be-tween, in two, in twain. This is the ground-meaning in actual usage. The word di─qa,lassoj originally meant 'resembling two seas' (cf. Euxine Sea, Strabo 2, 5, 22), but in the N. T. (Ac. 27:41) it apparently means lying between two seas (Thayer). The notion of interval (be-tween) is frequent in the N. T. both in composition and apart from composition. Thus in h`merw/n dia─genome,nwn tinw/n (Ac. 25:13), 'some days came in between' ( dia,). Cf. dia─gnw,somai ta. kaq v u`ma/j (Ac. 24:22) with Latin di-gnosco, dis-cerno and Greek-English dia-gnosis ( dia,─gnwsin, Ac. 25:21). Dia─qh,kh is an arrangement or covenant between two (Gal. 3:17). See di─airou/n, (1 Cor. 12:11); dia─di,dwmi, (Lu. 11:22) 'divide'; ouvqe.n di─e,krinen metaxu. h`mw/n te kai. auvtw/n (Ac. 15:9) where meatxu, explains dia,. Cf. dia,─ krisij (Heb. 5:14), dis-


crimination'; dia─lei/pw (Lu. 7:45), 'intervals of delay'; dia─lu,w (Ac. 5:36), 'dis-solve'; dia─meri,zw (Ac. 2:45), 'dis-tribute'; dia─rh,gnumi (Lu. 8:29), 'rend asunder'; dia─skorpi,zw (Jo. 11:52), opposed to sun─ a,gw├ di-sperse'; dia─spa,w (Mk. 5:4), 'rend in two'; dia─spe,rw (Ac. 8:1)-'scatter abroad'; dia─spora, (Jo. 7:35), 'dispersion'; dia─ste,llw (Heb. 12:20), 'divide'; dia,─sthma (Ac. 5:7), 'distance' or 'interval'; dia─stolh, (1 Cor. 14:7), 'distinction'; dia─ti,qemai (Lu. 22:29), 'dispose'; dia─fe,rw (Ac. 27:27, Mt. 6:26), 'bear apart,' 'differ'; dia,─ foroj (Ro. 12:6), 'different'; di─ca,zw (Mt. 10:35), 'set at variance' ('cleave asunder'). These numerous examples ought to be sufficient to show what the real meaning of the word in itself is. A particularly noticeable instance appears in Lu. 24:51, where we have di─e,sth avp v auvtw/n.

The N. T. preserves this notion of interval in expressions of time and so it is hardly "peculiar only to literary style."100 Thus in Mk. 2:1 di v h`merw/n, means 'interval of days,' 'days between,' 'after some days,' though surely no one would think that dia, really means 'after.' Cf. Mt. 26:61, dia. triw/n h`merw/n (cf. evn 27: 40); di v evtw/n pleio,nwn, Ac. 24:17; Gal. 2:1, dia. dekatessa,rwn evtw/n, Cf. Ac. 5:7. In Ac. 1:3, di v h`merw/n tessera,kointa ovptano,menoj, the appearance of Jesus was at intervals within the forty days. But see opposition to this idea in Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 255 f. In the phrase dia. nukto,j (Ac. 5:19; 16:9, etc.), 'by night,' dia, adds little to the genitive itself. It is the real adnominal genitive. The preposition is very common in the N. T., especially with the genitive (gen. 382, acc. 279),101 though the accusative becomes dominant later.

3. 'Passing Between' or 'Through.' The idea of interval between leads naturally to that of passing between two objects or parts of objects. 'Through' is thus not the original meaning of dia,, but is a very common one. The case is usually the genitive, though in Homer102 the accusative is common also, as we find it once in the N. T. (Lu. 17:11), dia, me,son samari,aj (cf. dia. me,sou, 4:30), and even here note the genitive after me,son. Some MSS. in Jo. 8:59 read also dia. me,sou. Blass103 wrongly calls the accusative an "inadmissible reading" in view of Homer and the growing use of the accusative in the vernacular with all prepositions (cf. modern Greek). This use of 'through' or 'thorough' is common in composition and sometimes has a "perfective" idea ('clear through') as in dia─kaqariei/ th.n a[lwna (Mt. 3:12), 'will thoroughly cleanse.' Cf. also dia─bai,nw


(Heb. 11:29), dia─ble,pw (Mt. 7:5), di─agge,llw (Lu. 9:60), dia─grhgore,w (Lu. 9:32), di─a,gw (1 Tim. 2:2), dia─de,comai, (Ac. 7:45), dia─kate─ le,gcomai (Ac. 18:28), dia─ma,comai (Ac. 23:9), dia─me,nw (Lu. 1:22), dia─nukteu,w (Lu. 6:12), di─anu,w (Ac. 21:7), dia─paratribh, (1 Tim. 6:5); dia─sei,w (Lu. 3:14), dia─sw,zw (Lu. 7:3), dia─fula,sswgrk grk(4:10). This sense of dia, is used with words of place, time, agent or abstract word. In all of these relations the root-idea of the preposition is easily perceived. Thus in Mt. 12:43, die,rcetai di v avnu,drwn to,pwn├ dia. xhra/j (Heb. 11:29), dia. th/j Samari,aj (Jo. 4:4), dia. puro.j (1 Cor. 3:15), di v evso,ptrou (1 Cor. 13:12). Cf. Ac. 13:49; 2 Cor. 8:18. In Ro. 15:28, avpoeleu,somai di v u`mw/n eivj Spani,an, Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 378) takes di v u`mw/n to be 'through you,' i.e. 'through your city,' 'through the midst of you.' In all these examples the idiom runs just as in the older Greek. The use of dia, with expressions of time was never very common and gradually was transferred104 to eivj. But some examples occur in the N. T. like di v o[lhj nukto,j (Lu. 5:5), which may be compared with dia. panto.j tou/ zh/n (Heb. 2 : 15) and the common phrase dia. panto,j (Mk. 5:5). Here the idea of through is applied to time. Rouffiac (Recherches, p. 29) cites dia. tou/ ceimw/noj o[lou from inscriptions of Priene 112, 98 and 99 (i/s.c.). The agent may also be expressed by dia,. This function was also performed in the ancient Greek, though, when means or instrument was meant, the instrumental case was commonly employed.105 Dia, is thus used with inanimate and animate objects. Here, of course, the agent is conceived as coming in between the non-attainment and the attainment of the object in view. One may compare gra,yantej dia. ceiro.j auvtw/n (Ac. 15:23) with du,o evpistola.j├ dia. Nhdu,mou mi,an├ dia. Kroni,ou macairofo,rou mi,an├ B.U. 1079, A.D. 41 (Milligan, Greek Pap., p. 39). So ouv qe,lw dia. me,lanoj kai. kala,mou soi gra,fein (3 Jo. 1:13), dia. glw,sshj (1 Cor. 14: 9), ta. dia. tou/ sw,matoj (2 Cor. 5:10), dia. tw/n o[plwn (2 Cor. 6:7), mh,te dia. pneu,matoj mh,te dia. lo,gou mh,te di v evpistolh/j (2 Th. 2:2). In 2 Pet. 3:5 note the difference between evx u[datoj and di v u[datoj. Abstract ideas are frequently so expressed, as seswsme,noi dia. pi,stewj (Eph. 2:8), dia. qelh,matoj qeou/ (Eph. 1:1), dia. tou/ euvaggeli,ou (1 Cor. 4:15), dia. no,mou (Ro. 3:27), di v avpokalu,yewj (Gal. 1:12). Cf. 1 Cor. 6:14. When dia, occurs with the personal agent, he is regarded as the intermediate agent. Sometimes the immediate agent is also expressed by u`po,. So u`po, Kuri,ou dia. tou/ profh,tou (Mt. 1:22, etc.). Cf. also dia. th/j gunaiko,j - evk tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 11:12), where source and mediate agent are distinguished. In Gal. 1:1, avp v avnqrw,pwn


di v a`nqrw,pou, Paul takes pains to deny both ideas. In 1 Cor. 8:6, evx ou-──di v ou-, the first refers to God the Father as the source of all things and the second refers to Jesus as the mediate agent by whom all things come into existence. Cf. Col. 1:16. Indeed God himself may be regarded as source, mediate agent, and ultimate object or end, as Paul does in his noble doxology in Ro. 11:36, o[ti evx auvtou/ kai. di v auvtou/ kai. eivj auvto.n ta. pa,nta. There are other instances also where God is looked upon as the intervening cause or agent. So di v ou- (Heb. 2:10; 1 Cor. 1:9). But dia, is often used with Christ in regard to our relation to God (cf. Paul's use of evn). Thus Ro. 1:8; 5:1, etc. Cf. div evmou/ in Jo. 14:6, dia. pollw/n martu,rwn (2 Tim. 2:2), di v avgge,lwn (Heb. 2:2). The intermediate idea of dia, appears well in 1 Cor. 3:5 dia,konoi di v w-n evpisteu,sate, Heb. 3:16 dia. Mwuse,wj, Ro. 5:5 dia. pneu,matoj. In 1 Th. 4:2, ti,naj paraggeli,aj evdw,kamen u`mi/n dia. tou/ kuri,ou vIhsou/ the matter seems turned round, but, as Paul was the speaker, he conceives Jesus as also making the commands. Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 236, rightly argues in favour of 'through him' (not 'it ') in Jo. 1:7. It is important to note dia. vIhsou/ Cristou/ (Eph. 1:5), pregnant with meaning. Cf. Schettler, Die paulinische Formel "Durch Christus," pp. 28 ff. This use of dia, occurs in the papyri (Wenger, Die Stellvertretung im Rechte der Papyri, 1906, p. 9 f.). Christ is conceived as our representative (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 340). It is not far from the notion of means like dia. pi,stewj to that of manner like dia. parabolh/j (Lu. 8:4). Indeed the two shade off into one another as di v o`ra,matoj (Ac. 18:9). Note also di v avga,phj (Gal. 5:6), di v evpaggeli,aj (Gal. 3:18), dia. brace,wn (Heb. 13:22), di v ovli,gwn (1 Pet. 5:12), di v u[datoj kai. ai[matoj (1 Jo. 5:6), dia. gra,mmatoj kai. peritomh/j (Ro. 2:27), dia. prosko,mmatojgrk grk(14:20), dia. do,xhj (2 Cor. 3:11), di v u`pomonh/j (Heb. 12:1), dia. pollw/n dakru,wn (2 Cor. 2:4). Cf. Rom. 2:27. But here also the notion of between is always present. This is true even in a case like dia. tw/n oivktirmw/n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 12:1). Cf. also dia. th/j ca,ritoj in Ro. 12:3 with dia. th.n ca,rin in 15:15.

4. 'Because of.' With the accusative dia, comes to be used with the idea of 'because of,' 'for the sake of,' 'on account of.' The notion of between is still present. Take Mt. 27:18, dia. fqo,non par,─ dwkan auvto,n. Envy is the reason that prompted the betrayal and so came in between and caused the act. The accusative (extension) is natural and helps also to distinguish this idiom from the others. For instance, in Heb. 2:10, di v oa}n ta. pa,nta kai. di v ou- ta. pa,nta├ the two ideas are distinguished entirely by means of the


cases. One may note also dia. th.n gunai/ka and dia. th/j gunaiko,j (1 Cor. 11:9, 12). Cf. dia. th.n ca,rin above. In Ro. 8:11 the MSS. vary between dia. to. evnoikou/n and dia. tou/ evnoikou/ntoj (MT. H., Nestle). Note also the difference between dia. pi,stewj and dia. th/n pa,resin in Ro. 3:25. Cf. also the common dia. to. o;noma (Mt. 10:22), dia. th.n pollh.n avga,phn (Eph. 2:4), dia. to.n lo,gon (Jo. 15:3), dia. to.n cro,non (Heb. 5:12). Cf. Heb. 5:14; Rev. 12:11. The personal ground is common also as in evgw. zw/ dia. to.n pate,ra (Jo. 6:57), di v ou[j (Heb. 6:7), etc. Cf. 1 Jo. 4:9 zh,swmen di v auvtou/. The aim (usually expressed by e[neka) may be set forth by dia, also. So to. sa,bbaton dia. to.n a;nqrwpon evge,neto kai. ouvc o` a;nqrpwoj dia. to. sa,bbaton in Mk. 2:27. Cf. also di v evme, and di v u`ma/j in Jo. 12:30. Cf. Mk. 13:20; Ph. 3:7. Moulton (Prol., p. 105) cites i[na dia. se. basileu/ tou/ dikai,ou tu,cw and 20 (iii/B.c.), in illustration of Jo. 6:57. The Pauline phrase dia. vIhsou/n (2 Cor. 4:5) is illustrated by dia. to.n Ku,rion in a Berlin Museum papyrus letter (ii/A. D.) which Deissmann (Light, pp. 176 ff.) thinks curiously illumines the story of the Prodigal Son in Lu. 15. In the modern Greek gia, $dia,% this notion of aim or purpose with the accusative is the usual one.106 A common idiom in the Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Greek107 is the use of dia. to, and the infinitive in the sense of i[na. It is practically equivalent in the N. T. to o[ti and the indicative and is frequent. In Jo. 2:24 f. we have both constructions parallel, dia. to. auvto.n ginw,skein pa,ntaj├ kai. o[ti ouv crei,an ei=cen. In the modern Greek we actually have gia. na, ( dia. i[na) with the subjunctive. Cf. English "for that." The use of dia. ti, does not differ practically from ti, alone.

(e) vEn. Inasmuch as eivj $evn─j% is merely a later variation of evn108 it will be treated after evn. There is an older form evni, (locative case), gill, and in Homer eivni, or eivn for metrical reasons. But some of the dialects (Arcadian, Cretan) wrote iv like the Latin in. But compare Latin en-do, Umbrian en, (Latin inter), German in (ein), English in (en-).

1. Old Use of evn with Accusative or Locative. Originally evn was used with either locative or accusative, not to say genitive in a case like eivn Ai;dao which Brugmann109 does not consider mere ellipsis. He cites also evmpodw,n as being really evn podw/n. But there is no manner of doubt as to the accusative and the locative. The inscriptions of many of the dialects show abundant illustrations of evn


with the accusative such as the Thessalian, Boeotian, Northwest Greek, Arcadian, etc.110 Cf. evn ta,gma├ evn o`pli,taj, etc.111 So ivn ta. e;rga├112 etc. Indeed in Cypriote Greek evn usually has the accusative.113 In North Arcadian evn alone appears (not evn─j├ eivj) and with either locative or accusative like Latin in.114 Besides in Homer we have evn─w/pa, not to mention the common compound verbs like evm─ba,llw, evm─bai,nw, where one might look for eivj. Cf. evmba,nti eivj ploi/on (Mt. 8:23), o` evmba,yaj evn tw|/ trubli,w| (Mt. 26:23). This so-called pregnant use of evn seems very natural after all. It is only in composition that the old usage is preserved in the N. T. or a case like evn tw|/ trubli,w| above after a verb of motion where eivj might at first seem more natural. Cf. Lu. 9:46; 1 Cor. 11:18; Ro. 1:25. In Ro. 1:24 evn occurs with pare,dwken, but eivj in verse 26. Indeed (Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130) we find evn with di,dwmi├ i[sthmi and ti,qhmi. Remnants of this early usage survive in the N. T., as dido,nti evn th|/ kardi,a| (2 Cor. 8:16), de,dwken evn th|/ ceiri, (Jo. 3:35), avpe,qeto evn fulakh|/ (Mt. 14:3). Cf. the spurious verse Jo. 5:4 kate,bainen evn th|/ kolumbh,qra|; Par. P. 10, 2 (iii/A.D.) avnakecw,rhken evn vAlexandre,a|; Epict. (I, 11, 32) avne,rch| evn `Rw,mh|; Tob. 5:5 poreu─ qh/nai evn `Ra,goij. Cf. Blass-Debrunner, p. 131. The LXX shows similar examples. Cf. Conybeare and Stock, p. 83. But it was only by degrees that evn came to be associated exclusively with the locative case and eivj with the accusative as a result of the triumph of the Ionic-Attic Greek.115 In Homer indeed evn appears as an adverb.116 In origin therefore we are not to associate evn primarily with the locative any more than in Latin, though ultimately that came to be true. Other examples of evn in composition in the N. T. with verbs of motion are evmbateu,w (Col. 2:18), evmbiba,zw (Ac. 27:6), evmpi,ptw (Lu. 10:36 followed by eivj). The word therefore evidently expresses the idea of 'within,' whether of rest or of motion depending on the context. Compare vernacular English, "Come in the house." Note in Ac. 26:20 that evn is not repeated with vIerosolu,moij.

2. vEn Older than eivj. It seems certain that originally evn stood alone without its, whereas in the modern Greek vernacular evn


has entirely disappeared before eivj which uses only the accusative.117 There is once more unity, but not exactly on the same terms. In the Greek N. T. this process of absorption is going steadily on as in the koinh, generally. There is rarely much doubt as to the significance of evn, whereas eivj has already begun to resume its old identity with evn, if indeed in the vernacular it ever gave, it up.118 We may compare evn tw|/ avgrw| in Mt. 24:18 with eivj to.n avgro,n in Mk. 13:16. Cf. evpe,scen cro,non eivj th.n vAsi,an (Ac. 19:22), thre/sqai eivj Kaisari,angrk grk(25:4), eivj oi=ko,n evstin (some MSS. in Mk. 2:1). Cf. Jo. 1:18.

In the N. T. evn is so frequent (2698 instances) that it is still the most common preposition. Indeed Moulton119 thinks that its ultimate. disappearance is due to the fact that it had become too vague as "a maid of all work."

3. Place. The simplest use is with expressions of place, like evn th|/ avgora|/ (Mt. 20:3), evn dexia|/ (Heb. 1:3), evn tw|/ qro,nw| (Rev. 3:21), evn tw|/ ploi,w| (Mt. 4:21), evn th|/ po,lei (Lu. 7:37), evn tw|/ vIorda,nh| potamw|/ (Mt. 3:6), evn u[datigrk grk(3:11), evn th|/ avme,lw| (Jo. 15:4). Cf. also evxh/lqen o` lo,goj evn th|/ vIoudai,a| (Lu. 7:17) and evn tw|/ gazofulaki,w| (Jo. 8:20). For the "pregnant" construction of evn after verbs of motion cf. chapter XI, x, (i). Cf. examples given under 1. In these and like examples evn indeed adds little to the idea of the locative case which it is used to explain. See also evn toi/j (Lu. 2: 49) in the sense of 'at the house of ' (cf. eivj ta. i;dia, Jo. 19:27) for which Moulton120 finds abundant illustration in the papyri. Cf. evn toi/j vApollwni,ou, R.L. 38 2 (iii/B.C.). The preposition in itself merely states that the location is within theounds marked by the word with which it occurs. It does not mean 'near,' but 'in,' that is 'inside.' The translation of the resultant idea may be indeed in, on, at, according to the context, but the preposition itself retains its own idea. There is nothing strange about the metaphorical use of evn in expressions like evn basa,noij (Lu. 16:23), evn tw|/ qna,tw| (1 Jo. 3:14), evn do,xh| (Ph. 4:19), evn musthri,w| (1 Cor. 2:7), etc.

4. Expressions of Time. vEn may appear rather oftener than the mere locative. Cf. evn tw|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| in Jo. 6:44, but th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| in 6:54, while in 6:40 the MSS. vary. By evn trisi.n h`me,raij (Jo. 2:19) it is clear that Jesus meant the resurrection


Addenda 2nd ed.

will take place within the period of three days. Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (never with evn in the N. T.) in Mt. 16:21.121 More common expressions are evn sabba,tw| (Mt. 12:2), evn th|/ h`me,ra| (Jo. 11:9), evn th|/ nukti,grk grk(11:10), evn tw|/ deute,rw| (Ac. 7:13), evn tw|/ kaqexh/j (Lu. 8:1), evn tw|/ metaxu, (Jo. 4:31), evn tai/j h`me,raij evkei,naij (Mt. 3:1), evn th|/ parousi,a|, (1 Th. 2:19), evn th|/ avnasta,sei (Mk. 12:23), evn h`me,ra| kri,sewj (Mt. 10:15), evn th|/ evsca,th| sa,lpiggi (1 Cor. 15:52), etc. Cf. Lu. 1:7. Another temporal use of evn is evn w|- in the sense of 'while' (Mk. 2:19). Cf. also evn oi-j in Lu. 12:1. The frequent use, especially in Luke (cf. evn tw|/ u`postre,gein, 8:40), of evn tw|/ with the infinitive calls for a word. Examples of this idiom occur in the ancient Greek (16 in Xenophon, 6 in Thucydides, 26 in Plato)122 and the papyri show it occasionally.123 Cf. evn tw|/ logi,zesqai Par. P. 63 (ii/B.C.). But in the LXX it is a constant translation of B. and is much more abundant in the N. T. as a result of the LXX profusion.

5. 'Among.' With plural nouns evn may have the resultant idea of 'among,' though, of course, in itself it is still 'in,' 'within.' Thus we note evn gennhtoi/j gunaikw/n (Mt. 11:11), e;stin evn h`mi/n (Ac. 2:29), h=n evn auvtoi/jgrk grk(4:34), evn u`mi/n (1 Pet. 5:1), evn toi/j h`gemo,sin vIou,da (Mt. 2:6). This is a common idiom in the ancient Greek. Not very different from this idea (cf. Latin apud) is the use evn ovfqalmoi/j h`mw/n (Mt. 21:42), like Latin coram. One may note also evn u`mi/n in 1 Cor. 6:2. Cf. evn toi/j e;qnesin, (Gal. 1:16). See also 2 Cor. 4:3; 8:1.

6. 'In the Case of,' 'in the Person of' or simply 'in.' A frequent use is where a single case is selected as a specimen or striking illustration. Here the resultant notion is 'in the case of,' which does not differ greatly from the metaphorical use of with soul, mind, etc. Cf. Lu. 24:38. Thus with avpokalu,ptw note evn evmoi, (Gal. 1:16), eivdw.j evn e`autw|/ (Jo. 6:61), ge,nhtai evn evmoi, (1 Cor. 9:15), evn tw|/ xhrw|/ ti, ge,nhtai (Lu. 23:31), evn h`mi/n ma,qhte (1 Cor. 4: 6), evn th|/ kla,sei (Lu. 24:35). One may note also evn tw|/ vAda.m pa,ntej avpoqnh,skousin (1 Cor. 15:22), evn tw|/ vIhsou/ katagge,llein (Ac. 4:2), h`giasme,nh evn pneu,mati a`gi,w| (Ro. 15:16), h`gi,astai evn th|/ gunaiki, (1 Cor. 7:14), etc. Paul's frequent mystical use of evn kuri,w| (1 Cor. 9:1), evn Cristw|/ (Ro. 6:11, 23, etc.) may be compared with Jesus' own words, mei,nate evn evmoi,├ kavgw. evn u`mi/n (Jo. 15:4). Cf. also evn tw|/


qew|/ in Col. 3:3. The LXX usage is not quite on a par with this profound meaning in the mouth of Jesus and Paul, even if "extremely indefinite" to the non-Christian.124 But Moulton125 agrees with Sanday and Headlam (Ro. 6:11) that the mystic indwelling is Christ's own idea adopted by Paul. The classic discussion of the matter is, of course, Deissmann's Die Neutestamentliche Formel "in Christo Jesu" (1892), in which by careful study of the LXX and the N. T. he shows the depth and originality of Paul's idea in the use of evn Cristw|/. Moulton126 doubts if even here the N.T. writers make an innovation, but the fulness of the Christian content would amply justify them if they did have to do so. See evn auvtw|/ evkti,sqh ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16). As further examples cf. Ro. 9:1; 14:14; Ph. 3:9; Eph. 4:21.

7. As a Dative? One may hesitate to say dogmatically that in 1 Cor. 14:11, o` lalw/n evn evmoi. ba,rbaroj, we have evn used merely as the dative (cf. eivj in modern Greek). But tw|/ lalou/nti ba,baroj in the same verse looks that way,127 and Moulton128 cites toi/j evn qew|/ patri. hvgaphme,noij (Ju. 1) and reminds us of the common ground between the locative and dative in Sanskrit where the locative appears with verbs of speaking. Cf. also evn evmoi, in Ph. 1:26. Note also evn evmoi. ku,rie in late LXX books (Thackeray, Gr., p. 14). One may compare evpoi,hsan evn auvtw|/ (Mt. 17:12). There seems no doubt that o`mologe,w evn (Mt. 10:32= Lu. 12:8) is due129 to literal translation of the Aramaic. The use of evn with ovmnu,nai (Mt. 5:34) is similar to the Hebrew B..

8. Accompanying Circumstance. It is needless to multiply unduly the various uses of evn, which are "innumerable" in the LXX 130 where its chief extension is due to the imitation of the Hebrew B..131 But by no means all these uses are Hebraic. Thus evn for the idea of accompanying circumstance is classical enough (cf. evn o[ploij ei=nai, Xen. Anab. 5. 9, like English "The people are up in arms"), though the LXX abounds with it. It occurs also in the papyri. Cf. Tb.P. 41 (119 B.C.). Here evn draws close to meta, and su,n in


usage. Note, for instance, evn de,ka cilia,sin u`panth/sai (Lu. 14:31), h=lqen evn a`gi,aij muria,sin auvtou/ (Ju. 14), <), evn pa/sin avnalabo,ntej (Eph. 6:16), evn stolai/j peripatei/n (Mk. 12:38), e;rcontai evn evndu,masin proba,twn (Mt. 7:15), evn leukoi/j kaqezome,nouj (Jo. 20:12), meteka─ le,sato- evn yucai/j (Ac. 7:14), eivse,rcetai evn ai[mati (Heb. 9:25), evn tw|/ u[dati kai. evn tw|/ ai[mati (1 Jo. 5:6), evn r`a,bdw| e;lqw (1 Cor. 4:21), evn plhrw,mati (Ro. 15:29), evn keleu,smati (1 Th. 4:16), peribalei/tai evn i`mati,oij (Rev. 3:5; cf. Mt. 11:8). Note also evn musthri,w| lalou/men (1 Cor. 2:7) where 'in the form of ' is the idea. These examples show the freedom of the preposition in this direction. Somewhat more complicated is a passage like a;nqrwpoj evn pneu,mati avkaqa,rtw| (Mk. 1:23), which Blass132 properly compares with pneu/ma avka,qarton e;cei. (Mk. 3:30), and the double use in Ro. 8:9, u`mei/j de. ouvk evste. evn sarki. avlla. evn pneu,mati├ ei;per pneu/ma qeou/ oivkei/ evn u`mi/n (followed by pneu/ma Cristou/ ouvk e;cei. The notion of manner is closely allied to this idiom as we see it in evn dikaiosu,nh| (Ac. 17:31), evn parrh─ si,a| (Col. 2:15), evn ta,cei (Lu. 18:8, cf. tacu, and tace,wj). Cf. Mt. 6:18 and Jo. 18:20.

9. 'Amounting to,' 'Occasion,' 'Sphere.' Moulton133 considers Mk. 4 : 8, e;feren eivj tria,konta kai. evn e`xh,konta kai. evn e`kato,n (note similarity here between eivj and evn), as showing that evn sometimes is used in the sense of 'amounting to.' Cf. also Ac. 7:14 (LXX). The idiom is present in the papyri. Moulton cites proi/ka evn drac─ mai/j evnnakosi,aij, B.U. 970 (ii/A.D.), th.n prw,thn do,sin evn dracmai/j tes─ sara,konta, O.P. 724 (ii/B.C.). He (Prol., p. 76) quotes Hb. P. 42 (iii/B.C.), dw,somen evn ovfeilh,mati, as "predicative" use of evn. He compares Eph. 2:15, evn do,gmasin, 'consisting in decrees.' Certain it is that in Rev. 5:9 hvgo,rasaj evn tw|/ ai[mati, sou we have price134 indicated by evn. Cf. Ro. 3:25; Ac. 20:28. In a few examples evn gives the occasion, as e;fugen evn tw|/ lo,gw| tou,tw| (Ac. 7:29), evn th|/ polulogi,a| auvtw/n eivsakousqh,sontai (Mt. 6:7), evn tou,tw| (Jo. 16:30). Note also latreu,w evn tw|/ pneu,mati, mou evn tw|/ euvaggeli,w| (Ro. 1:9) where the second evn suggests 'in the sphere of.' Cf. evn me,trw| (Eph. 4:16), evn tou,toij i;sqi (1 Tim. 4:15), evn no,mw| h[marton (Ro. 2:12). In simple truth the only way to know the resultant meaning of evn is to note carefully the context. It is so simple in idea that it appears in every variety of connection.

10. Instrumental Use of evn) See previous discussion under Cases. Blass135 considers it due to Hebrew influence as does Jan-


naris.136 The ancient Greek writers did use evn with certain verbs, as the N. T. kai,w evn puri, (Rev. 17:16, some MSS.), avpokalu,ptw evn puri, (1 Cor. 3:13), a`li,zw evn ti,ni (Mt. 5:13), metre,w evn w|- me,trw| (Mt. 7:2).137 The construction in itself is as old as Homer.138 Cf. evn ovfqalmoi/j F ide,sqai (Il. i. 587), evn puri. kai,ein (Il. xxiv. 38). It is abnormally frequent in the LXX under the influence of the Hebrew B.,139 but it is not so common in the N. T. Besides, the papyri show undoubted examples of it.140 Moulton finds Ptolemaic examples of evn macai,rh|, Tb.P. 16 al.; dialuo,menai evn tw|/ limw|/ Par. P. 28 (ii/B.C.), while 22 has tw|/ limw|/ dialuqh/nai and note tou.j evnesch─ me,nouj e;n tisin avgnoh,masin, Par. P. 63 (ii/B.C.). We can only say, therefore, that the LXX accelerated the vernacular idiom in this matter. The Aramaic probably helped it on also. The blending of the instrumental with the locative in form facilitated this usage beyond a doubt,141 and the tendency to use prepositions abundantly helped also.142 But even so one must observe that all the N. T. examples of evn can be explained from the point of view of the locative. The possibility of this point of view is the reason why evn was so used in the beginning. I pass by examples like bapti,zw evn u[dati├ bapti,sei evn pneu,mati a`gi,w| kai. puri, (Mt. 3:11) as probably not being instances of the instrumental usage at all. But there are real instances enough. Take Lu. 22:49 eiv pa─ ta,xomen evn macai,rh|; Here the smiting can be regarded as located in the sword. To be sure, in English, we translate the resultant idea by 'with,' but evn in itself does not mean 'with.' That resultant idea can only come in the proper context. So evn tw|/ Beezebou.l a;rconti tw/n diamoni,wn evkba,llei (Mt. 12:24). Here the casting out is located in the prince of demons. Cf. kri,nw evn avndri, (Ac. 17:31), evn braci,oni (Lu. 1:51), evn do,lw| (Mk. 14:1), evn fo,nw| macai,rhj (Heb. 11:37). The Apocalypse has several examples, like polemh,sw evn tw|/ r`omfai,a|grk grk(2:16), avpoktei/nai evn r`omfai,a| kai. evn limw|/ kai. evn qana,tw|grk grk(6:8), evn macai,rh| avpoktenei/grk grk(13:10). In Rev. 14:15, kra,zwn evn fwnh|/, we do not necessarily have to explain it in this manner. Cf. Ro. 2:16; 2:28; 1 Jo. 2:3; Jas. 3:9. On the whole there is little that is out of harmony with the vernacular koinh, in the N. T. use of evn├ though Abbott143 thinks that the ex-


amples of Deissmann and Moulton do not exactly parallel the mental use. For repetition of evn see 2 Cor. 6:4 ff.

(f) Eivj) There is nothing to add to the etymology of eivj as compare that of evn save that eivj is known to be really as we find it in the inscriptions of Argos, Crete, etc. So evnj vAqanai,an.144 This j seems to have been added to evn by analogy to e`x.145 Usually with the disappearance of n the form was eivj, but Thucydides, like the Ionic and Doric writers and the poets, preferred is which was current in the inscriptions before 334 B.C.146 So is appears in a Phrygian Christian inscription.147 But the AEolic eivj gradually drove out all the other forms.148 Originally, therefore, evn alone existed with either locative or accusative, and eivj appears nowhere else save in the Greek. The classic use of eivj Ai[dou (some MSS. in Ac. 2:27, 31 and reading in Is. 14:15) is the true genitive, according to Brugmann (Griech Gr., p. 439), 'in the sphere of Hades.'

1. Original Static Use. In Homer eivs─kei/sqai means merely to lie within. But, though eivj really means the same thing as evn, it was early used only with the accusative, and gradually specialized thus one of the usages of evn. The locative with evn, however, continued to be used sometimes in the same sense as the accusative with eivj. The accusative indeed normally suggests motion (extension), and that did come to be the common usage of eivj plus the accusative. The resultant idea would often be 'into,' but this was by no means always true. Eivj is not used much in composition in the N. T. and always where motion is involved save in the case of eis─akou,w where there seems little difference between eivj and evn (cf. 1 Cor. 14:21; Mt. 6:7). In itself eivj expresses the same dimension relation as evn, viz. in.149 It does not of itself mean into, unto, or to. That is the resultant idea of the accusative case with verbs of motion. It is true that in the later Greek this static use of eivj with the idea of rest (in) is far more common than in the earlier Greek. This was naturally so, since in the vernacular eivj finally drove evn out entirely and did duty for both, just as originally evn did. The only difference is that eivj used the one case (accusative), whereas evn used either ac-


cusative or locative. But150 then the accusative was once the only case and must be allowed large liberty. And even, in the classic writers there are not wanting examples. These are usually explained151 as instances of "pregnant" construction, but it is possible to think of them as survivals of the etymological idea of eivj $evn─j) with only the general notion of the accusative case. Certainly the vernacular laid less stress on the distinction between eivj and evn than the literary language did. Though eivj falls behind evn in the N. T. in the proportion of 2 to 3, still, as in the papyri152 and the inscriptions and the LXX,153 a number of examples of static eivj occur. Some of these were referred to under evn, where the "pregnant" use of evn for eivj occurs. Hatzidakis gives abundant examples of evn as eivj and eivj as evn. Cf. eivj vAlexa,ndreia,n evsti, B.U. ii. 385; eivj tu,nbon kei/mai, Kaibel Epigr. 134; kinduneu,santoj eivj qa,lassan, B.U. 423 (ii/ A.D.). Deissmann (Light, p. 169) notes Paul's kindu,noij evn qala,ssh| and that the Roman soldier in the last example writes "more vulgarly than St. Paul." In these examples it is not necessary nor pertinent to bring in the idea of 'into.' Blass154 comments on the fact that Matthew (but see below) has no such examples and John but few, while Luke has most of them. I cannot, however, follow Blass in citing Mk. 1:9 evbapti,sqh eivj to.n vIorda,nhn as an example. The idea of motion in baptizw suits eivj as well as evn in Mk. 1:5. Cf. ni,yai eivj (Jo. 9:7). But in Mt. 28:19, bapti,zontej eivj to. o;noma, and Ro. 6:3 f., eivj Cristo,n and eivj to.n qa,naton, the notion of sphere is the true one. The same thing may be true of bap─ tisqh,tw eivj a;fesin tw/n a`martiw/n (Ac. 2:38), where only the context and the tenor of N. T. teaching can determine whether 'into,' 'unto' or merely 'in' or 'on' ('upon') is the right translation, a task for the interpreter, not for the grammarian. One does not need here to appeal to the Hebrew ~veB. lb;j' as Tholuck does (Beitrage zur Spracherkleirung des N. T., p. 47 f.). Indeed the use of o;noma for person is common in the papyri (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 196 f.). Deissmann gives examples of its eivj o;noma├ evp v ovno,matoj, and the mere locative ovno,mati, from the papyri. The static use of eivj is seen in its distributive use like evn in Mk. 4:8, eivj tria,konta kai. evn e`xh,konta kai. evn e`kato,n. But there are undoubted examples where only 'in,' 'on' or 'at' can be the idea. Thus


khru,sswn eivj ta.j sunagwga,j (Mk. 1:39) where there is some excuse for the "pregnant" explanation because of h=lqen. So evlqw.n katw|,kh─ sen eivj po,lin (Mt. 2:23; 4:13), but note only parw|,khsen eivj gh/n (Heb. 11:9) and eu`re,qh eivj ;Azwton (Ac. 8:40). Cf. kaqhme,nou eivj to. o;roj (Mk. 13:3), o` eivj to.n avgro,n (Mk. 13:16), toi/j eivj to.n oi=kon (Lu. 9:61), eivj th.n koi,thn eivsi,n (Lu. 11:7), evgkatalei,yeij eivj a|[dhn (Ac. 2:27; cf. verse 31), toi/j eivj makra,n grk(2:39), eivj colh,n - o;nta (Ac. 8:23), evpe,scen cro,non eivj th.n vAsi,an (Ac. 19:22), avpoqanei/n eivj vIerousalh,m, (Ac. 21:13), eivj `Rw,mhn marturh/sai (Ac. 23:11), threi/sqai eivj Kaisari,an (Ac. 25:4), o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon (Jo. 1:18), oi` trei/j eivj to. e[n eivsin (1 Jo. 5:8), eivj h;n sth/te (1 Pet. 5:12). Nor is this quite all. In some MSS. in Mk. 2:1 we have eivj oi=ko,n evstin ( aBDL evn oi;kw). In Ac. 2:5 the MSS. vary between eivj and evn as in Mk. 10:10. Another instance is found in Eph. 3:16, krataiwqh/nai eivj to.n e;sw a;nqrwpon. Cf. Jo. 20:7; Mk. 13:9. But in e;sth eivj to. me,son (Jo. 20:19, 26) we have motion, though e;sth eivj to.n aivgialo,n (Jo. 21:4) is an example of rest. Jo. 17:23 is normal. In Mt. 10:41 f., eivj o;noma profh,tou $maqhtou/├ dikai,ou) one can see little difference between eivj and evn) Certainly this is true of Mt. 12:41, meteno,hsan eivj kh,rugma vIwna/, where it is absurd to take eivj as 'into' or 'unto' or even 'to.' See also sunhgme,noi eivj to. evmo.n o;noma (Mt.18:20).

2. With Verbs of Motion. But the usual idiom with eivj was undoubtedly with verbs of motion when the motion and the accusative case combined with eivj ('in') to give the resultant meaning of 'into,' 'unto,' 'among,' to,' 'towards' or 'on,' 'upon,' according to the context. This is so common as to call for little illustration. As with evn so with eivj, the noun itself gives the boundary or limit. So eivj th.n oivki,an (Mt. 2:11), as eivj to. o;rojgrk grk(5:1), eivj to. praitw,riongrk grk(27:27), eivj qa,lassangrk grk(17:27), eivj to.n ouvrano,n (Rev. 10:5), eivj e;qnh (Ac. 22:21), eivj peirasmo,n (Mt. 6:13), eivj to. mnhmei/on (Jo. 11:38), eivj th.n o`do,n (Mk. 11:8), eivj tou.j maqhta,j (Lu. 6:20), eivj tou.j lh|sta,j (Lu. 10:36), eivj kli,nhn (Rev. 2:22), eivj ta. dexia, (Jo. 21:6), eivj th.n kefalh,n (Mt. 27:30), eivj ta.j avgka,laj (Lu. 2:28), eivj o[lon to.n ko,smon (Mk. 14:9), eivj u`ma/j(1 Th. 2:9). These examples fairly illustrate the variety in the use of eivj with verbs of motion. For idea of 'among' see Jo. 21:23. It will be seen at once, if one consults the context in these passages, that the preposition does not of itself mean 'into' even with verbs of motion. That is indeed one of the resultant meanings among many others. The metaphorical uses do not differ in principle, such as eivj qli,yin (Mt. 24:9), suna,gein eivj e[n, (Jo. 11:52), eivj th.n zwh,n (Mt. 18:8), eivj kri,sin (Jo. 5:24), eivj u`pakoh,n (2 Cor.


Addenda 2nd ed.

10:5), eivj cei/raj (Mt. 17:22), etc. For many interesting examples of evn and eivj see Theimer, Die Prapositionen eivj├ evn├ evk im N. T., Beitreige zur Kenntnis des Sprachgebrauches im N. T 1896.

3. With Expressions of Time. Here eivj marks either the limit or accents the duration expressed by the accusative. Thus in 2 Tim. 1:12 we find fula,xai eivj evkei,nhn th.n h`me,ran where 'until' suits as a translation (cf. 'against'). Cf. Ph. 1:10, eivj h`me,ran Cristou/. Not quite so sharp a limit is eivj to. au;rion (Mt. 6:34). Cf. 1 Pet. 1:11. There is little that is added by the preposition to the accusative in such examples as as eivj to. me,llon (Lu. 13:9), eivj to.n aivw/na (Mt. 21:19), eivj genea.j kai. genea,j (Lu. 1:50), eivj to. dihneke,j (Heb. 7:3), etc. Cf. Lu. 12:19. But a more definite period is set in cases like eivj to.n kairo,n (Lu. 1:20), eivj to. metaxu. sa,bbaton (Ac. 13:42).

4. Like a Dative. It is not strange to see eivj used where disposition or attitude of mind is set forth. Indeed already eivj and the accusative occur where the dative alone would be sufficient. This is especially true in the LXX, but the papyri show examples also. Cf. oi` eivj Cristo,n (Mart. Pauli, II). Moulton (Prol., p. 246) cites Tb. P. 16, ouv lh,gontej th/i [ eivj] auvtou.j auvqadi,a|, "where as actually stands for the possessive genitive." One must remember the complete disappearance of the dative in modern Greek155 vernacular. Note th/j logi,aj th/j eivj tou.j a`gi,ouj $1 Cor. 16:1), ploutw/ eivj pa,ntaj (Ro. 10:12), pleona,zw eivj (Ph. 4:17), evlehmosu,naj poih,swn eivj to. e;qnoj (Ac. 24:17), leitourgo.n eivj ta. e;qnh (Ro. 15:16), avpoble,pw eivj (Heb. 11:26), le,gei eivj (Ac. 2:25), ovmnu,w eivj (Mt. 5:34 f.), to. auvto. eivj avllh,louj (Ro. 12:16), pisteu,ein eivj (Mt. 18:6), crhsto.j eivj (Eph. 4:32), avga,phn eivj (Ro. 5:8), etc. If one entertains hostile feelings the resultant idea with eivj will be 'against,' though the word does not of itself mean that. So in Lu. 12:10 eivj to.n ui`o.n tou/ avnqrw,pou (cf. kata, in Mt. 12:32) and eivj to. a[gion pneu/ma blasfh─ mh,santi├ bla,sfhma eivj (Ac. 6:11), evpiboulh. eivj (Ac. 23:30), a`marta,nein eivj (Lu. 15:18), etc. As a matter of fact all that eivj really accentuates here is the accusative case (with reference to) which happens to be in a hostile atmosphere. But that is not true of such examples as hvqe,thsan eivj e`autou,j (Lu. 7:30), eivj th.n evpaggeli,an tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 4:20), etc. For o;yontai eivj in Jo. 19:37 see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 245. In the modern Greek eivj has displaced the dative in the vernacular.

5. Aim or Purpose. Sometimes indeed eivj appears in an atmosphere where aim or purpose is manifestly the resultant idea.


Thus we may note evlqw.n eivj th.n Trw|a,da eivj to. euvagge,lion (2 Cor. 2:12). Here the second eivj suggests the purpose of his coming. Cf. also tou/to poiei/te eivj th.n evmh.n avna,mnhsin (1 Cor. 11:24), where eivj does not mean 'for,' though that is clearly the resultant idea. So with eivj martu,rion auvtoi/j (Mt. 8:4). Take Ro. 11:36, for instance, where eivj auvto,n is set over against evx auvtou/. Cf. again eivj do,xan qeou/ in Ph. 1:11, eivj fo,bon in Ro. 8:15, eivj e;ndeixin in Ro. 3:25, eivj zwn.n aivw,nion in Jo. 6:27. One may not doubt also that this is the idea in Mt. 26:28, to. peri. pollw/n evkcunno,menon eivj a;fesin a`martiw/n. But it by no means follows that the same idea is expressed by eivj a;fesin in Mk. 1:4 and Ac. 2:38 (cf. Mt. 10:41), though that may in the abstract be true. It remains a matter for the interpreter to decide. One must not omit here also the frequent use of eivj to. and the infinitive to express design. Cf. eivj to. evmpai/xai in Mt. 20:19, eivj to. staurwqh/nai in 26:2. See chapter on Verbal Nouns for further discussion. Cf. also eivj tou/to (Mk. 1:38), eivj auvto. tou/to (2 Cor. 5:5), avgora,zw eivj (Jo. 13:29), eivj avpa,nthsin (Mt. 25:6), eivj u`pa,nthsin auvtw|/ (Jo. 12:13).156 Cf. xu,lwn eivj evlaiw/na,j mou (Fay. P., 50 A.D.), 'sticks for my olive-gardens' (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 157), eivj i[ppon evnoclou,menon (P. Fl.-Pet., xxv, 226 B.C.), 'for a sick horse' (Deissmann, B. S., p. 118). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 112) cites w|vkodo,mhsen- eivj e`auto,n (83 N. Chr. Wadd. Inscr., 2614).

6. Predicative Use. But there remains one more use of eivj which, though good koinh,, was greatly accelerated by the influence of the LXX.157 This is where eivj occurs in the predicate with eivmi, or gi,nomai├ ktl) Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 16 f.) quotes i[na mh. eivj ywmi,on ge,nhtai├ P. Fay. 119, 276 (100 A.D.); Heliod., AEthiop. VI, 14, th.n ph,ran eivj kaqe,dran poihsame,nh; and even the Attic author AEneas 114, gunai/kaj o`pli,santej w`j evj a;ndraj. Thus in Lu. 3:5, e;stai ta. skolia. eivj euvqei,aj (Is. 40:4). So e;sesqe, moi eivj ui`ou.j kai. quga─ te,raj (2 Cor. 6:18, LXX); e;sontai oi` du,o eivj sa,rka mi,an (Mt. 19:5; cf. Gen. 2:24); h` lu,ph u`mw/n eivj cara.n genh,setai (Jo. 16:20). Cf. Lu. 13:19. As already remarked, this predicate use of eivj appears in the papyri158 and in the Apostolic Fathers,159 but not with


Addenda 3rd ed.

the frequency that we find it in the LXX. Cf. pp. 481 f. Blass160 credits evij in u[page eivj eivrh,nhn (Mk. 5:34) to the Hebrew through the LXX (cf. 1 Sam. 1:17). Cf. also eivj diataga.j avgge,lwn (Ac. 7:53) where eivj is much like evn. In general therefore, as with evn so with eivj we must hark back to first principles and work out to the resultant idea by means of the context and the history.

7. Compared with evpi,├ para, and pro,j. The growth in the use of eivj is shown by its appearance where evpi, or pro,j would be expected in the older Greek. Cf. e;rcetai eivj po,lin (Jo. 4:5), where the point is not 'into,' but 'to.' So 11:31, u`pa,gei eivj to. mhnmei/on. In 11:38 D has evpi,, not eivj. So in Mk. 3:7, avnecw,rhsen pro.j th.n qa,lassan, DHP have eivj. Cf. Mk. 2:13, a has eivj for para, and in 7:31 aBD have eivj, not pro,j.

(g) vEk ( evx). The etymology of this word is simple. Cf. Latin ex (e), Gallic ex, Old Irish ess, Cymric eh. In the Greek the form varies thus evk before vowels), evg (assimilation), ev (Locrian, cf. Latin e), evj or evsj like Old Irish (Arcadian, Boeotian, Thessalian). The original form was evx, then evk like Latin ex, e. Cf. Brugmaim, Griech Gr., p. 147.

1. Meaning. The word means 'out of,' 'from within,' not like avpo, or para,. It stands in contrast to evn ( evn─j).161 In the modern Greek vernacular avpo, has displaced evk except in the Epirot avc or ovc.162 But in the N. T. evk is still ahead of avpo,. The indifference of the scribes163 as to which they used is shown in the MS. variations between evk and avpo, as in Mt. 7:4; 17:9; Mk. 16:3. The writings of John (Gospel, Epistles, Revelation) use evk more frequently than any other N. T. books.164 In the late Greek (eighth century A.D.) we find the accusative with evk, and this was the last usage to survive.165 Brugmann166 indeed thinks that evk may even rarely use the genuine genitive besides the ablative, but I doubt this. But it is certain that evk used the locative in Arcadian, Cypriotic and Pamphylian dialects after analogy of evn (Buck, Greek Dialects, p. 101f).167

2. In Composition. It is very common and sometimes with the "perfective" idea. So we note evx─aporou,menoi contrasted with avporou,menoi in 2 Cor. 4:8.168 Cf. also evk─dapana,w (2 Cor. 12:15),


evk─dihge,omai (Ac. 13:41), evk─qambe,w (Mk. 9:15), evk─qauma,zw (Mk. 12:17), evk─kaqai,rw (2 Tim. 2:21), evx─erauna,w (1 Pet. 1:10). The other uses in composition follow the root-idea of the word closely, meaning 'out of,' 'away,' etc., like evxe,rcomai├ evkba,llw, etc. vEk has a causative force in composition sometimes as in evxamarta,nw, 'cause to sin' (LXX), and evkfobei/n (2 Cor. 10:9).

3. Place. The preposition naturally is common with expressions of place. The strict idea of from within is common, as in fwnh. evk tw/n ouvranw/n (Mt. 3:17), evk tou/ ovfqalmou/ (Lu. 6:42), evk tw/n mnhmei,wn (Mt. 8:28), etc. Often it appears in contrast with eivj as in evk th/j vIoudai,aj eivj th.n Galilai,an (Jo. 4:47), tou/ evk sko,touj u`ma/j kale,santoj eivj to. fw/j (1 Pet. 2:9), where the metaphorical follows the literal usage. In Lu. 6:42 evk tou/ ovfqalmou/ is set in opposition to evn tw|/ ovfqalmw|/. In Ac. 8:38 f. we have both eivj to. u[dwr and evk tou/ u[datoj. So in Mk. 1:10 avnabai,nwn evk tou/ u[datoj a previous presence evn tw|/ u[dati is implied. In a case like katabaino,ntwn evk tou/ o;rouj (Mt. 17:9; parallels in Mk. and Lu. 6. avpo, we are not to suppose that they had been in a cave, but merely up in the mountain (cf. English idiom), the term "mountain" including more than the earth and rock. Cf. eivj to. o;roj in Mt. 5:1. But in Mt. 8:1 we merely have avpo. tou/ o;rouj. Note likewise qri.x evk th/j kefalh/j (Lu. 21:18), evk tw/n ceirw/n (Ac. 12:7). Thus we explain also krema,menon to. qhri,on evk th/j ceiro.j auvtou/ (Ac. 28:4), evk dexiw/n (Mt. 20:21), evx evnanti,aj (Mk. 15:39), etc. It is not necessary to record all the verbs with which evk occurs. In Lu. 5:3 evdi,dasken evk tou/ ploi,ou the teaching is represented as proceeding out of the boat (Jesus was in the boat). One may compare with this evgei,retai evk tou/ dei,pnou (Jo. 13: 4), avnalu,sh| evk tw/n ga,mwn (Lu. 12:36), avpoluli,ein to.n li,qon evk th/j qu,raj (Mk. 16:3), diaswqe,nta evk th/j qala,sshj (Ac. 28:4).

4. Time. With expressions of time evk gives the point of departure, like evk neo,thtoj (Mk. 10:20), evx avrch/j (Jo. 6:64), evx i`kanw/n cro,nwn (Lu. 23:8), evk tou/ aivw/noj (Jo. 9:32), evk pollw/n evtw/n (Ac. 24:10), evk tou,tou (Jo. 6:66). In cases where succession is involved the point of departure is really present. Thus with evk deute,rou, (Jo. 9:24), evk tri,tou (Mt. 26:44), h`me,ran evx h`me,raj (2 Pet. 2:8). Other adverbial phrases have a similar origin as with evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 12:27), evk me,trou (Jo. 3:34), evx avna,gkhj (2 Cor. 9:7), sumfw,nou (1 Cor. 7:5). Cf. evk pa,lai.

5. Separation. The use of evk for the idea of separation is merely the fuller expansion of the ablative. Thus with evleu,qeroj evk pa,ntwn (1 Cor. 9:19), avnapah,sontai evk tw/n ko,pwn, (Rev. 14:13), u`ywqw/ evk th/j gh/j (Jo. 12:32), u`postre,yai evk th/j evntolh/j (2 Pet. 2:21), a;rh|j evk


tou/ ko,smou (Jo. 17:15). Cf. Jo. 17:6. Abbott169 doubts if in the LXX and John evk always implies previous existence in the evils from which one is delivered when used with sw,zw and thre,w. Certainly in Jo. 17 evk occurs rather frequently, but thrh,shh|j evk tou/ ponhrou/grk grk(17:15) may still imply that the evil one once had power over them (cf. Jesus' prayer for Peter). Certainly in Jo. 12:27, sw/so,n me evk th/j w[raj tau,thj, Jesus had already entered into the hour. Cf. duna,menon sw,zein evk qana,tou (Heb. 5:7) where evk may accentuate the power of God ( duna,menon), though he had not yet entered into death. In Rev. 3:10 thrh,sw evk th/j w[raj tou/ peirasmou/ we seem to have the picture of general temptation with the preservation of the saints. Cf. e;kbasij in 1 Cor. 10:13. So in Mt. 13:41 sulle,─ xousin evk th/j basilei,aj the idea is 'out from among,' just as cheat or cockle grows in among the wheat in the same field. The two kingdoms coexist in the same sphere (the world). The notion of separation is common with a number of verbs like evxoleqreuqh,setai evk tou/ laou/ (Ac. 3:23), h;geiren evk nekrw/n (Jo. 12:1), h` avna,stasij h` evk nekrw/n (Lu. 20:35); evxelexa,mhn evk tou/ ko,smou (Jo. 15:19), etc. This all seems simple and clear. Not quite so apparent is nikw/ntaj evk tou/ qhri,ou (Rev. 15:2). Thayer and Blass both take it like thre,w evk, 'victorious over' (by separation). Cf. meteno,hsan evk tw/ ne;rgwn (Rev. 16:11) and Jo. 3:25, zh,thsij evk.

6. Origin or Source. Equally obvious seems the use of evk for the idea of origin or source. Thus evxh/lqon evk tou/ patro,j (Jo. 16:28), ouvk eivmi. evk tou/ ko,smougrk grk(17:14, 16), evk tw/n li,qwn tou,twn evgei/rai te,kna (Mt. 3:9. Naturally this usage has a wide range. Cf. evk Nazare,t (Jo. 1:46 f.), evk po,lewj (Jo. 1:44), evk th/j Samari,aj (Jo. 4:7), vEbrai/oj evx vEbrai,wn (Ph. 3:5), evk th/j gh/j (Jo. 3:31), evk qeou/ (Ph. 3:9), evx evqnw/n (Gal. 2:15), evk plah,nhj (1 Th. 2:3), evk pollh/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 2:4), th|/ evx h`mw/n evn u`mi/n avga,ph| (2 Cor. 8:7). Cf. Lu. 12: 15. This list is by no means exhaustive, but it is at least suggestive. One may note here ste,fanon evx avkanqw/n (Mt. 27:29), where the material is expressed by

7. Cause or Occasion. Closely allied to the above is the notion of cause or occasion which may also be conveyed by evk. Thus note to. evx u`mw/n in Ro. 12:18, evmasw/nto evk tou/ po,nou (Rev. 16:10), dikaiwqe,ntaj evk pi,stewj (Ro. 5:1), evx e;rgwn (Gal. 3:10), evk tou/ euvaggeli,ou zh/n (1 Cor. 9:14), evx avsqenei,aj (2 Cor. 13:4), evk tou/ ma─ mwna/ (Lu. 16:9). Cf. also avpe,qanon evk tw/n u`da,twn (Rev. 8:11). Perhaps here belongs evplhrw,qh evk th/j ovsmh/j (Jo. 12:3). Cf. gemi,zw evk in Jo. 6:13 (Abbott, Johannine Gr., p. 253). At any rate a


Addenda 2nd ed.

number of verbs use evk in this general sense like wvfele,w (Mk. 7:11), zhmiou/sqai (2 Cor. 7:9), avdikei/sqai (Rev. 2:11), ploute,w (Rev. 18:3), corta,zesqai (Rev. 19:21), kaopia,zw (Jo. 4:6), za,w (Ro. 1:17), etc. Cf. evblasfh,mhsan to.n qeo.n evk th/j plhgh/j (Rev. 16:21). Indeed evk with the notion of price does not differ radically from this idiom. Thus hvgo,rasan evx auvtw/n to.n avgro,n (Mt. 27:7), evth,sato evk misqou/ (Ac. 1:18), sumfwnh,saj evk dhnari,ou (Mt. 20:2). vEk dia─ tagh/j, 'by order,' was a regular formula in the papyri (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 87). Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 248, finds the idiom evk tw/n tessa,rwn avne,mwn (Mk. 13:27) in the papyri as well as in Zech. 11:6.

8. The Partitive Use of evk. It is not infrequent, marking an increase over the earlier idiom.170 Thus in Jo. 16:17 evk tw/n maqhtw/n is even used as the subject of ei=pan. Cf. Ac. 21:16 without evk. See also Jo. 7:40. John is specially fond of the partitive use of evk (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 115) and the inscriptions and papyri have it also. Cf. avnh.r evk tw/n prwteuo,ntwn, Petersen-Luschan, Reisen, p. 113, xviii. A. 5. Further examples are a;nqrwpoj evk tw/n Farisai,wn (Jo. 3:1), mh, tij evk tw/n avrco,ntwn (Jo. 7:48), evk tou/ o;clou avkou,santej (Jo. 7:40), qanatw,sousin evx u`mw/n (Lu. 21:16), evx auvtw/n avpoktenei/te (Mt. 23:34), ble,pousin evk tw/n law/n (Rev. 11:9), dihko,noun evk tw/n u`parco,ntwn (Lu. 8:3), evx auvtou/ fa,gh| (Jo. 6:50), evk tou/ pneu,matoj de,dwken (1 Jo. 4:13), pi,nwn evk tou/ u[datoj (Jo. 4:13), ouvdei.j evx auvtw/n (Jo. 17:12), etc.171 In Heb. 13:10 it is what is on the altar that is eaten. The use of evk with a class or for a side or position may as well be mentioned here also. Thus o` w'n evk th/j avlhqei,aj (Jo. 18:37), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), o` evk pi,stewj (Ro. 3:26), oi` evk peri─ tomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` evk evriqi,aj (Ro. 2:8), etc. The partisan use is allied closely to the partitive. Cf. Ph. 4:22 oi` evk th/j Kai,saroj oivki,aj) See further ch. XI, Cases.

9. vEk and evn) A word in conclusion is needed about the socalled blending of evk with evn. Blass172 doubts if this classic idiom appears in the N. T. The passages that seem to have it are mh. kataba,tw a=rai ta. evk th/j oivki,aj auvtou/ (Mt. 24:17) where evn might indeed have been employed, but evk coincides in idea with a=rai. . . Cf. Mk. 13:15, where evk does not have ta, before it. In Lu. 11: 13 o` path.r o` evx ouvranou/ dw,sei pneu/ma a[gion W. H. bracket o` before evx├ and with o` the sending of the Holy Spirit by the Father has


caused evx to displace evn which would otherwise have been regular. In Jo. 3:13 some MSS. add o` w'n evn tw|/ ouvranw|/ to o` ui`o.j avnqw,pou, thus making Jesus in heaven at that moment when he was speaking to Nicodemus. In Col. 4:16, th.n evk Laokiki,aj, the evk assumes, of course, that an Epistle had been sent to Laodicea, and suggests that the Colossians get it from ( evk) them. Cf. Ro. 3:25 f. for examples of dia,├ evn├ eivj├ pro,j, evk. See avpo, and para,)

(h) vEpi,. See Sanskrit api (locative case), Zend aipi, Latin ob, Lithuanian pi.

1. Ground-Meaning. It is 'upon' as opposed to u`po,. It differs from u`pe,r in that evpi, implies a real resting upon, not merely over.173 But the very simplicity of this idea gives it a manifoldness of resultant uses true of no other preposition. Sometimes indeed in the causal and ethical usages the root-idea seems dim,174 but none the less it is there. The only safety consists in holding on to the root-idea and working out from that in each special context. It marks a delicate shade of difference from evn is seen in w`j evn ouvranw|/ kai. evpi. gh/j (Mt. 6:10). For evn cf. Lu. 8:15.

2. In Composition in the N. T. It is very common, always retaining the root-idea (cf. evp─evn─du,w, 2 Cor. 5:2), though sometimes the perfective idea is clear. Thus with evp─aite,w in Lu. 16:3, evpi─ ginw,skw in 1 Cor. 13:12,175 evpi,─gnwsij in Col. 1:9, evpi─tele,w in 2 Cor. 8:11.

3. Frequency in N. T. In the N. T. evpi, is still in constant use, though it ultimately dropped out of the vernacular176 before evpa,nw Note e[wj evpi. dialo[ ogis] mo,j, P. Oxy. 294 (A.D. 22) like avna. ei-j, etc. But in the N. T. it is the one preposition still used freely with more than two cases (acc. 464, gen. 216, dat. and loc. 176).177 Most of the examples called dative in the lexicons and grammars are really locatives, but some of them are possibly true datives.178 So then evpi, really has four cases still in the N. T. In Homer evpi, often stands alone for e;p─estin. Farrar,179 quoting Donaldson, finds in the locative with evpi, the idea of absolute superposition, while the genitive expresses only partial superposition and the accusative implies motion with a view to superposition and the dative would be superposition for the interest of one. There is some truth in this distinction and the case-idea must always be observed. But


Addenda 3rd ed.

the growth of the accusative in the later language at the expense of the other cases caused some confusion in the usage according to the standard of the earlier Greek. Simcox180 considers it "almost a matter of indifference" whether in the N. T. one uses locative, genitive or accusative. This is somewhat true, but even so it does not follow that there was no difference in the cases. The locative accentuated mere location, the genitive brought out rather the kind or genus, while the accusative would present the general idea of extension modified by the fact that the accusative tended to absorb the other cases without insisting on the distinct caseidea. Thus sometimes either case with evpi, would give substantially the same idea, though technical differences did exist. For instance, in Ac. 5:9 note evpi, th|/ qu,ra|, while in verse 23 we have evpi. tw/n qurw/n. So compare evggu,j evstin evpi. qu,raij (Mk. 13:29) with e[sthka evpi. th.n qu,ran (Rev. 3:20). Here the notion of rest exists with all three cases, though in Rev. 3:20 kai. krou,w may have some effect on the presence of the accusative. Once more observe kaqi,sh| evpi. qro,nou and kaqh,sesqe evpi. dw,deka qro,nouj in Mt. 19:28. Rev. 4:2 gives us evpi. to.n qro,non kaqh,menoj, verse 9 (marg. of W. H., text of Nestle) tw|/ kaqhme,nw| evpi. tw|/ qro,nw|, while verse 10 has evpi. tou/ qro,nou, three cases with the same verb. It would be overrefinement to insist on too much distinction here. But the cases afford variety of construction at any rate. In Rev. 14:9 the single verb lamba,nei has evpi. tou/ metw,pou auvtou/ h' evpi. th.n cei/ra auvvtou/ (cf. Ac. 27:44). Compare also li,qoj evpi. li,qon in Mt. 24:2 with li,qoj evpi. li,qw| in Lu. 21:6. In Ph. 2:27 the MSS. vary between lu,phn evpi. lu,phn and lu,phn evpi. lu,ph|. Cf. also evp v ovli,ga and evpi. pollw/n in Mt. 25:21. The use of pisteu,w evpi, with locative or accusative has already been discussed. The accusative suggests more the initial act of faith (intrust) while the locative implies that of state (trust). We find eivj also used with this verb as well as dative (both common in John). Once we have pisteu,w evn (Mk. 1:15). See Moulton, Prol., p. 68. But, after all is said, the only practical way to study evpi, is from the point of view of the cases which it supplements.

4. With the Accusative. As already noted, it is far in excess of the other, cases combined. It is hardly necessary to make minute subdivision of the accusative usage, though the preposition with this case follows the familiar lines. With expressions of place it is very common and very easy to understand. So evlqei/n evpi. ta. u[data (Mt 14:28), periepa,thsen evpi. ta. u[datagrk grk(14:29), avnapesei/n evpi.


th/n gh/n (Mt. 15:35), sko,toj evge,neto evpi. pa/san th/n gh/n (Mt. 27:45), poreu,ou evpi. th.n o`do,n (Ac. 8:26), evpe,balon ta.j cei/raj evpi. to.n vIhsou/n (Mt. 26:50), avnapesw.n evpi. to. sth/qoj (Jo. 13:25). The metaphorical use is in harmony with this idiom. Thus fo,boj evpe,pesen evp v auvto.n (Lu. 1:12), kate,sthsaj auvto.n evpi. ta. e;rga (Heb. 2:7), ba─ sileu,sei evpi. to.n oi=kon (Lu. 1:33), i[na evpiskhnw,sh| evp v evme. h` du,namij tou/ Cristou/ (2 Cor. 12:9). Cf. 2 Cor. 1:23, evpikalou/mai evpi, th.n evmh.n yuch,n. But not all the accusative uses are so simple. In a case like Mt. 7:24, w|vkodo,mhsen evpi. th.n pe,tran, some idea of motion may be seen. But that is not true of Mt. 13:2, pa/j o` o;cloj evpi. to.n aivgialo.n i`sth,kei. Cf. also kaqh,menon evpi. to. telw,nion (Mt. 9:9) and others given above. So evpi. to. proskefa,laion kaqeu,dwn (Mk. 4:38), pneu/ma h=n a[gion evp v auvto.n (Lu. 2:25), e;meinen evp v auvto,n (Jo. 1:32), evpe,sthsan evpi. to.n pulw/na (Ac. 10:17), evf v u`ma/j avnapau,etai (1 Pet. 4:14), ka,lumma evpi. th.n kardi,an kei/tai (2 Cor. 3:15), e;sontai avlh,qousai evpi. to. auvto, (Lu. 17:35). Here it is hard to think of any idea of 'whither.'181 Sometimes indeed evpi, seems not to imply strictly 'upon,' but rather 'as far as.' So with e;rcontai evpi. to. mnhmei/on (Mk. 16:2), kate,bhsan evpi. th.n qa,lassan (Jo. 6:16), h=lqon evpi. ti u[dwr (Ac. 8:36). The aim or purpose is sometimes expressed by evpi, as evpi. to. ba,ptisma (Mt. 3:7), evf v oa} pa,rei (Mt. 26:50). It may express one's emotions as with pisteu,w evpi, (Ro. 4:24), evlpi,zw evpi, (1 Pet. 1:13), splagcni,zomai evpi, (Mt. 15:32). Cf. evf v oa}n gego,nei in Ac. 4: 22 and the general use of evpi, in Mk. 9:12 ge,graptai evpi. to.n ui`o.n tou/ avnqrw,pou. In personal relations hostility is sometimes suggested, though evpi, in itself does not mean 'against.' Thus w`j evpi. lh|sth.n evxh,lqate (Mt. 26:55). In Mt. 12:26 evf v e`auto.n evmeri,sqh is used side by side with merisqei/sa kaq v e`auth/j in the preceding verse. Cf. also Mk. 3:26, etc. Abbott182 notes that John shows this usage only once once(19:33). For evpi, with the idea of degree or measure see evf v o[son (Ro. 11:13). Cf. evpi. to. auvto, in the sense of 'all together' (Ac. 1:15). With expressions of time evpi, may merely fill out the accusative, as with evpi. e;th tri,a (Lu. 4:25, marg. of W. H.), evpi. h`me,raj plei,ouj (Ac. 13:31), evf v o[son cro,non (Ro. 7:1), or a more definite period may be indicated, as with evpi. th.n w[ran th/j proseuch/j (Ac. 3:1),183 evpi. th.n au;rion (Lu. 10:35). It is common with adverbs like evf v a[pax├ evpi. tri,j, etc.

5. With the Genitive. The genitive with evpi, has likewise a wide range of usages. Usually the simple meaning 'upon' sat-


isfies all reqUirements, as in evpi. kli,nhj (Mt. 9:2), evf v ou- w|vkodo,mhto (Lu. 4:29), khru,xate evpi. tw/n dwma,twn (Mt. 10:27), evrco,menon evpi. nefelw/n (Mt. 24:30), e;qhken evpi. tou/ staurou/ (Jo. 19:19), kaqi,saj evpi. tou/ bh,matoj (Ac. 12:21), evpi. th/j kefalh/j (Jo. 20:7), evpi. th/j qala,sshj (Rev. 5:13) evpi. xu,lou (Ac. 5:30). In Mk. 12:26, evpi. tou/ ba,tou an ellipsis in thought occurs "in the passage about the bush." Sometimes, indeed, as with the accusative, so with the genitive, evpi,, has the idea of vicinity, where the word itself with which it is used has a wide meaning. Thus in Jo. 21:1 evpi. th/j qala,sshj seems to mean 'on the sea-shore,' and so 'by the sea.' So with evpi. th/j o`dou/, (Mt. 21:19), the fig-tree being not on the path, but on the edge of the road. Abbott184 notes how Matthew Matthew(14:25 f.) has evpi. th.n qa,lassan which is not ambiguous like the genitive in Jo. 6:19. Cf. Ac. 5:23 evpi. tw/n qurw/n. The classic idiom with evpi, and the genitive in the sense of 'towards' is not so common in the N. T., though it has not quite disappeared as Simcox185 thinks. Cf. evge,neto to. ploi/on evpi. th/j gh/j (Jo. 6:21), kaqie,menon evpi. th/j gh/j (Ac. 10:11), balousa to. mu,ron evpi. tou/ sw,matoj (Mt. 26:12), e;pipten evpi. th/j gh/j (Mk. 14:35), geno,menoj evpi. tou/ to,pou (Lu. 22:40), po.n evp v auvth/j evrco,menon (Heb. 6:7), pesw.n evpi. th/j gh/j (Mk. 9:20). In these examples we see just the opposite tendency to the use of the accusative with verbs of rest. Cf. pesei/tai evpi. th/n gh/n (Mt. 10:29) with Mk. 9:20 above and balei/n evpi. th/n gh/n (Mt. 10:34) with Mk. 4:26. With persons evpi, and the genitive may yield the resultant meaning of 'before' or 'in the presence of.' Thus evpi, h`gemo,nwn (Mk. 13:9), kri,nesqai evpi. tw/n avdi,kwn (1 Cor. 6:1), evkto.j eiv mh. evpi. du,o h' triw/n martu,rwn (1 Tim. 5:19), evpi. Ponti,ou Peila,tou (1 Tim. 6:13), evpi. sou/ (Ac. 23:30), evp v evmou/grk grk(25:9). Blass186 observes how in Ac. 25:10 e`stw.j evpi. tou/ bh,matoj Kai,saroj the meaning is 'before,' while in verse 17 the usual idea 'upon' is alone present ( kaqi,saj evpi. tou/ bh,matoj). Cf. evpi. Ti,tou in 2 Cor. 7:14. With expressions of time the result is much the same. Thus evp v evsca,tou tw/n cronwn (1 Pet. 1:20) where evpi, naturally occurs (cf. Ju. 18). With evpi. tw/n proseucw/n mou) (Ro. 1:10) we have period of prayer denoted simply by evpi,. Cf. evpeu,comai evpi,, (Magical papyrus, Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 252). There is no difficulty about evpi. th/j metoi─ kesi,aj (Mt. 1:11). With persons a fuller exposition is required, since evpi. Klaudi,ou (Ac. 11:28) is tantamount to 'in the time of Claudius' or 'during the reign of Claudius.' Cf. also evpi. avrciere,wj ;Anna (Lu. 3:2), evpi. vEliasai,ougrk grk(4:27), evpi. vAbia,qar avrciere,wj (Mk.


Addenda 3rd ed.

2:26). Cf. evp v auvth/j in Heb. 7:11. The idea of basis is a natural metaphor as in evp v avlhqei,aj (Lu. 4:25), aa} evpoi,ei evpi. tw/n avsqenou,ntwn (Jo. 6:2), w`j evpi. pollw/n (Gal. 3:16), evpi. sto,matoj (Mt. 18:16). One of the metaphorical uses is with the resultant idea of 'over,' growing naturally out of 'upon.'187 Thus katasth,sei evpi. th/j qerapei,aj (Lu. 12:42), though in Mt. 25:21, 23 both genitive and accusative occur. Cf. also basilei,an evpi. tw/n basile,wn (Rev. 17:18), o` w;n evpi. pa,ntwn, (Ro. 9:5), etc.

6. With the Locative. Here evpi, is more simple, though still with a variety of resultant ideas. Blass188 observes that with the purely local sense the genitive and accusative uses outnumber the locative with evpi,. But still some occur like evpi. pi,naki (Mt. 14:8), evpi. th|/ phgh|/ (Jo. 4:6), evpi. i`mati,w| palaiw|/ (Mt. 9:16), evpi. tau,th| th|/ pe,tra| oivkodomh,sw (Mt. 16:18; cf. some MSS. in Mk. 2:4, evf v w|- kate,keito), evpi. toi/j kraba,ttoij (Mk. 6:55), evpi. tw|/ co,rtw| (Mk. 6:39), evp v evrh,moij to,poij (Mk. 1:45), evpe,keito evp v auvtw|/ (Jo. 11:38), evpi, sani,sin (Ac. 27:44; cf. also evpi, tinwn). In Lu. 23:38, evpigrafh. evp v auvtw|/, the resultant idea is rather that of 'over,' Mt. 27:37 having evpa,nw th/j kefalh/j auvtou/. As with the accusative and genitive, so with the locative the idea of contiguity sometimes appears, as in evpi. qu,raij (Mt. 24:33), evpi. th|/ probatikh|/ (Jo. 5:2), evpi. th|/ stoa|/ (Ac. 3:11). Here the wider meaning of the substantive makes this result possible. Cf. also evpi. tw|/ potamw|/ (Rev. 9:14). vEpi, is used very sparingly with the locative in expressions of time. Cf. evpi. suntelei,a| tw/n aivw,nwn (Heb. 9:26). The use of evpi. pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a| u`mw/n (Ph. 1:3), ouv sunh/kan evpi. toi/j a;rtoij (Mk. 6:52), qeri,zein evpi. euvlogi,aij (2 Cor. 9:6) wavers between occasion and time. Cf. also evpi. th|/ prw,th| diaqh,kh| (Heb. 9:15). The notion of evpi. trisi.n ma,r─ tusin (Heb. 10:28) is rather 'before,' 'in the presence of.' Cf. evpi. nekroi/j (Heb. 9:17). All these developments admit of satisfactory explanation from the root-idea of evpi,, the locative case and the context. There are still other metaphorical applications of evpi,) Thus in Mt. 24 47, evpi. pa/sin, 'over' is the resultant meaning. So in Lu. 12:44 evpi. pa/sin toi/j u`pa,rcousi. The notion of basis is involved in evp v a;rtw| monw| in Mt. 4:4, evpi. tw|/ r`h,mati, sou in Lu. 5:5, evleu,sontai evpi. tw|/ ovno,mati, mou in Mt. 24 : 5, evp v evlpi,di in Ac. 2:26, etc. Ground or occasion likewise may be conveyed by evpi,. Thus note evpi. tou,tw| in Jo. 4:27 and in particular evf v w|-├ like evpi. tou,tw| o[ti├ in Ro. 5:12 and 2 Cor. 5:4. Cf. evfv w|- evfronei/te (Ph. 4:10) where 'whereon' is the simple idea. See


also evpi. parorgismw|/ u`mw/n (Eph. 4:26), cf. 2 Cor. 9:15. The idea of aim or purpose seems to come in cases like evpi. e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10), evf v w|- kai. katelh,mfqhn (Ph. 3:12). Note also Gal. 5:13, evp v evleuqeri,a|; 1 Th. 4:7, ouvk evp v avkaqarsi,a|, (cf. evn a`giasmw|/), evpi, katastrofh|/ (2 Tim. 2:14). Cf. evp v evleuqeri,ai inscr. at Delphi ii/B.C. (Deissm., Light, p. 327). The notion of model is involved in evka,loun evpi. tw|/ ovno,mati (Lu. 1:59) and evpi. tw|/ o`moiw,mati (Ro. 5: 14). Many verbs of emotion use evpi. with the locative, as e;cairen evpi. pa/si (Lu. 13:17), qauma,zontej evpi, (Lu. 2:33), etc. But some of the examples with these verbs may be real datives, as is possibly the case with the notion of addition to, like prose,qhken kai. tou/to evpi. pa/sin (Lu. 3:20).

7. The True Dative. As we have seen, it was probably sometimes used with evpi,. The N. T. examples do not seem to be very numerous, and yet some occur. So I would explain dia. thn u`per─ ba,llousan ca,rin tou/ qeou/ evf v u`mi/n (2 Cor. 9:14). This seems a clear case of the dative with evpi, supplementing it. The same thing may be true of evf v u`mi/n in 1 Th. 3:7 and Ro. 16:19. Cf. also pepoiqo,─ taj evf v e`autoi/j in Lu. 18:9 and makroqu,mhson evp v evmoi, in Mt. 18:26 f. So Lu. 1:47 evpi. tw|/ qew|/. In Lu. 12:52 f., trei/j evpi. dusi,n├ du,o evpi. trisi,n├ ui`o.j evpi. patri, (cf. also evpi. qugate,ra), the resultant sense is 'against.' Cf. also profhteu/sai evpi. laoi/j in Rev. 10:11. In Jo. 12:16, h=n evp v auvtw|/ gegramme,na, and Ac. 5:35, evpi. toi/j avnqrw,poij tou,toij the idea is rather 'about' or 'in the case of.' Cf. also th/j genome,nhj evpi. Stefa,nw| (Ac. 11:19). Here the personal relation seems to suit the dative conception better than the locative. The notion of addition to may also be dative. Cf. Lu. 3:20 above and Col. 3:14, evpi. pa/sin de. tou,toij* Heb. 8:1, evpi. toi/j legome,noij. In Eph. 6:16 the best MSS. have evn) It is possible also to regard the use of evpi, for aim or purpose as having the true dative as in 1 Th. 4:7.

(i) Kata,. There is doubt about the etymology of this preposition. In tmesis it appears as ka,ta, and in Arcadian and Cypriote Greek it has the form katu,. It is probably in the instrumental case,189 but an apparently dative form katai survives a few times. Brugmann190 compares it with Old Irish cet, Cymric cant, Latin com-, though this is not absolutely certain.

1. Root-Meaning. Brugmann191 thinks that the root-meaning of the preposition is not perfectly clear, though 'down' (cf. avna,% seems to be the idea. The difficulty arises from the fact that we


Addenda 3rd ed.

sometimes find the ablative case used when the result is down from, then the genitive down upon, and the accusative down along. But 'down' (cf. ka,tw) seems always to be the only idea of the preposition in itself. In the N. T. three cases occur with kata,.

2. Distributive Sense. Kata, came to be used in the distributive sense with the nominative, like avna, and su,n, but chiefly as adverb and not as preposition.192 Hence this usage is not to be credited to the real prepositional idiom. Late Greek writers have it. So ei-j kata. ei-j in Mk. 14:19 (and the spurious Jo. 8:9), to. kaq v ei-j in Ro. 12:5. The modern Greek uses kaqei,j or kaqe,naj as a distributive pronoun.193 Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 138 f., considers also ei-j kaq v e[kastoj (A Lev. 25:10) merely the adverbial use of kata,. But see kaq v e[na in 1 Cor. 14:31, skata. de. e`orth,n (Mt. 27:15).

3. kata, in Composition. It is true to the root-idea of 'down,' like kate,bh in Mt. 7:25, katagagei/n in Ro. 10:6. But the various metaphorical uses occur also in composition. Often kata, occurs with "perfective" force.194 So, for instance, observe katarti,sei (1 Pet. 5:10), kathgwni,santo (Heb. 11:33), katedi,wxen (Mk. 1:36), katadouloi/ (2 Cor. 11:20), katakau,sei (Mt. 3:12), katama,qete (Mt. 6:28), katanoh,sate (Lu. 12:24), kate,pausan (Ac. 14:18), kata─ pi,nontej (Mt. 23:24), kataskeua,sei (Mk. 1:2), katerga,zesqe (Ph. 2:12), kate,fagen (Mt. 13:4), kaqora/tai (Ro. 1:20). This preposition vies with dia, and su,n in the perfective sense. Kate,cw in Ro. 1:18 is well illustrated by o` kate,cwn to.n qumo,n from an ostracon (Deissmann, Light, p. 308). In the magical texts it means to 'cripple' or to 'bind,' 'hold fast.' But in Mk. 14:45, katefi,lhse the preposition seems to be weakened, though the A. S.V. puts "kissed him much" in the margin. Cf. Moulton, Cl. Rev., Nov., 1907, p. 220.

4. With the Ablative. This construction is recognised by Brugmann,195 Monro,196 Kuhner-Gerth,197 DelbrŘck.198 There are some examples of the ablative in the N. T., where 'down' and 'from' combine to make 'down from.' Thus, for instance, is to be explained e;balen ket v auvth/j a;nemoj tufwniko,j (Ac. 27:14), where auvth/j refers to Krh,thn, and the meaning (cf. American Standard Revision) is manifestly ' down from' Crete. In 1 Cor. 11:4, profhteu,wn kata. kefalh/j e;cwn, we have 'down from' again, the veil hanging


Addenda 2nd ed.

Addenda 3rd ed.

down from the head. In Mk. 5:13 we find w[rmhsen h` avge,lh kata. tou/ krhmnou/ (Mt. 8:32= Lu. 8:33) where 'down from the cliff' is again the idea.

5. With the Genitive. It is more usual with kata, than the ablative in the N. T. as in the earlier Greek.199 The idea is 'down upon,' the genitive merely accenting the person or thing affected. A good example of this sense in composition followed by the genitive appears in katakurieu,saj avmfote,rwn (Ac. 19:16). Some MSS. in Mk. 14:3 have kata, with th/j kefalh/j, but without it kate,ceen means 'pour down on' the head. In 2 Cor. 8:2, h` kata. ba,qouj ptwcei,a, the idea is 'down to' depth. But with the genitive the other examples in the N. T. have as resultant meanings either 'against, throughout' or 'by.' These notions come from the original down.' Luke alone uses 'throughout' with the genitive and always with o[loj. The earlier Greek had kaq v o[lou (also alone in Luke in the N. T., Ac. 4:18), though Polybius employed kata, in this sense. Cf. in Lu. 4:14 kaq v o[lhj th/j peri─ cw,rou; Ac. 9:31 kaq v o[lhj th/j vIoudai,aj (so 9:42; 10:37). The older Greek would have used the accusative in such cases. But cf. Polyb. iii, 19, 7, kata. th/j nh,sou diespa,rhsan. The notion of 'against' is also more common200 in the koinh,. But in the modern Greek vernacular kata, ( ka,) is confined to the notions of 'toward' and 'according to,' having lost the old ideas of 'down' and 'against' (Thumb, Handb., p. 105 f.). Certainly the preposition does not mean 'against.' That comes out of the context when two hostile parties are brought together. Cf. English vernacular "down on" one. This kata, then is 'down upon' rather literally where the Attic usually hadand accusative.201 Among many examples note kata. tou/ vIhsou/ marturi,an (Mk. 14:55), nu,mfhn kata. penqera/j (Mt. 10:35), kata. tou/ pneu,matoj (Mt. 12:32), kata. tou/ Pau,lou (Ac. 24:1), etc. Cf. no. 8:33. Sometimes meta, and kata, are contrasted (Mt. 12:30) or kata, and u`pe,r (Lu. 9:50; 1 Cor. 4:6). The other use of kata, and the genitive is with verbs of swearing. The idea is perhaps that the hand is placed down on the thing by which the oath is taken. But in the N. T. God himself is used in the solemn oath. So Mt. 26:63, evxorki,zw se kata. tou/ qeou/. Cf. Heb. 6:13, 16. In 1 Cor. 15:15 evmarturh,samen kata. tou/ qeou/, may be taken in this sense or as meaning 'against.'

6. With the Accusative. But the great majority of examples


Addenda 2nd ed.

in the N. T. use the accusative. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 116) notes the frequency of the accusative in the papyri where peri, would appear in the older Greek. Farrar202 suggests that kata, with the genitive (or ablative) is perpendicular ('down on' or 'down from') while with the accusative it is horizontal ('down along'). Curiously enough John has only some ten instances of kata, and several of them are doubtful.203 On the whole, the N. T. use of the accusative with kata, corresponds pretty closely to the classic idiom. With a general horizontal plane to work from a number of metaphorical usages occur. But it appears freely in local expressions like avph/lqe kaq v o[lhn th.n po,lin khru,sswn (Lu. 8:39), dih,rconto kata. ta.j kw,maj (Lu. 9:6), kata. th.n o`do,n (Lu. 10:4), evge,neto limo.j kata. th.n cw,ran (Lu. 15:14), kata. th.n Kiliki,an (Ac. 27:5), ble,ponta kata. li,ba (Ac. 27:12), kata. meshmbri,an (Ac. 8:26), kata. pro,swpon (Gal. 2:11), kat v ovfqalmou,j (Gal. 3:1), kata. skopo,n (Ph. 3:14). The notion of rest may also have this construction as kat v oi=kon (Ac. 2:46). Cf. th.n kat v oi=kon auvth/j evkklhsi,an (Col. 4:15). Cf. Ac. 11:1. In Ac. 13:1 a rather ambiguous usage occurs, kata. th.n ou=san evkklhsi,an profh/tai. But this example may be compared with tw/n kata. vIou─ dai,ouj evqw/n (Ac. 26:3), oi` kaq v u`ma/j poihtai, (Ac. 17:28, some MSS. kaq v h`ma/j%├ no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j (Ac. 18:15). This idiom is common in the literary koinh, and is one of the marks of Luke's literary style.204 But this is merely a natural development, and kata, with the accusative always expressed direction towards in the vernacular.205 Schmidt (de eloc. Joseph., p. 21 f.) calls kata, a sort of periphrasis for the genitive in late Greek. Cf. ta. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12). It is more than a mere circumlocution for the genitive206 in the examples above and such as th.n kaq v u`ma/j pi,stin (Eph. 1:15), to. kat v evme, (Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), ta. kat v evme, (Eph. 6:21; cf. Ac. 25:14), avndra,sin toi/j kat v evxoch,n (Ac. 25:23; cf. par excellence). Kata, is used with expressions of time like kat v evkeinon to.n kairo,n (Ac. 12:1), kata. to. mesonu,ktion (Ac. 16:25), kaq v e`ka,sthn h`me,ran (Heb. 3:13), kata. pa/n sa,bbaton (Ac. 13:27). The notion of distribution comes easily with kata,, as in kata. po,lin (Lu. 8:1), kata. ta.j sunagwga,j (Ac. 22:19), kat v e;toj (Lu. 2:41), kaq v h`me,ran (Ac. 2:46), kaq v e[na pa,ntej (1 Cor. 14:31), kat v o;noma (Jo. 10:3), etc. See Mt. 27:15 = Mk. 15:6. Cf. kata. du,o, P. Oxy. 886 (iii/A.D.). As a standard or rule of measure kata, is very common


Addenda 2nd ed.

and also simple. So kata. to. euvagge,lion (Ro. 16:25) with which compare the headings207 to the Gospels like kata. Maqqai/on, though with a different sense of euvagge,lion. Here the examples multiply like kata. no,mon (Lu. 2:22), kata. fu,sin (Ro. 11:21), kata. ca,rin (Ro. 4:4), kata. qeo,n (Ro. 8:27), kata. th.n pi,stin (Mt. 9:29), kata. du,namin (2 Cor. 8:3), kaq v u`perbolh,n (Ro. 7:13), kata. sungnw,mhn (1 Cor. 7:6), etc. Various resultant ideas come out of different connections. There is no reason to call kata. pa/san aivti,an, (Mt. 19:3) and kata. a;gnoian (Ac. 3:17) had Greek. If there is the idea of cause here, so in 1 Tim. 6:3, kat v euvse,beian├ the notion of tendency or aim appears. We must not try to square every detail in the development of kata, or any Greek preposition with our translation of the context nor with classic usage, for the N. T. is written in the koinh,. This preposition is specially common in Acts and Hebrews. Kat v ivdi,an (Mt. 14:13) is adverbial. But kata. pro,swpoin is not a mere Hebraism, since the papyri have it (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 140). As a sample of the doubling up of prepositions note sunepesth kat v auvtw/n (Ac. 16:22).

(j) Meta,. Most probably meta, has the same root as me,soj, Latin medius, German mit (midi), Gothic mils, English mid (cf. a-mid). Some scholars indeed connect it with a[ma and German samt. But the other view is reasonably certain. The modern Greek uses a shortened form me,, which was indeed in early vernacular use.208 Some of the Greek dialects use pe,da,. So the Lesbian, Boeotian, Arcadian, etc. meta, seems to be in the instrumental case.209

1. The Root-Meaning. It is ('mid') 'midst.' This simple idea lies behind the later developments. Cf. metaxu, and avna,mesa. We see the root-idea plainly in metewri,zw (from met─e,wroj, in 'mid-air'). In the N. T. we have a metaphorical example (Lu. 12:29) which is intelligible now in the day of aeroplanes and dirigible balloons. The root-idea is manifest also in me,t─wpon (Rev. 7:3), 'the space between the eyes.'

2. In Composition. The later resultant meanings predominate in composition such as "with" in metadi,dwmi (Ro. 12:8), metalam─ ba,nw (Ac. 2:46), mete,cw (1 Cor. 10:30); "after" in metape,mpw (Ac. 10:5); or, as is usually the case, the notion of change or transfer is the result as with meqi,sthmi (1 Cor. 13:2), metabai,nw (Mt. 8:34), metamorfo,w (Ro. 12:2), metame,lomai (Mt. 27:3), metanoe,w (Mt. 3:2).

3. Compared with su,n. Meta, is less frequent in composition than


su,n, though far more common as a preposition. Simcox210 thinks that it is useless to elaborate any distinction in meaning between meta,, and su,n. The older grammars held that su,n expressed a more intimate fellowship than meta,. But in the N. T. meta, has nearly driven su,n out.

4. Loss of the Locative Use. Meta, was originally used with the locative. It is common in Homer, but even with him the genitive has begun to displace it.211 Homer uses the locative with collective singulars and plurals.212 Mommsen213 indeed considers that in Hesiod a[ma├ meta, and su,n, all use the instrumental case and with about equal frequency, while meta, with the genitive was rare. But in the N. T. meta,, along with peri, and u`po,, has been confined to the genitive and accusative, and the genitive use greatly predominates (361 to 100).214 The idea with the locative was simply between.215 With several persons the notion of 'among' was present also.216

5. With the Genitive. In Homer it occurs only five times and with the resultant idea of 'among.' So once (Iliad, 13. 700, meta. Boiwtw/n evma,conto), where indeed the idea is that of alliance with the Boeotians. In Rev. 2:16, etc., meta, occurs with poleme,w in a hostile sense, a usage not occurring in the older Greek, which Simcox217 considers a Hebraism. But the papyri may give us examples of this usage any day. And Thumb (Hellenismus, p. 125; cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 106) has already called attention to the modern Greek use of with oivke,w. Deissmann (Light, p. 191) finds meta. stratiw,tou with oivke,w in an ostracon (not in hostile sense) and possibly with avntiloge,w, 'elsewhere.' In Jo. 6:43 meta, occurs in a hostile sense with goggu,zw and probably so with zh,thsij in Jo. 3:25, though Abbott218 argues for the idea of alli- ance here between the Baptist's disciples and the Jews to incite rivalry between the Baptist and Jesus. In 1 Cor. 6:6 f. we have the hostile sense also in legal trials, avdelfo.j meta. avdelfou/ kri,─ netai. Cf. Jo. 16:19. This notion gives no difficulty to English students, since our "with" is so used. But Moulton219 admits a translation Hebraism in Lu. 1:58, evmega,lunen Ku,rioj to. e;leoj auvtou/ met v auvth/j. But what about o[sa evpoi,hsen o` qeo.j met v auvtw/n


(Ac. 14:27) and tetelei,wtai h` avga,ph meq v h`mw/n (1 Jo. 4:17)? Simcox220 again finds a Hebraism in "the religious sense" which appears in Mt. 1:23; Lu. 1:28; Jo. 3:2, etc. But the notion of fellowship is certainly not a Hebraism. Meta, has plenty of examples of the simple meaning of the preposition. Thus to.n zw/nta meta. tw/n nekrw/n (Lu. 24:5), h=n meta. tw/n qhri,wn (Mk. 1:13), meta. tw/n telwnw/n (Lu. 5:30), meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37), an idiom not common to su,n and found in the classical poets.221 Cf. also skhnh. tou/ qeou/ meta. tw/n avnqrw,pwn (Rev. 21:3), meta. diwgmw/n (Mk. 10:30), e;mixen meta. tw/n qusiw/n (Lu. 13:1), oi=non meta. colh/j (Mt. 27:34). It is not far from this idea to that of conversation as in meta. gunaiko.j evla,lei (Jo. 4:27), and general fellowship as with eivrhneu,w (Ro. 12:18), sumfwne,w (Mt. 20:2), koinwni,an e;cw (1 Jo. 1:3), sunai,rw lo,gon (Mt. 18:23), etc. Perhaps the most frequent use of is with the idea of accompaniment. So with avkolouqe,w (Lu. 9:49), lam─ ba,nw (Mt. 25:3), paralamba,nw (Mt. 12:45), e;rcomai (Mk. 1:29), avnacwre,w (Mk. 3:7), etc. Cf. Mt. 27:66. So with eivmi, (Mk. 3:14), but sometimes the notion of help or aid is added as in Jo. 3:2; 8:29, etc. Cf. also h` ca,rij meq v u`mw/n (Ro. 16:20) and often. The notion of fellowship may develop into that of followers or partisans as in Mt. 12:30. Sometimes the phrase of oi` met v auvtou/ with the participle (Jo. 9:40) or without (Mt. 12:4) means one's attendants or followers (companions). The idea of accompaniment also occurs with things as in evxh,lqate meta. macairw/n (Lu. 22: 52), meta. tw/n lampa,dwn (Mt. 25:4), meta. sa,lpiggoj (Mt. 24:31), meta. braci,onoj u`yhlou/ (Ac. 13:17), some of which approach the instrumental idea. Cf. meta. evpiqe,sewj tw/n ceirw/n (1 Tim. 4:14), where the idea is rather 'simultaneous with,' but see meta. o[rkou (Mt. 14:7), meta. fwnh/j mega,lhj (Lu. 17:15). Still in all these cases accompaniment is the dominant note. See also mhde,n$a% avpolelu,sqai tw/n meta. si,tou ('in the corn service'), B.U. 27 (ii/A.D.). Certainly it is not a Hebraism in Lu. 1:58, for Moulton (Prol., p. 246) can cite A.P. 135 (ii/A.D.) ti, de. h`mei/n sune,bh meta. tw/n avrco,ntwn* In later Greek the instrumental use comes to be common with meta, (cf. English "with").222 In Lu. 10:37 o` poih,saj to. e;leoj met v auv─ tou/ Debrunner (Blass-Deb., p. 134) sees a Hebraism. But see Herm. S. V. 1, 1, evpoi,hse met v evmou/. The metaphorical use for the idea of accompaniment occurs also like meta. duna,mewj kai. do,xhj (Mt. 24:30), meta. spoudh/j (Mk. 6:25), meta. dakru,wn (Heb. 12:17), meta.


fo,bou kai. tro,mou (2 Cor. 7:15), parrhsi,aj (Ac. 2:29), qoru,bou (Ac. 24:18), etc. Deissmann (Bible Studies, pp. 64, 265) finds in the papyri examples of meta. kai, like that in Ph. 4:3. Cf. Schmid, Der Atticismus, III, p. 338. In the modern Greek vernacular me, is confined to accompaniment, means or instrument and manner. Time has dropped out (Thumb, Handb., p. 103. f.).

6. With the Accusative. At first it seems to present more difficulty. But the accusative-idea added to the root-idea ("midst") with verbs of motion would mean "into the midst" or "among." But this idiom does not appear in the N. T. In the late Greek vernacular meta, with the accusative occurs in all the senses of meta, and the genitive,223 but that is not true of the N. T. Indeed, with one exception (and that of place), meta. to. deu,teron katape,tasma (Heb. 9:3), in the N. T. meta, with the accusative is used with expressions of time. This example in Hebrews is helpful, however. The resultant notion is that of behind or beyond the veil obtained. by going through the midst of the veil. All the other examples have the resultant notion of "after" which has added to the rootmeaning, as applied to time, the notion of succession. You pass through the midst of this and that event and come to the point where you look back upon the whole. This idea is "after." Cf. meta. du,o h`me,raj (Mt. 26:2). In the historical books of the LXX meta. tau/ta (cf. Lu. 5:27) is very common.224 Simcox225 treats ouv meta. polla.j tau,taj h`me,raj (Ac. 1:5) as a Latinism, but, if that is not true of pro,, it is hardly necessary to posit it of meta,. Cf. meta. h`me,raj ei;kosi Herm. Vis. IV, 1, 1. The litotes is common. Jannaris226 comments on the frequency of meta. to, with the infinitive in the LXX and N. T. So meta. to. avnasth/nai (Acts 10:41). Cf. 1 Cor. 11:25; Heb. 10:26, etc. This comes to be one of the common ways of expressing a temporal clause (cf. evpei, or o[te). Cf. meta. bracu, (Lu. 22:58), meta. mikro,n (Mk. 14:70), adverbial phrases.

(k) Para,.

1. Significance. Delbruck227 does not find the etymology of para, clear and thinks it probably is not to be connected with parea (Sanskrit), which means 'distant.' Brugmann228 connects it with the old word pura like Latin por-, Gothic faura, Anglo-Saxon fore (cf. German vor). Giles229 thinks the same root furnishes paro,j (gen.),


para, (instr.), parai, (dat.), peri, (loc.). He also sees a kinship in these to pe,ran, pe,ra, pro,j.

2. Compared with pro,j. In meaning230 para,, and pro,j do not differ essentially save that para, merely means 'beside,' 'alongside' (cf. our "parallel"), while pro,j rather suggests 'facing one another,' an additional idea of contrast. This oldest meaning explains all the later developments.231 Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 116) thinks that the N. T. shows confusion in the use of para, ( dielogi,zonto par v [marg. of W. H. and Nestle, evn in text] e`autoi/j, Mt. 21:25) and dielogi,zonto pro.j e`autoi,j (Mk. 11:31). But is it not diversity the rather?

3. In Composition. The preposition is exceedingly common in composition, though with nouns it falls behind some of the others a good deal. Para, does not survive in modern Greek vernacular save in composition (like avna, and evk) and some of its functions go to avpo, and eivj.232 All the various developments of para, appear in composition, and the simplest use is very common. Thus para─ bolh, (Mk. 13:28) is a 'placing of one thing beside another.' So para─qala,ssioj (Mt. 4:13) is merely 'beside the sea.' Cf. also para─qh,kh (2 Tim. 1:14), para─kaqesqei,j (Lu. 10:39), para─lake,w (Ac. 28:20), para,─klhtoj (Jo. 14:16), para─le,gomai (Ac. 27:8), par─a,lioj (Lu. 6:17), para─me,nw (Heb. 7:23; cf. menw/n kai. para─menw/ Ph. 1:25), para─ple,w (Ac. 20:16), para─rre,w (Heb. 2:1), para─ ti,qhmi (Mk. 6:41), pa,r─eimi (Lu. 13:1), etc. A specially noticeable word is pa,r─oinoj (1 Tim. 3:3). Cf. also avnti─par─h/lqen in Lu. 10:31 f. Sometimes para, suggests a notion of stealth as in par─ eis─a,gw (2 Pet. 2:1), par─eis─du,w (Ju. 4), <), par─ei,s─aktoj (Gal. 2:4), but in par─eis─e,rcomai at in Ro. 5:20 this notion is not present. Cf. Mt. 14:15, h` w[ra h;dh parh/lqen, 'the hour is already far spent' ('gone by'). Note also the Scotch "far in" like modern Greek parame,sa (Moulton, Prol., p. 247). A few examples of the "perfective" use occur as in paroxu,nw (Ac. 17:16), para─pikrai,nw (Heb. 3:16), para,─ shmoj (Ac. 28:11), para─thre,w (Gal. 4:10, but in Lu. 14:1 the idea of envious watching comes out). With para─frone,w the notion is rather 'to be beside one's self,' 'out of mind.' Cf. also para,─ shmoj in Heb. 6:6, found in the ostraca (Wilcken, i. 78 f.) as a commercial word 'to fall below par.' For parenoclei/n, (Ac. 15:19) see parenoclei/n h`ma/j, P. Tb. 36 (ii/B.o.). Para, occurs in the N. T. with three cases. The locative has 50 examples, the accusative 60, the ablative 78.233


4. With the Locative. Para, with the locative is nearly confined to persons. Only one other example appears, i`sth,keisan para. tw|/ staurw|/ (Jo. 19:25). This confining of para, to persons is like the usual Greek idiom, though Homer234 used it freely with both. Homer used it also as an adverb and in the shortened form pa,r. The only instance in the N. T. of the locative with para,, after a verb of motion is in Lu. 9:47, e;sthsen auvto. par v e`autw|/, though here D reads e`auto,n. The locative with para, leaves the etymological idea unchanged so that we see the preposition in its simplest usage. Cf. oa}n avpe,leipon para. Ka,rpw| (2 Tim. 4:13) as a typical example of the use with persons which is much like apud in Latin, 'at one's house' (Jo. 1:40), 'in his society,' etc. So katalu,sai para, (Lu. 19:7), me,nw para,, (Jo. 14:17), xeni,zw para, (Ac. 21:16). Cf. Ac. 21:8. In Rev. 2:13; Mt. 28:15, para, has the idea of 'among.' The phrase para. tw|/ qew|/ (Lu. 1 : 30) is common. The word is used in ethical relations,235 also like par v evmoi, (2 Cor. 1:17). Cf. ti, a;piston kri,netai `ar v u`mi/n (Ac. 26:8) and fro,nimoi par v e`autoi/j (Ro. 12:16). Para, with the locative does not occur in Hebrews.

5. With the Ablative. But it occurs only with persons (like the older Greek). The distinction between para, and avpo, and evk has already been made. In Mk. 8:11 both para, and avvpo, occur, zhtou/ntej par v auvtou/ shmei/on avpo. tou/ ouvranou/ (cf. 12:2), and in Jo. 1:40 we have both para, and evk├ ei-j evk tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn para. vIwa,nou. In a case like Jo. 8:38 the locative is followed by the ablative,236 e`w,raka para. tw|/ patri, - hvkou,sate para. tou/ patro,j, though some MSS. have locative in the latter clause also. But the ablative here is in strict accordance with Greek usage as in a case like avkou/sai para. sou/ (Ac. 10:22). On the other hand in Jo. 6:45 f. we find the ablative in both instances, o` avkou,saj `ara. tou/ patro,j- o` w'n para. tou/ qeou/ (cf. o` w'n eivj to.n ko,lpon tou/ patro,j in Jo. 1:18). But this last para, implies the coming of Christ from the Father, like para. tou/ patro.j evxh/lqon, (Jo. 16:27). Para, with the ablative means 'from the side of' as with the accusative it means 'to the side of.' The phrase oi` par v auvtou/ therefore describes one's family or kinsmen (Mk. 3:21). In the papyri the phrase is very common for one's agents, and Moulton4 has found one or two like oi` par v h`mw/n pa,ntej parallel to of oi` par v auvtou/ in Mk. 3:21. Cf. also ta. par v


auvtw/n (Lu. 10:7) for one's resources or property. Rouffiac (Recherches, etc., p. 30) cites evdapa,nhsen par v e`autou/ from inscription from Priene (1,11, 117). Note also h` par v evmou/ diaqh,kh (Ro. 11:27) with notion of authorship. With passive verbs the agent is sometimes expressed by para, as in avpestalme,noj para. qeou/ (Jo. 1:6), toi/j lelalhme,noij para. Kuri,ou (Lu. 1:45). Cf. Text. Rec. in Ac. 22:30 with kathgorei/tai para. tw/n vIoudai,wn, where W. H. have u`po,) Para,, occurs with the middle in Mt. 21:42, para. Kuri,ou evge,neto. In the later Greek vernacular para, with the ablative helped supplant u`po, along with avpo,, and both para, and u`po, (and evk% vanished237 "before the victorious avpo,."

6. With the Accusative. It is not found in John's writings at all238 as it is also wanting in the other Catholic Epistles. The accusative is common in the local sense both with verbs of motion and of rest. The increase in the use of the accusative with verbs of rest explains in part the disuse of the locative.239 One naturally compares the encroachments of eivj upon evn. We see the idiom in the papyri as in oi` para. se. qeoi,., P. Par. 47 (B.C. 153). The use of para, with the accusative with verbs of rest was common in Northwest Greek (Buck, Greek Dialects, p. 101). Thus in Mt. 4:18 we find peripatw/n para. th.n qa,lassan logically enough, but in 13:1 we meet evka,qhto para. th/n qa,lassan, and note kaqh,menoi para. th/n o`do,n (Mt. 20:30), e`stw.j para. th.n li,mnhn (Lu. 5:1), evsti.n oivki,a para, qa,lassan (Ac. 10:6), dida,skein para. qa,lassan (Mk. 4:1), avnateqramme,noj para. tou.j po,daj (Ac. 22:3). Cf. Ac. 4:35. So no difficulty arises from e;riyan para. tou.j po,daj (Mt. 15: 30). There is no example in the N. T. of para, in the sense of 'beyond,' like Homer, but one where the idea is 'near to,' alongside of,' as h=lqen para. th.n qa,lassan (Mt. 15:29). But figuratively para, does occur often in the sense of 'beside the mark' or 'beyond.' Once240 indeed we meet the notion of 'minus,' as in tessara,konta para. mi,an (2 Cor. 11:24). Cf. para. ta,lanto,n soi pe,praka, B.U. 1079 (A.D. 41), where para, means 'except.' The modern Greek vernacular keeps para. tri,ca, 'within a hair's breadth' (Thumb, Handb., p. 98). The notion of 'beyond' is common enough in classic writers and is most frequent in Hebrews in the N. T. It occurs with comparative forms like diafo─ rw,teron (Heb. 1:4), plei,onojgrk grk(3:3), krei,ttosigrk grk(9:23; cf. 12:24),


with implied comparison like hvla,ttwsaj bracu, ti grk(2:7), or with merely the positive like a`martwloi, (Lu. 13: 2; cf. 13:4). Indeed no adjective or participle at all may appear, as in ovfeile,tai evge,nonto para. pa,ntaj (Lu. 13:4 ; cf. 13:2). The use of the positive with para, is like the Aramaic (cf. Wellhausen, Einl., p. 28). Here the notion of 'beyond ' or 'above ' is simple enough. Cf. para, after a;lloj in 1 Cor. 3:11 and h`me,ran in Ro. 14:5; Heb. 11:11. The older Greek was not without this natural use of para, for comparison and the LXX is full of it.241 In the later Greek vernacular the ablative and both retreat before para, and the accusative.242 In the modern Greek vernacular we find para, and the accusative and even with the nominative after comparison (Thumb, Handb., p. 75). The notion of comparison may glide over into that of opposition very easily. Thus in Ro. 1:25, evla,treusan th|/ kti,sei para. to.n kti,santa, where 'rather than' is the idea (cf. "instead of "). Cf. Ro. 4:18, par v evlip,da evp v evlpi,di, where both prepositions answer over to each other, 'beyond,' 'upon.' So in 2 Cor. 8:3 kata. du,namin and para. du,namin are in sharp contrast. Cf. Ac. 23:3. In Gal. 1:8 f. par v o[ has the idea of 'beyond' and so 'contrary to.' Cf. Ro. 11:24; 12:3; 16:17. To exceed instructions is often to go contrary to them. In a case like para. no,mon (Ac. 18:13), to go beyond is to go against. Cf. English trans-gression, para,─ptwma. Once more para,, with the accusative strangely enough may actually mean 'because of,' like propter. So in 1 Cor. 12:15 f. para. tou/to. Cf. D in Lu. 5:7. The Attic writers used para, thus, but it disappears in the later vernacular.243 The notion of cause grows out of the idea of nearness and the nature of the context. Farrar244 suggests the English colloquial: "It's all along of his own neglect."

(l) Peri,. There is some dispute about the etymology of peri,. Some scholars, like Sonne,245 connect it in etymology and meaning with u`pe,r. But the point is not yet clear, as Brugmann246 contends. Whatever may be true about the remote Indo-Germanic root, peri, belongs to the same stem as para, and is in the locative case like pari in the Sanskrit.247 Cf. also Old Persian pariy, Zend pairi, Latin per, Lithuanian per, Gothic fair-, Old High German far-, fer, German ver-. The Greek uses pe,ri as an adverb (Homer)


and the AEolic dialect248 even uses pe,r instead of peri,. The intensive particle per is this same word.

1. The Root-Meaning. It is 'round' ('around'), 'on all sides' (cf. avmfi,, 'on both sides'). Cf. pe,rix (Ac. 5:16), where the rootidea is manifest. Cf. Latin circum, circa. The preposition has indeed a manifold development,249 but after all the root-idea is plainer always than with some of the other prepositions. The N. T. examples chiefly (but cf. Ac. 28:7) concern persons and things, though even in the metaphorical uses the notion of 'around' is present.

2. In Composition. The idea of 'around' in the literal local sense is abundant. Cf. perih/gen (Mt. 4:23), periastra,yai (Ac. 22: 6), periestw/ta (Jo. 11:42), perie,dramon (Mk. 6:55), perife,rein (Mk. 6:55), peri─e,rcomai (Ac. 19:13), fragmo.n auvtw|/ perie,qhken (Mt. 21:33). In peri─pate,w (Mt. 9:5) peri, has nearly lost its special force, while in periergazome,nouj (2 Th. 3:11) the whole point lies in the preposition. Note in Mk. 3:34, peri─bleya,menoj tou.j peri. auvto.n ku,klw| kaqhme,nouj, where ku,klw| explains peri, already twice expressed. Cf. also peri─kuklw,sousi,n se (Lu. 19:43). The perfective idea of peri, in composition is manifest in peri─elei/n a`marti,aj (Heb. 10:11), 'to take away altogether.' Cf. peri─aya,ntwn pu/r evn me,sw| th/j auvlh/j (Lu. 22:55), where note the addition of peri, to evn me,sw|. In Mk. 14:65 peri─kalu,ptw means 'to cover all round,' 'to cover up,' like peri─kru,ptwin Lu. 1:24. This is the "perfective" sense. Cf. peri,─lupoj in Mt. 26:38. Per contra note peri,ergoj (1 Tim. 5:13) for 'busybody,' busy about trifles and not about important matters. In 1 Tim. 6:10 note perie,peiran in the sense of 'pierced through.' But in 2 Cor. 3 : 16, periairei/tai, 'the veil is removed from around the head.'

3. Originally Four Cases Used. These were the locative, accusative, genitive, ablative. The locative was never common in prose and died out in the late Greek, not appearing in the N. T. Delbruck250 is very positive about the ablative in some examples in Homer and the earlier Greek. Indeed he thinks that the true genitive is a later development after the ablative with peri,. I think it probable that some of these ablative examples survive in the N. T., though I do not stress the point.251

4. With the Ablative. There is some doubt as to how to explain


the ablative with peri,. In Homer252 it is usually explained as like ablative of comparison. Cf. u`pe,r. Thus peri, is taken in the sense of 'beyond' or 'over,' and is allied to pe,ra $pe,ran) and u`pe,r, according to the original sense.253 Brugmann254 cites also peri,eimi and perigi,gnomai where the notion of superiority comes in. With this compare perikratei/j gene,sqai th/j ska,fhj (Ac. 27:16), which would thus have the ablative in ska,fhj. But Monro255 admits that the origin of this notion with peri, is not quite clear. On the other hand, the use of peri, in composition may throw light on the subject. In 2 Cor. 3:16, peri─airei/tai to. ka,lumma, 'the veil is taken from around.' Cf. also Ac. 27:20. The same notion occurs in peri─ka,qarma (1 Cor. 4:13) and periyhma (ib.), 'off-scouring' and 'off-scraping.' The same idea of from around occurs in peri─rh,xantej ta. i`ma,tia (Ac. 16:22; cf. 2 Macc. 4:38). In Lu. 10:40 this idea appears in a metaphorical sense with periespa/to, 'drawn away' or 'from around,' 'distracted.' See perispai/, P. Brit. M. 42 (B.C. 168) for 'occupy.' Cf. also the notion of beyond in periergoj (1 Tim. 5:13), perilei,pw (1 Th. 4:15), perime,nw (Ac. 1:4), periou,sioj (Tit. 2:14), perisseu,w (Jo. 6:12), perisso,j (Mt. 5:37). In the last example, to. perisso.n tou,twn, note the ablative. There remains a group of passages of a metaphorical nature where the idea is that of taking something away. These may be explained as ablatives rather than genitives. So in Ro. 8:3, peri. a`marti,aj, the idea is that we may be freed from sin, from around sin. Thayer (under peri,) explains this usage as "purpose for removing something or taking it away." This, of course, is an ablative idea, but even so we get it rather indirectly with peri,. See Cristo.j a[pax peri. a`martiw/n avpe,qanen in 1 Pet. 3:18. It is worth observing that in Gal. 1:4 W. H. read u`pe,r rather than peri,, while in Heb. 5:3 W. H. have peri, rather than u`pe,r. Cf. Mk. 14:24. In Eph. 6:18 f. we have deh,sei peri. pa,ntwn tw/n a`gi,wn├ kai. u`pe.r evmou/├ where the two prepositions differ very little. But in 1 Pet. 3:18 (see above), u`pe.r avdi,kwn, the distinction is clearer. Cf. Jo. 16:26; 17:9. See Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 152 f. D has u`pe,r with evkcunno,menon in Mt. 26:28 rather than peri,. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 134. Cf. peri, with i`lasmo,j in 1 Jo. 2:2. The ablative with u`pe,r renders more probable this ablative use of peri,.

5. With the Genitive. This is the common case with peri, in the


Addenda 2nd ed.

N. T. If the genitive and ablative examples are counted together (the real ablatives are certainly few) they number 291 as against 38 accusatives.256 But in the later Greek the accusative gradually drives out the genitive (with the help of dia, also).257 The genitive was always rare with peri, in the local or temporal sense. The N. T. shows no example of this usage outside of composition (Ac. 25:7), unless in Ac. 25:18 peri. ou- a be taken with staqe,ntej, which is doubtful.258 Curiously enough the Gospel of John has the genitive with peri, almost as often as all the Synoptic writers and the accusative not a all in the critical text, Jo. 11:19 reading pro.j th.n Ma,rqan.259 This frequency in John is due largely to the abundant use of marture,w├ le,gw├ lale,w├ gra,fw, etc. Cf. Jo. 1:7, 22:7, 13, 17, etc. Peri, may occur with almost any verb where the notion of 'about,' 'concerning' is natural, like evsplagcni,sqh (Mt. 9:36), hvgana,kthsan grk grk grk(20:24), me,leigrk grk(22:16), evlegco,menoj (Lu. 3:19), evqau,masan (Lu. 2: 18), etc. The list includes verbs like avkou,w├ ginw,skw├ dialogi,zomai evnqume,omai├ evpizhte,w, etc. The usage includes both persons, like proseu,cesqe peri. h`mw/n (1 Th. 5:25), and things, like peri. evndu,matoj ti, merimna/te (Mt. 6:28). One neat Greek idiom is ta. peri,. Cf. ta. peri. th/j o`dou/, (Ac. 24:22), ta. peri. vIhsou/grk grk(18:25; Mk. 5:27), ta. peri. evmautou/ (Ac. 24:10). Blass260 considers poiei/n peri. auvtou/ (Lu. 2:27) "an incorrect phrase," which is putting it too strongly. Cf. lagca,nw peri, in Jo. 19:24, like classical ma,comai peri,. Sometimes rept appears rather loosely at the beginning of the sentence, peri. th/j logi,aj (1 Cor. 16:1), peri. vApollw,grk grk(16:12). Sometimes peri, is used with the relative when it would be repeated if the antecedent were expressed, as in peri. w-n e`gra,yate (1 Cor. 7:1) or where peri, properly belongs only with the antecedent, as in peri. w-n de,dwka,j moi (Jo. 17:9). In Lu. 19:37, peri. pasw/n w-n ei=don duna,mewn, the preposition strictly belongs only to the antecedent which is incorporated. In a case like peri/ pa,ntwn eu;comai (3 Jo. 1:2) the subjectmatter of the prayer is implied in peri, as cause is involved in peri. tou/ kaqarismou/ (Mk. 1:44) and as advantage is expressed in peri. auvth/j (Lu. 4:38). But this is merely due to the context.

6. With the Accusative. This construction in reality occurs with much the same sense as the genitive. The accusative, of course, suggests a placing around. It is rare in the N. T., but in later Greek displaced the genitive as already remarked. But it does not survive in the modern Greek vernacular. With the accusative


peri, is used of place, as in ska,yw peri. auvth,n (Lu. 13:8), peri. to.n to,pon evkei/non (Ac. 28:7). Cf. Mk. 3:8. So with expressions of time, as in peri. tri,thn w[ran (Mt. 20:3). Note the use of peri, with the different parts of the body, as peri. th.n ovsfu,n (Mt. 3:4), peri. to.n tra,chlongrk grk(18:6). Cf. Rev. 15:6. Peri, is used of persons as in peri─ astra,yai peri. evme, (Ac. 22:6), ei=dan peri. auvtou,j (Mk. 9:14). An ancient Greek idiom occurs in oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13), like of peri. Cenofw/nta (Xen. Anab. 7, 4, 16), where the idea is 'Paul and his companions.'261 But in a case like oi` peri. auvto,n (Lu. 22:49) the phrase has only its natural significance, 'those about him.' The still further development of this phrase for the person or persons named alone, like the vernacular "you all" in the Southern States for a single person, appears in some MSS. for Jo. 11:19, pro.j ta.j peri. Ma,rqan kai. Mari,an, where only Martha and Mary are meant,262 the critical text being pro.j th.n Ma,rqan. Blass263 notes that only with the Philippian Epistle Epistle(2:23, ta. peri. evme,) did Paul begin the lase of the accusative with peri, (cf. genitive) in the sense of 'concerning,' like Plato. Cf. in the Pastoral Epistles, peri. th.n pi,stin (1 Tim. 1:19), peri. th.n avlh,qeian (2 Tim. 2:18). But Luke (10: 40 f.) has it already. Cf. peri. ta. toiau/ta (Ac. 19:25). But ku,klw| in the LXX, as in the koinh,, is also taking the place of peri, (Thackeray, Gr., p. 25). vAmfi, could not stand before u`pe,r, and finally peri, itself went down. The entrance of u`pe,r into the field of peri, will call for notice later.

(m) Pro,. Cf. the Sanskrit pra and the Zend fra, Gothic fra, Lithuanian pra, Latin pro, German fur, vor, English for (for-ward), fore (fore-front). The case of pro, is not known, though it occurs a few times in Homer as an adverb.264 Cf. avpo, and u`po,. The Latin prod is probably remodelled from an old *pro like an ablative, as prae is dative (or locative).

1. The Original Meaning. It is therefore plain enough. It is simply 'fore,' 'before.' It is rather more general in idea than Cori and has a more varied development.265 In pro, th/j qu,raj (Ac. 12:6) the simple idea is clear.

2. In Composition. It is common also in composition, as in pro─au,lion (Mk. 14:68), 'fore-court.' Other uses in composition grow out of this idea of 'fore,' as pro─bai,nw (Mt. 4:21), 'to go on' ('for-wards'), pro─ko,ptw (Gal. 1:14), pro─a,gw (Mk. 11:9; cf. avko─ louqe,w in contrast), pro,─dhloj (1 Tim. 5:24), 'openly manifest,'


'before all' (cf. Ga1.3:1, pro─egra,fh); pro─e,cw (Ro. 3:9), 'to surpass'; pro─amarta,nw (2 Cor. 12:21), 'to sin before,' 'previously'; pro─ori,zw (Ro. 8:29), to 'pre-ordain.' Cf. pro,─krima (1 Tim. 5: 21), 'pre-judgment.' In these respects the N. T. merely follows in the wake of the older Greek.266 One may illustrate pro, still further by the comparative pro─teroj and the superlative prw/─toj (cf. Doric pra/─toj.). Cf. also pro,─sw├ pro─pe,rusi.

3. The Cases Used with pro,. These call for little comment. It is barely possible that ouvrano,qi pro, in Homer may be a remnant of a locative use.267 Brugmann268 thinks that a true genitive is seen in pro. o`dou/, but this is not certain. But the ablative is probably the case. In very late Greek pro, even appears with the accusative.269 It is not in the modern Greek vernacular. The ablative is due to the idea of comparison and is found also with the Latin pro.270 Pro, occurs only 48 times in the N. T. and is almost confined to Matthew's and John's Gospels, Luke's writings and Paul's Epistles (12 times).

4. Place. Thus it occurs only in four instances, pro. th/j qu,raj (Ac. 12:6), pro. tw/n qurw/n (Jas. 5:9), pro. tou/ pulw/noj (Ac. 12:14), pro. th/j po,lewjgrk grk(14:13). Cf. e;mporsqen, (Mt. 5:24), which is more common in this sense in the N. T. Some MSS. have pro, in Ac. 5:23. In Cyprus (borrowing from the literary language) to-day we still have pro. kefalh/j, 'at the head of the table' (Thumb, Handb., p. 98).

5. Time. This is the more common idea with pro, in the N. T. Thus we find such expressions as tou.j pro. u`mw/n (Mt. 5:12), pro. kairou/ grk(8:29), pro. tou/ kataklusmou/ (Mt. 24:38), pro, tou/ avgi,stou (Lu. 11:38), pro. tou/ pa,sca (Jo. 11:55), pro. tw/n aivw,nwn (1 Cor. 2:7), pro. ceimw/noj (2 Tim. 4:21). This is all plain sailing. Nor need one stumble much at the compound preposition (translation Hebraism) pro. prosw,pou sou (Mk. 1:2 and parallels). Cf. Ac. 13: 24; Lu. 9:52. Nine times we have pro. tou/ with the infinitive, as in Lu. 2:21; 22:15; Jo. 1:48. Here this phrase neatly expresses a subordinate clause of time (antecedent). Cf. ante quam. A real difficulty appears in pro. ea}x h`merw/n tou/ pa,sca (Jo. 12:1), which does look like the Latin idiom in ante diem tertium Kalendas.


Jannaris271 attributes this common idiom in the late Greek writers to the prevalence of the Roman system of dating. This has been the common explanation. But Moulton272 throws doubt on this "plausible Latinism" by showing that this idiom appears in a Doric inscription of the first century B.C. (Michel, 694), pro. a`mera/n de,ka tw/n musthri,wn. The idiom occurs also in the inscriptions, pro. ie Kalandw/n Auvrgou,stwn, I.M.A. iii. 325 (ii/A.D.), and the papyri, prw. du,o h`mero,n F.P. 118 (ii/A.D.). So Moulton proves his point that it is a parallel growth like the Latin. Rouffiac (Recherches, p. 29) re-enforces it by three citations from the Priene inscriptions. Cf. also pro. pollw/n tou,twn h`merw/n Acta S.-Theogn., p. 102. Moulton thinks that it is a natural development from the ablative case with pro,, 'starting from,' and refers to ovye. sabba,twn in Mt. 28:1 as parallel. May it not be genuine Greek and yet have responded somewhat to the Latin influence as to the frequency (cf. LXX and the N. T.)? Similarly pro. evtw/n dekatessa,rwn (2 Cor. 12:2), 'fourteen years before (ago).' Abbott273 considers it a transposing of pro,, but it is doubtful if the Greek came at it in that way. Simcox274 calls attention to the double genitive with pro, in Jo. 12:1, really an ablative and a genitive.

6. Superiority. Pro, occurs in the sense of superiority also, as in pro. pa,ntwn (Jas. 5:12; 1 Pet. 4:8). In Col. 1:17 pro. pa,ntwn is probably time, as in pro. evmou/ (Jo. 10:8; Rom. 16:7). Cf. pro. tou,twn pa,ntwn in Lu. 21:12.

(n) Pro,j. The etymology of pro,j is not perfectly clear. It seems to be itself a phonetic variation275 of proti, which is found in Homer as well as the form poti, (Arcad. po,j├ po,t in Boeotian, etc.). What the relation is between poti, and proti, is not certain.276 The Sanskrit prati is in the locative case. The connection, if any, between pro,j and pro, is not made out, except that pro─ti, and pra-ti both correspond to pro, and pra. Thayer considers - ti, an adverbial suffix.

1. The Meaning.277 It is the same as proti, and poti,. The rootidea is 'near,' 'near by,' according to Delbruck,278 though Brugmann279 inclines to towards.' In Homer pro,j has an adverbial


Addenda 3rd ed.

use, pro,j de, with the notion of 'besides.'280 'Near,' rather than 'towards,' seems to explain the resultant meanings more satisfactorily. The idea seems to be 'facing,' German gegen. Cf. pro,swpon. In o` lo,goj h=n pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1) the literal idea comes out well, 'face to face with God.'

2. In Composition. Probably one sees the original notion in pros─edreu,w, 'to sit near' (cf. Eurip., etc.). Some MSS. read this verb in 1 Cor. 9:13, though the best MSS. have paredreu,w. But we do have pros─kefa,laion (Mk. 4:38) and pros─me,nw (Mt. 15:32; 1 Tim. 5:5). Cf. also pros─fa,gion (Jo. 21:5), and pros─ormi,zw (Mk. 6:53). The other resultant meanings appear in composition also as ' towards ' in pros─a,gw (Lu. 9:41), 'to' in pros─kolla,w (Eph. 5:31), 'besides' in pros─ofei,lw) (Phil. 1:19), 'for' in pros─kairoj (Mt. 13:21). This preposition is common in composition and sometimes the idea is simply "perfective," as in pros─kartere,w (Ac. 1:14), pro,s─peinoj (Ac. 10:10).

3. Originally with Five Cases. The cases used with pro,j were probably originally five according to Brugmann,281 viz. locative, dative, ablative, genitive, accusative. The only doubt is as to the true dative and the true genitive. Delbruck282 also thinks that a few genuine datives and genitives occur. Green283 (cf. pro,) speaks of "the true genitive" with pro,; it is only rarely true of pro,j and u`pe,r. The genitive with pro,j is wanting in the papyri and the Pergamon inscriptions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 117). And in the N. T. no example of the genitive or dative appears. In Lu. 19:37 pro.j th|/ kataba,sei might possibly be regarded as dative with evggi,zontoj; but it is better with the Revised Version to supply "even" and regard it as a locative. In composition ( prose,cete e`autoi/j, Lu. 12:1) the dative is common.284 Maccabees shows the literary use of pro.j with dative of numbers (Thackeray, Gr., p. 188).

4. The Ablative. There is only one example of the ablative in the N. T. and this occurs in Ac. 27:34, tou/to pro.j th/j u`mete,raj swthri,aj u`pa,rcei. This metaphorical usage means 'from the point of view of your advantage.' It is possible also to explain it as true genitive, 'on the side of.' This is a classical idiom. So then pro,j in the N. T. is nearly confined to two cases. Moulton285 agrees


with Blass286 that this is a remnant of the literary style in Luke. Moulton finds the genitive (ablative) 23 times in the LXX. The true genitive appeared in examples like pro.j tou/ potamou/, 'by the river' or 'towards the river.' In the modern Greek vernacular pro,j fades287 before eivj and avpo, as the ablative use is going in the N. T. It is rarely used of place and time, and even so the usage is due to the literary language (Thumb, Handbook, p. 106).

5. With the Locative. Pro,j indeed occurs in the N. T. with the locative only seven times, so that it is already pretty nearly a one-case preposition. These seven examples are all of place and call for little remark. Cf. pro.j tw|/ o;rei (Mk. 5:11), pro.j tw|/ mnhmei,w| (Jo. 20:11). They are all with verbs of rest save the use with evggi,zontoj in Lu. 19:37. See under 3. The correct text gives the locative in Mk. 5:11 and Jo. 20:11, else we should have only five, and D reads the accusative in Lu. 19:37. These seven examples illustrate well the etymological meaning of pro,j as 'near' or 'facing.' Moulton counts 104 examples of pro,j and the dative (locative) in the LXX. Four of these seven examples are in John's writings. Cf. especially Jo. 20:12. Moulton (Prol., p. 106) notes "P. Fi. 5 pro.j tw|/ pulw/ni, as late as 245 A.D. "

6. With the Accusative. It was exceedingly common in Homer and always in the literal local sense.288 The metaphorical usage with the accusative developed later. How common the accusative is with pro,j in the N. T. is seen when one notes that the number is 679.289 This was the classic idiom290 with pro,j both literally and metaphorically. It is not necessary to say that pro,j with the accusative means 'towards.' The accusative case implies extension and with verbs of motion pro,j ('near') naturally blends with the rest into the resultant idea of 'towards.' This is in truth a very natural use of pro,j with the accusative, as in avnecw,rhsen pro,j th.n qa,lassan (Mk. 3:7). In Mk. 11:1 note both eivj ( vIeroso,luma) and pro,j ( to. o;roj) with evggi,zw). In Phil. 1:5 (W. H.) the margin has both with persons. Here Lightfoot (in loco) sees a propriety in the faith which is towards ( pro,j) Christ and the love exerted upon ( eivj) men. But that distinction hardly291 applies in Ro. 3:25 f.; Eph. 4:12. Cf. Mk. 5:19. In Mk. 9:17 W. H. and Nestle accent pro.j se,) There seems to be something almost intimate, as well as personal, in some of the examples of pro,j. The examples of pro,j with persons are very numerous, as in evxeproeu,eto pro.j auvto,n (Mt. 3:5),


Addenda 3rd ed.

deu/te pro,j me (Mt. 11:28), etc. But one must not think that the notion of motion is essential to the use of pro,j and the accusative (cf. eivj and evn). Thus in Mk. 4:1, pa/j o` o;cloj pro.j th.n qa,lassan evpi. th/j gh/j h=san, note both evpi, and pro,j and the obvious distinc-. tion. Cf. also qermaino,menoj pro. to. fw/j (Mk. 14:54). It is not strange, therefore, to find pro.j h`ma/j eivsi,n (Mt. 13:56), pro.j se. poiw/ to. pa,scagrk grk(26:18). Cf. also ta. pro.j th.n qu,ran in Mk. 2:2. The accusative with pro,j is not indeed exactly what the locative would be, especially with persons. In Mk. 14:49 we find kaq v h`me,ran h;mhn pro. u`ma/j evn tw|/ i`erw|/ dida,skwn. Abbott292 properly illustrates Jo. 1:1, o` lo,goj h=n pro.j to.n qeo,n with this passage in Mk. and with 2 Cor. 5: 8, evndhmh/sai pro.j to.n ku,rion. It is the face-to-face converse with the Lord that Paul has in mind. So John thus conceives the fellowship between the Logos and God. Cf. sto,ma pro.j sto,ma in 2 Jo. 1:12, 3 Jo. 1:14 and pro,swpon pro.j pro,swpon in 1 Cor. 13:12. But, while this use of pro,j with words of rest is in perfect harmony with the root-idea of the preposition itself, it does not occur in the older Greek writers nor in the LXX.293 Jannaris294 is only able to find it in Malalas. Certainly the more common Greek idiom would have been para,, while meta, and su,n might have been employed. Abbott,295 however, rightly calls attention to the frequent use of pro,j with verbs of speaking like le,gw├ lale,w, etc., and Demosthenes has it with za,w. So then it is a natural step to find pro,j employed for living relationship, intimate converse. Two very interesting examples of this personal intercourse occur in Lu. 24:14, w`mi,loun pro.j avllh,louj, and verse 17, avntiba,llete pro.j avllh,louj. Cf. also pro,j with peripate,w (Col. 4:5), koinwni,a (2 Cor. 6:14), diaqh,kh (Ac. 3:25 as in ancient Greek), lo,goj (Heb. 4:13), etc. Certainly nothing anomalous exists in pi,ptei pro.j tou.j po,daj (Mk. 5:22) and prosko,yh|j pro. li,qon (Mt. 4:6). Pro,j is not used often with expressions of time, and the notion of extension is in harmony with the accusative case. Cf. pro.j kairo,n in Lu. 8:13, pro.j w[ran in Jo. 5:35, pro.j ovli,gaj h`me,raj in Heb. 12:10. In pro.j e`spe,ran (Lu. 24:29) the resultant notion is 'toward,' rather than 'for.' Blass296 points out that pro.j to. paro,n (Heb. 12:11) is classical. The metaphorical uses of pro,j are naturally numerous. Disposition towards one is often expressed by pro,j, whether it be friendly as in makroqumei/te pro.j pa,ntaj (1 Th. 5:14) or hostile as in evn e;cqra| o;ntej pro.j au`tou,j (Lu. 23:12).


Addenda 3rd ed.

Cf. met v avllh,lwn (ib.). Pro,j does not of itself mean 'against,' though that may be the resultant idea as in goggusmo.j- pro.j tou.j vEbrai,ouj (Ac. 6:1). Cf. also pro.j plhsmonh.n th/j sarko,j (Col. 2:23) and pro.j tou.j ktl) (2 Cor. 5:12). Sometimes pro,j adds nothing to the vague notion of extension in the accusative case and the idea is simply 'with reference to.' Thus pro.j tou.j avgge,louj le,gei (Heb. 1:7). Cf. also Lu. 20:19. Pro,j in the koinh, shares with eivj and peri,, the task of supplanting the disappearing dative (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 112). In particular pro.j auvto,n, (- ou,j) takes the place of auvtw|/ (-- oi/j) after le,gw├ ei=pon avpokri,nomai, as shown by parallel passages in the Synoptic Gospels, as in Lu. 3:14, where MSS. vary between auvtoi/j and pro.j auvtou,j. Adjectives may have pro,j in this general sense of fitness, like avgaqo,j (Eph. 4:29), dunata, (2 Cor. 10:4), i`kano,j (2 Cor. 2:16), leukai. pro.j qerismo,n (Jo. 4:35), etc. Cf. also ta. pro.j to.n qeo,n (Ro. 15: 17). The phrase ti, pro.j h`ma/j* (Mt. 27:4) has ancient Greek support.297 The notion of aim or end naturally develops also as in evgra,fh pro.j nouqesi,an h`mw/n (1 Cor. 10:11), pro.j ti, ei=pen (Jo. 13:28), o` pro.j th.n evlehmosu,nhn kaqh,menoj (Ac. 3:10). Cf. 1 Cor. 14:26; 15:34. Some examples of the infinitive occur also in this connection, like pro.j to. qeaqh/nai auvtoi/j (Mt. 6:1), pro.j to. katakau/sai auvta,grk grk(13:30), etc. In pro.j to. dei/n proseu,cesqai (Lu. 18:1) the notion is hardly so strong as 'purpose.' But see Infinitive. Then again cause may be the result in certain contexts as in Mwush/j pro.j th.n sklhrokardi,an u`mw/n evpe,treyen (Mt. 19:8). There is no difficulty about the notion of comparison. It may be merely general accord as in pro.j to. qe,lhma auvtou/ (Lu. 12: 47), pro.j th.n avlh,qeian (Gal. 2:14), or more technical comparison as in ouvk a;xia ta. paqh,mata tou/ nu/n kairou/ pro.j th.n me,llousan do,xan avpokalufqh/nai (Ro. 8:18). With this may be compared pro.j fqo,non, in Jas. 4:5, where the phrase has an adverbial force.

(o) Su,n. The older form xu,n (old Attic) appears in some MSS. in 1 Pet. 4:12 (Beza put it in his text here). This form xu,n is seen in xuno,j. In meta─xu, both meta, and xu,( n) are combined.298 Delbruck299 is indeed in doubt as to the origin of su,n├ but see Mommsen,300 and some (Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 343) consider xu,n and su,n, different.

1. The Meaning. This is in little dispute. It is 'together with.'301


Cf. Latin cum and English con-comitant. The associative instrumental is the case used with su,n as with a[ma and it is just that idea that it was used to express originally.302 It never departed from this idea, for when the notion of help is present it grows naturally out of that of association. The Attic, according to Blass,303 confines su,n, to the notion of 'including,' but the Ionic kept it along with meta,, for 'with.'

2. History. It is not without interest. In Homer it is sometimes an adverb (tmesis). Indeed it never made headway outside of poetry save in Xenophon, strange to say. The Attic prose writers use meta, rather than su,n. Thus in 600 pages of Thucydides we find meta, 400 times and xu,n 37, while Xenophon has su,n more than meta,. In Demosthenes the figures run 346 of meta, and 15 of su,n, while Aristotle has 300 and 8 respectively.304 Monro305 thinks that meta, displaced su,n in the vernacular while su,n held on in the poets as the result of Homer's influence and finally became a sort of inseparable preposition like dis- in Latin (cf. avmfi- in N. T.). In the modern Greek vernacular su,n is displaced by me, $meta,% and sometimes by a[ma.306 The rarity of su,n in the N. T. therefore is in harmony with the history of the language. Its use in the N. T. is largely confined to Luke's Gospel and Acts and is entirely absent from John's Epistles and the Apocalypse as it is also from Hebrews and 1 Peter, not to mention 2 Thessalonians, Philemon and the Pastoral Epistles. It is scarce in the rest of Paul's writings and in Mark and Matthew,307 and John's Gospel has it only three times times times(12:2; 18:1; 21:3). It occurs in the N. T. about 130 times (over two-thirds in Luke and Acts), the MSS. varying in a few instances.

3. In Composition. Here su,n is extremely common. See list of these verbs in chapter on Cases (Instrumental). Cf. Thayer's Lexicon under su,n. The use in composition illustrates the associative idea mainly as in sun─a,gw (Mt. 2:4), sun─e,rcomai (Mk. 3:20), though the notion of help is present also, as in sun─anti─lamba,nomai. (Lu. 10:40), sun─erge,w (1 Cor. 16:16). Cf. cai,rw kai. sugcai,rw (Ph. 2:17 f.). The "perfective" use of su,n is seen in sun─kalu,ptw (Lu. 12:2), sun─klei,w (Ro. 11:32), sun─ku,ptw (Lu. 13:11). Cf. suntele,w├ sunthre,w, etc. In su,noida the knowing may be either with another, as possibly Ac. 5:2, or with one's self, as in 1 Cor. 4:4.


The verb dune,cw (Lu. 22:63; Ac. 18:5) is found in the papyri (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 160. Cf. Moulton and Milligan, Expositor, 1911, p. 278). As already explained, the case used is the associative-instrumental. In the very late Greek the accusative begins to appear with su,n, (as indeed already in the LXX!) and both su,n and a[ma show308 examples of the genitive like meta,.

4. N. T. Usage. There is very little comment needed on the N.T. usage of the preposition beyond what has already been given.309 The bulk of the passages have the notion of accompaniment, like su.n soi. avpoqanei/n (Mt. 26:35). So it occurs with me,nein (Lu. 1:56), kaqi,sai (Ac. 8:31), etc. Cf. also su.n o[lh| th|/ evkklhsi,a| (Ac. 15:22), where the use of su,n may subordinate the church a bit to the Apostles (Thayer).310 Cf. also Ac. 14:5; Lu. 23:11, where kai, rather than su,n might have occurred. As applied to Christ, su,n, like evn├ may express the intimate mystic union, as in ke,kruptai su.n tw|/ Cristw|/ evn tw|/ qew|/ (Col. 3:3). The phrase oi` su,n is used much like oi` para,├ oi` peri,├ oi` meta,. Thus Pe,troj kai. oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32). Cf. Lu. 5:9 and Mk. 2:26. Once su,n occurs in a context where the idea is 'besides,' avlla, ge kai. su.n pa/sin tou,toij (Lu. 24:21). Cf. Neh. 5:18. So probably also Ph. 1:1. It appears in the papyri in this sense also. Cf. Moulton and Milligan, "Lexical Notes on the Papyri," The Expositor, 1911, p. 276. In Mt. 8:34 Text. Rec. reads eivj suna,nthsin tw|/ vIhsou/, where critical text has The case of vIhsou/ is associative-instrumental in either instance. MSS. give sun── in other passages. The use of su.n th|/ duna,mei tou/ kuri,ou (1 Cor. 5:4) has a technical sense ('together with') seen in the magical papyri and in an Attic cursing tablet (iii/B.C.). Cf. Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 304 f. See also Deissmann's Die neut. Formel "in Christo Jesu" for discussion of su.n Cristw|/, the notion of fellowship in Ph. 1:23. He now cites a graffito with these words to a deceased person, eu;comai kavgw. evn ta,cu su.n soi. ei=nai (Light, p. 305). Cf. Col. 3:3. In 1 Th. 4:17 note a[ma su.n auvtoi/j and in 5:10 a[ma su.n auvtw|/ like our "together with," which shows also the retreat of su,n before a[ma. For sun─epi and kata, see Ac. 16:22.

(p) `Upe,r. In Homer, by anastrophe, sometimes we have u[per. Cf. Sanskrit upari (locative case of upar), Zend upairi, Latin super, Gothic ufar, German uber, Anglo-Saxon ofer, English over. The


oldest Indo-Eur. locative311 was without i. A longer comparative occurs in u`pe,rteroj, and a superlative u`pe,rtatoj shortened into u[patoj. Cf. Latin superus, summus, and English up, upper, upper- most.

1. The Meaning. It is therefore clear enough. It is the very English word 'over' or 'upper.' Chaucer uses 'over' in the sense of 'upper.' As an adverb it does not occur in Homer, though Euripides (Medea, 627) has u`pe.r a;gan. Jannaris312 calls u[per (Blass u`pe.r) evgw, (2 Cor. 11:23) "the monstrous construction," which is rather overdoing the matter. The use of the preposition is not remarkably abundant in the N. T.

2. In Composition. The N.T. has also the compound prepositions bream.) (Eph. 1:21), u`perekperissou/ (Eph. 3:20), u`pere,keina (2 Cor. 10:16) and the adverbs u`perli,an (2 Cor. 11:5), u`perballo,n─ twj (2 Cor. 11:23). The literal meaning of u`pe,r ('over') appears in u`per─a,nw (Heb. 9:5), u`pe.r auvth, (ib. D), u`per─w|/on ('upper room,' Ac. 1:13). The notion of 'excess,' 'more than' (comparison), appears in u`per─ai,rw (2 Cor. 12:7) u`per─ekperissou/ (1 Th. 3:10), u`per─evcw (Ph. 4:7), u`per─nika,w (Ro. 8:37), u`per─uyo,w (Ph. 2:9), u`pe,r─frone,w (Ro. 12:3). 'Beyond' is rather common also, as in u`pe,r─akmoj (1 Cor. 7:36), u`per─auxa,nw (2 Th. 1:3), u`per─bai,nw (1 Th. 4:6), u`per─ektei,nw in 2 Cor. 10:14, u`per─evkeinagrk grk(10:16), and this grows into the "perfective" idea as in u`per─hvfanoj (Ro. 1:30), u`per─ u,ywsen (Ph. 2:9), u`per─och, (1 Tim. 2:2), u`per─pleona,zw (1 Tim. 1:14). Cf. English "over-zealous," "over-anxious," etc. The negative notion of 'overlook' appears in u`per─ei/don (Ac. 17:30). The idea of 'defence,' 'in behalf of,' 'bending over to protect,' occurs in u`per─entugca,nw (Ro. 8:26). In the late Greek vernacular u`pe,r fades313 before u`pera,nw and dia, and already in the N. T. the distinction between peri, and u`pe,r is not very marked in some usages, partly due to the affinity in sound and sense.314 Passages where the MSS. vary between u`pe,r and peri, are Mk. 14:24; Jo. 1:30; Ac. 12:5; Ro. 1:8; Gal. 1:4; etc.

3. With Genitive? A word is needed about the cases used with u`pe,r. There is no trouble as to the accusative, but it is a mooted question whether we have the true genitive or the ablative. Brugmann315 views the ,case as genitive without hesitation and cites the Sanskrit use of upari in support of his position. But


on the side of the ablative we note Kuhner-Gerth316 and Monro,317 while Delbruck318 admits that either is possible, though leaning to the genitive. Where such doctors disagree, who shall decide? The Sanskrit can be quoted for both sides. The main argument for the ablative is the comparative idea in u`pe,r which naturally goes with the ablative. On the whole, therefore, it seems to me that the ablative has the best of it with

4. With Ablative. Certainly as between the ablative and the accusative, the ablative is far in the lead. The figures319 are, ablative 126, accusative 19. On the whole, therefore, u`pe,r, drops back along with u`po,. There is no example of the strictly local use of u`pe,r in the N. T. unless oi` baptizo,menoi u`pe.r tw/n nekrw/n (1 Cor. 15:29) be so understood, which is quite unlikely.320 This obscure passage still remains a puzzle to the interpreter, though no difficulty arises on the grammatical side to this or the other senses of u`pe,r. The N. T. examples are thus metaphorical. These uses fall into four divisions.

The most common is the general notion of 'in behalf of,' 'for one's benefit.' This grows easily out of the root-idea of 'over' in the sense of protection or defence. Thus in general with pros─ eu,comai (Mt. 5:44), de,omai (Ac. 8:24), avgwni,zomai (Col. 4:12), kaqi,stamai (Heb. 5:1), prosfe,rw (ib.), etc. The point comes out with special force in instances where kata, is contrasted with u`pe,r as in ei-j u`pe.r tou/ e`no.j fusiou/sqe kata. tou/ e`te,rou (1 Cor. 4:6). Cf. also Mk. 9:40; Ro. 8:31. We must not, however, make the mistake of thinking that u`pe,r of itself literally means 'in behalf of.' It means 'over.'

It is sometimes said that avnti, means literally 'instead' and u`pe,r 'in behalf of.'321 But Winer322 sees more clearly when he says: "In most cases one who acts in behalf of another takes his place." Whether he does or not depends on the nature of the action, not on avnti, or u`pe,r. In the Gorgias of Plato (515 C.) we have u`pe.r sou/ for the notion of 'instead.' Neither does pro, (nor Latin pro) in itself mean 'instead.' In the Alcestis of Euripides, where the point turns on the substitutionary death of Alcestis for her hus-


band, u`pe,r occurs seven times, more than avnti, and pro, together. Cf. Thucydides I, 141 and Xenophon Anab. 7:4, 9 for the substitutionary use of u`pe,r. In the Epistle to Diognetus (p. 84) we note lu,tron u`pe,r h`mw/n, and a few lines further the expression is avntallagh, Paul's combination in 1 Tim. 2:6 is worth noting, avntilutron u`pe.r pa,ntwn, where the notion of substitution is manifest. There are a few other passages where u`pe,r has the resultant notion of 'instead' and only violence to the context can get rid of it. One of these is Gal. 3:13. In verse 10 Paul has said that those under the law were under a curse ( u`po. kata,ran). In verse 13 he carries on the same image. Christ bought us "out from under" the curse ( evk th/j kata,raj tou/ no,mou) of the law by becoming a curse "over" us ( geno,menoj u`pe.r h`mw/n kata,ra). In a word, we were under the curse; Christ took the curse on himself and thus over us (between the suspended curse and us) and thus rescued us out from under the curse. We went free while he was considered accursed (verse 13). It is not a point here as to whether one agrees with Paul's theology or not, but what is his meaning. In this passage u`pe,r has the resultant meaning of 'instead.' The matter calls for this much of discussion because of the central nature of the teaching involved. In Jo. 11:50 we find another passage where u`pe,r is explained as meaning substitution, i[na ei-j a;nqrwpoj avpoqa,nh| u`pe.r tou/ laou/ kai. mh. o[lon to. e;qnoj avpo,lhtai. Indeed Abbott323 thinks that "in almost all the Johannine instances it refers to the death of one for the many." In Philemon 13, <, u`pe.r sou/ moi diakonh|/, the more obvious notion is 'instead.' One may note e;graya u`pe.r auvtou/ mh. ivdo,toj gra,mmata, P. Oxy. 275 (A.D. 66), where the meaning is obviously 'instead of him since he does not know letters.' Deissmann (Light, p. 152 f.) finds it thus ( e;grayen u`pe.r auvtou/) in an ostracon from Thebes, as in many others, and takes u`pe,r to mean 'for' or 'as representative of,' and adds that it "is not without bearing on the question of u`pe,r in the N. T." Cf. e;graya u`[ pe.r auvt] wu/ avgramma,tou, B.U. 664 (i/A.D.). In the papyri and the ostraca u`pe,r often bore the sense of 'instead of.' In 2 Cor. 5:15 the notion of substitution must be understood because of Paul's use of a;ra oi` pa,ntej avpe,qanon as the conclusion324 from ei-j u`pe.r pa,ntwn avpe,qanen. There remain a


Addenda 3rd ed.

number of passages where the notion of substitution is perfectly natural from the nature of the case. But in these passages one may stop in translation with 'in behalf of' if he wishes. But there is no inherent objection in u`pe,r itself to its conveying the notion of 'instead' as a resultant idea. In fact it is per se as natural as with avnti,. In the light of the above one finds little difficulty with passages like Ro. 5:6 f.; 8:32; Gal. 2:20; Jo. 10: 11, 15; Heb. 2:9; Tit. 2:14, etc. In Mk. 10:45 we have lu,tron avnti. pollw/n and in 14:24 to. ai-ma mou- to. evkcunno,menon u`pe.r pollw/n. But one may argue from 1 Jo. 3:16 that u`pe,r in case of death does not necessarily involve substitution. Surely the very object of such death is to save life.

The two other uses of u`pe,r may be briefly treated. Sometimes the resultant notion may be merely 'for the sake of,' as in u`pe,r th/j do,xhj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 11:4), u`pe.r avlhqei,aj qeou/ (Ro. 15:8), u`pe.r tou/ ovno,matoj (Ac. 5:41), u`pe.r Cristou/ (Ph. 1:29), etc. This is natural in relations of intimate love.

A more general idea is that of 'about' or 'concerning.' Here u`pe,r encroaches on the province of peri,. Cf. 2 Cor. 8:23, u`pe.r Ti,tou, 2 Th. 2:1, u`pe.r thj parousi,aj tou/ kuri,ou. Perhaps 1 Cor. 15:29 comes in here also. Moulton325 finds commercial accounts in the papyri, scores of them, with u`pe,r in the sense of 'to.' We see the free use ('concerning') with verbs like kauca,omai (2 Cor. 7:14), frone,w (Ph. 1:7), kra,zw (Ro. 9:27), evrwta,w (2 Th. 2:1), etc. The Latin super is in line with this idiom also. Cf. Jo. 1: 30, u`pe.r ou- evgw. ei=pon. In 1 Cor. 10:30, ti, blasfhmou/mai u`pe.r ou- evgw. euvcaristw|/, the preposition suits antecedent as well as relative. In 2 Cor. 1:6 and Ph. 2:13 u`pe,r suggests the object at which one is aiming. Cf. u`pe.r w-n hvboulo,meqa avpesta,lkamen, P. Goodspeed 4 (ii/B.c.); u`pe.r ou- le,gwi, P. Oxy. 37 (A.D. 49); u`pe.r avrabw/noj, P. Grenf. ii. 67 (A.D. 237), 'by way of earnest-money.'

5. The Accusative with u`pe,r calls for little remark. The literal local use of u`pe,r, occurs in D in Heb. 9:5, u`pe.r d v auvth,n, "an unparalleled use,"326 in the sense of 'above,' the other MSS. having u`pera,nw. The accusative with u`pe,r has the metaphorical sense of 'above' or 'over,' as in ouvk evstin maqhth/j u`pe.r dou/lon (Mt. 10:24). Cf. also to. o;noma to. u`pe.r pa/n o;noma (Ph. 2:9), kefalh.n u`pe.r pa,nta (Eph. 1:22), ouvke,ti w`j dou/lon avlla. u`pe.r dou/lon (Phil. 1:16). This notion easily gets into that of 'beyond' in harmony with the accusative case. Thus u`pe.r aa} ge,graptai (1 Cor. 4:6), peira─ sqh/nai u`pe.r oa} du,nasqe (1 Cor. 10:13). Cf. u`pe.r du,namin (2 Cor. 1:8),


u`pe.r pollou,j (Gal. 1:14), u`pe.r th.n lampro,thta (Ac. 26:13). Classical Greek only shows the beginning of the use of u`pe,r with comparatives,327 but the N. T. has several instances. Thus the LXX often uses it with comparatives, partly because the Hebrew had no special form for the comparative degree.328 But the koinh, shows the idiom. So we find fronimw,teroi u`pe.r tou.j ui`ou,j (Lu. 16:8), tomw,teroj u`pe.r pa/san ma,cairan (Heb. 4:12). In Jo. 12:43 W. H. read h;per in text and u`pe,r in margin after ma/llon. But u`pe,r has the comparative sense of 'more than' after verbs, as o` filw/n pate,ra h' mhte,ra u`pe.r evme, (Mt. 10:37). In the LXX the positive adjective occurs with u`pe,r as e;ndoxoj u`pe.r tou.j avdelfou,j (1 Chron. 4:9). In Ro. 12:3, mh. u`perfronei/n par v oa} dei/ fronei/n, note the conjunction of u`pe,r and para,. Moulton (Prol., p. 237) cites u`pe.r e`auto.n fronei/n, T.P. 8 (ii/B.C.). Blass329 doubts whether u`perli,an├ u`perekperissou/ can be properly regarded as compounds. He would separate u`pe,r as an adverb, u`pe,r li,an. But the modern editors are against him. It has disappeared in modern Greek vernacular before gi,a (Thumb, Handb., p. 105).

(q) `Upo,. Little is called for by way of etymology since u`po, is the positive of u`pe,r. Cf. the Sanskrit upa, Latin sub, Gothic uf, possibly also German auf, English up, ab-ove. The form u`po, is of unknown case, but the Elean dialect330 has uvpa-, and Homer331 has also u`pai, (dative.)

1. The Original Meaning.332 This was probably 'upwards' or 'from under.' Unlike kata,├ u`po, never means 'downwards.' As a matter of fact, 'up' and 'under' are merely relative terms. The very English word up is probably u`po,. Cf. u[yi 'aloft,' u[p─tioj 'facing upwards,' u[p─atoj 'uppermost,' u[yistoj. The meaning of under or beneath is common in the N. T., as u`po. to.n mo,dion (Mt. 5:15).

2. In Composition. Here u`po, appears simply with the notion of 'under' as in u`po─ka,tw (Mk. 7:28), u`po─wpia,zw (1 Cor. 9:27), u`po─ grammo,j (1 Pet. 2:21), u`po─po,dion (Mt. 5:35), u`po─de,w (Mk. 6:9). Cf. also u`po,─deigma (Jo. 13:15), u`po─zu,gion (Mt. 21:5). In u`po,─ krisij (Mt. 23:28), u`po─krith/j (Mt. 6:2) the notion of an actor under a mask lies behind the resultant idea. The idea of hospitality (under one's roof) is natural with u`po─de,comai, (Lu. 10: 38), u`po─lamba,nw (3 Jo. 1:8). In Ro. 16:4 u`po─ti,qhmi has the idea of 'put under,' as u`po─zw,nnumi (Ac. 27:17), 'undergird.' In u`po─


labw.n ei=pen, (Lu. 10:30) the notion of interrupting or following a speech comes from the idea of 'up' in u`po,, taking up the talk, etc. The "perfective" idea appears in u`po─lei,pw (Ro. 11:3), 'leave behind or over.' So with u`po─tre,cw (Ac. 27:16), 'run under or past.' Cf. u`po─ple,w (Ac. 27: 4, 7), 'sail close by.' But in u`po─pne,w (Ac. 27:13) the preposition minimizes the force of the verb, blow softly.' Cf. our suspicion, the French soupcon. So with underestimate. In u`po─ba,llw (Ac. 6:11) the notion of suggestion has an evil turn, but in u`po─mimnh,skw (Jo. 14:26) there is no such colour. The idea of subjection (note how these ideas appear in English usage all along) occurs in u`p─akou,w (Ph. 2:12), u`p─ei,kw (Heb. 13:17), etc. In u`p─anta,w (Mt. 8:28) the special force of u`po, has rather disappeared. Cf. our vulgar "meet up" with one. So u`p─enanti,oj (Col. 2:14).

3. The Cases Once Used with u`po,. The locative was originally very common with u`po,, as in Homer, even with verbs of motion.333 As a matter of fact, however, in the historical writers the locative and accusative with u`po, are very rare as compared with the ablative,334 though Appian and Herodian use the locative more than the accusative.335 But the locative retreated336 before the accusative with u`po, till in the N. T. and the modern Greek it has disappeared. In the N. T.337 the accusative shows 50 examples and the ablative 165, but in the vernacular of the Byzantine Greek the accusative with u`po, disappears before avpoka,tw and u`poka,tw.338 In the modern Greek vernacular avpo, has displaced u`po, (Thumb, Handb., p. 102). Brugmann339 even thinks that u`po, once occurred with the instrumental case, and he is clear that the ablative, as well as the genitive, was found with it. Delbruck340 agrees to both ablative and genitive. Thus originally u`po, occurred with five cases (loc., instr., acc., abl., gen.). In the N. T. we meet only the accusative and ablative. No example of the pure genitive with u`po, occurs in the N. T. In Jo. 1:50 we find ei=do,n se u`poka,tw th/j sukh/j, but not u`po,. So also in some other N. T. passages where a genitive with u`po, might have been used. Cf. Mk. 7:28; Lu. 8:16, etc. The accusative with u`po,, as in o;nta u`po. thn sukh/n (Jo. 1:48), supplants


the genitive also in the N. T. The use of u`po, for agency and cause is ablative like the Latin usage with ab (a).

4. With the Accusative. It is considered by Winer341 to be the original use of u`po,. This indeed would accord with the notion of 'upwards,' 'up from under.' But in the N. T., as in the later Greek, the accusative occurs with the notion of rest (cf. eivj).342 The accusative in the N. T. takes the place of the local use of u`po, with locative and genitive.343 Thus we find (motion) tiqe,asin auvto.n u`po. to.n mo,dion (Mt. 5:15), but also (rest) o;nta u`po. th.n sukh/n (Jo. 1:48). Other examples with verbs of rest are u`po. th.n sikia.n kataskhnoi/n (Mk. 4:32), u`po. to.n ouvrano,n (Ac. 4:12), with eivmi,, we have u`po. ta. cei,lh (Ro. 3:13), u`po. no,mon (Ro. 6:14 f.), u`po. paidagwgo,n (Gal. 3:25); etc. These examples are as freely used as those like i[na mou u`po. th.n ste,ghn eivse,lqh|j (Mt. 8:8). The examples are both local as with evpisuna,gw (Lu. 13:34) and figurative as with tapeino,w (1 Pet. 5:6). Cf. Ac. 4:12 u`po. to.n ouvrano,n with u`po. Di,a Gh/n [Hlion evpi. lu,troij P. Oxy. 48, 49, 722 (A.D. 86, 100, 91). Cf. Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 332. Only one instance of the use of u`po, with time appears in the N. T., u`po. to.n o;rqron (Ac. 5:21), where it has the notion of 'about' (or 'close upon') dawn. John uses u`po, with the accusative only once344 (Jo. 1:48) and with the ablative only five times (Jo. 14:21; 3 Jo. 1:12 bis; Rev. 6:8, 13), an incidental argument, for unity of authorship.

5. With the Ablative. In the sense of efficient cause or agent it was the commonest classical usage and it continues so in the N. T.345 The local and temporal uses do not occur, but only the metaphorical. These occur after passive or neuter verbs. Abbott346 thinks that John preferred to represent the agent as performing the act and so avoided u`po,. The ancient Greek indeed used u`po, chiefly in this sense of agent. The use of avpoqnh,skw u`po, as the correlative of avpoktei,nei tij is well known.347 In the N. T. once (Rev. 6:8) u`po, actually occurs with the active of avpotei,nw $avpoktei/nai e`n r`omfai,a|── kai. u`po. tw/n qhri,wn. This is probably due to the desire to distinguish between the living agent and the lifeless causes preceding.348 But the N. T. has neuter verbs with u`po,, like avpo,llumai (1 Cor. 10:9), lamba,nw (2 Cor. 11:24), pa,scw (Mk. 5:26), u`pome,nw $Heb. 12:3). In the case of passive verbs the usage follows the traditional lines. Cf. Mt. 4:1 for two examples, avnh,cqh u`po. tou/ pneu,─


matoj├ peirasqh/nai u`po. tou/ diabo,lou. It is to be noted that in Lu. 9:8 u`po, is not repeated with a;llwn. The bulk of the N. T. instances of u`po, occur of personal agency like evbapti,zonto u`p v auvtou/, (Mt. 3:6), diespa,sqai uvp v auvtou/ (Mk. 5:4), etc. Sometimes, when dia, is added to u`po,├ a distinction is made between the intermediate and the mediate agent, as in to. r`hqe.n u`po. kuri,ou dia. tou/ profh,tou (Mt. 1:22). Cf. 2:15. There is nothing peculiar about the use of u`po, in 2 Pet. 1:17, fwnh/j evnecqei,shj u`po. th/j megaloprepou/j do,xhj.349 But u`po, is not the only way of expressing the agent. Besides dia, for the indirect agent avpo, is the most common350 substitute for u`po,, though and para, both are found for the notion of agency. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 116) speaks of aro as "die eigentlich pradestinierte Partikel." The instrumental case and evn and the locative must also be recalled. But dia,, with the accusative (motive or cause) must not be confounded with this idea. Cf. Lu. 21:17 for u`po, with ablative and dia, with the accusative. The prepositions will richly repay one's study, and often the whole point of a sentence turns on the prepositions. In Lu. 5:19 eight prepositions occur, counting e;mprosqen, and many such passages are found as Gal. 2: 1, 2. Cf. Joy, On the Syntax of Some Prepositions in the Greek Dialects (1904).

VIII. The "Adverbial" Prepositions. The list in the N. T. of those prepositions which do not occur in composition with verbs is considerable. As already remarked in the beginning of this chapter, what are called "proper" prepositions were originally adverbs, fixed case-forms which came to be used with nouns and in composition with verbs. We have followed the varied history of this most interesting group of words. Homer351 in particular used most of them at times merely adverbially. In Homer the "regular" prepositions often retain this adverbial force, as para. de,├ and this separation from a verb is no longer considered a surgical operation" (tmesis). Cf. Seymour, Homeric Language and Verse, 25, 78. Some of these prepositions gradually disappeared, but the total use of prepositions greatly increased. This increase was due to the wider use of the remaining prepositions and the increasing use of so-called " improper" prepositions, adverbs with cases that never came to be used in composition with verbs. The Sanskrit352 had no proper class of prepositions, but a number of


adverbs which were sometimes used with cases. These adverbial prepositions varied constantly in the history of the Greek. Some of them, like a;neu├ evggu,j├ e[neka, come right on down from Homer Others drop by the way while each age sees a new crop coming on. But in the late vernacular a number of these prepositional adverbs are followed by the preposition353 before the case, like avpoka,tw avpo,) In the modern Greek the improper prepositions are used either with the genitive (only with enclitic pronoun) or by the addition of vj├ avpo,├ me, with the accusative. They are quite new formations, but made from ancient Greek material (Thumb, Handb., p. 107). From our point of view any adverb that occurs with a case may be regarded as a prepositional adverb,354 like avxi,wj tou/ euvageli,ou (Ph. 1:27). Some of these prepositional adverbs, as already shown, occur both as adverbs, as a[ma kai. evlipi,zwn (Ac. 24:26), and as prepositions, as a[ma auvtoi/j (Mt. 13:29), while others appear only as prepositions with cases, as a;neu tou/ patro,j (Mt. 10:29). But it is not necessary to make a separate list on this basis. Blass,355 who treats these words very scantily, is right in saying that no hard and fast line can be drawn between adverb and preposition here. The LXX shows some adverbial prepositions which do not occur in the N. T.356 Thus avpa,nwqen, (Judges 16:20) may be compared with evpa,nwqen (classical also), and u`poka,twqen (Dent. 9:14), which in ancient Greek is only an adverb. Simcox357 carefully explains evnw,pion, so common in the LXX, as a translation and imitation of yney[eB., but even Conybeare and Stock358 surrender this word as not a Hebraism before Deissmann's proof.359 The N. T., like the koinh, in general, makes free use of these prepositional adverbs. I have given the list in my Short Grammar of the Greek New Testament (3 ed., 1912, p. 116 f.), forty-two in all, more than twice as many as the "regular" prepositions.360 vAxi,wj noted above is not included. Cf. a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7). Conybeare and Stock (p. 87) even count evco,mena pe,traj (Ps. 140:6), but surely that is going too far. Cf. ta. krei,ssona kai. evco,mena swthri,aj (Heb. 6:9). There is more excuse for claiming evsw,teron th/j lolumbh,qraj (Is.


22:11). It will pay us to take up briefly these adverbial prepositions. All of them use the genitive or the ablative case except a[ma (instrumental) and evggu,j (dative).

1. [Ama. It is probably in the instrumental case itself. Brugmann361 connects the word with the root of ei-j├ me,a├ e[n as seen in a[─pax├ a`─plou/j, Latin semel, Sanskrit sama, English same. Cf. also o`mou/├ e`─kato,n. It occurs in Homer with the associative-instrumental case.362 The word occurs in the N. T. only ten times and usually as adverb, either merely with the verb as in Ro. 3:12, LX X, or with de. kai, (1 Tim. 5:13; Phil. 1:22). Cf. kai, in Col. 4:3. Three of the examples are with participles (Col. 4:3 above and Ac. 24:26; 27:40). Twice we find a[ma su,n with the instrumental, a sort of double preposition after the manner of the later Greek (1 Th. 4:17; 5:10) and once a[ma prwi, with adverb (Mt. 20:1). The use of a[ma su,n Thayer explains by taking a[ma as an adverb with the verb. Only once does it occur as a simple preposition with the instrumental, a[ma auvtoi/j (Mt. 13:29). For the later revival of a[ma and use like meta, see Jannaris.363 In 2 Esdr. 17:3 sxo is translated by a[ma. In the Acta Nerei a[ma is used only with the genitive (Radermacher, N. T. Or., p. 1.19).

2. ;Aneu. It is of uncertain etymology.364 Homer has another form, a;neuen, the Eleatic a;neu─j, the Epidaurian a;neu─n, the Megarian a;nij. There is, however, no doubt as to the meaning, 'without' or 'besides,' and the case used is the ablative. There are only three examples in the N. T., not counting Mk. 13:2, where W. H. and Nestle reject a;neu ceirw/n. Two of these (1 Pet. 3:1; 4:9) occur with abstract words, and one (Mt. 10:29) with tou/ patro,j. The word is rare in the late Greek, especially with a case.365

3. ;Antikruj (some editors avntikru,). It is a compound form that originally meant 'straight on,' but in later Greek occurs in the Sense of 'opposite,' 'face to face.' It was common in the ancient Greek as adverb of place or as preposition. In the N. T. we find it only once (Ac. 20:15) and the case used is the genitive, a;ntikruj Ci,ou. It occurs in modern Greek vernacular (Thumb, Handb., p. 109).

4. vAnti,pera ( avnti─pe,ran, Polybius, etc.). It is just avnti, and pe,ran, combined. Thucydides uses avntipe,raj as adverbial preposition. Only one example occurs in the N. T. (Lu. 8:26), avnti,pera th.j


Galilai,aj. The case is open to dispute, since avnti, comes with the genitive and pe,ran with the ablative. 'Over against' would be genitive, 'on the other side of' would be ablative. Either will make sense in Lu. 8:26. Probably genitive is the case here.

5. vApe,nanti. It is a triple compound of avpo,├ evn├ avnti,. A number of adverbial prepositions were formed on avnti, as a base. In the N. T. we find also e;nanti├ evnanti,on├ kate,nanti. These are late, except evnanti,on (from Homer on. Cf. a;nat├ e;n─anta). Polybius uses avpe,nanti with the genitive, and it is common with this case in the LXX366 (cf. Gen. 3:24). In the N. T. it occurs only six times, and in two of these (Mt. 27:24; Mk. 12:41) W. H. put kate,nanti in the text and avpe,nanti in the marg. Of the remaining four examples two (Ac. 3:16; Ro. 3:18) have the sense merely of 'before,' 'in the sight or presence of.' One (Mt. 27:61) has the notion of 'opposite' or 'over against,' while the fourth (Ac. 17:7) takes on a hostile idea; 'against.' These resultant ideas all come naturally out of the threefold combination. The other compounds with avnti, will be noted later.

6. ;Ater. This word is of unknown origin, but compare Old Saxon sundir, Old High German suntar, Sanskrit sanular. It is common in Homer and the poets generally. Later prose uses it. But it occurs only once in the LXX (2 Macc. 12:15) and twice in the N. T. (Lu. 22:6, 35). The case is clearly the ablative, and the meaning is 'without.' One example, a;ter o;clou, is with persons and the other, a;ter ballanti,ou, is with a thing.

7. ;Acri$j%. It is related to me,cri,$j% whatever its origin. Cf. usque in Latin and a;cri eivj like usque ad. As a mere adverb it no longer occurs in the N. T., but it is common both as a preposition and as a conjunction. In the form a;cri ou- (Ac. 7:18) and a;cri h-j h`me,raj (Mt. 24:38) it is both preposition and conjunction (resultant temporal phrase). Leaving out these examples, a;cri, is found 30 times in the N. T. (W. H. text) and some MSS. read a;cri in Ac. 1:22 and 20:4, while in Mt. 13:30 the MSS. vary between a;cri├ me,cri and e[wj (W. H.). The meaning is 'up to' and the case used is the genitive. It occurs with place (Ac. 13:6), persons (Ac. 11:5), time (Ac. 13:11) and abstract ideas (Ac. 22:4, 22). It occurs mainly in Acts, Paul's writings and Revelation. Cf. its use with the adverb a;cri tou/ nu/n (Ro. 8:22).

8. vEggu,j. It is a mere adverb (see comp. evggu,teron, superl. e;ggista) possibly related to evg─gu,n) It is common in Homer both as adverb and with the genitive. The late Greek added the true


dative and all three uses (adverb, gen., dat.) occur in the N. T. There are nineteen examples of the pure adverb in the N. T. (cf. Mt. 24:32), one the comparative (Ro. 13:11) and the superlative in some MSS. in Mk. 6:36. There are eight examples of the genitive with evggu,j (cf. Jo. 11:54). Only four times does evggu,j have the dative (Ac. 9:38; 27:8), counting the indeclinable vIerousalh,m (Lu. 19:11; Ac. 1:12), in which case Luke (4) would have the dative uniformly and John (6) and Heb. (2) the genitive (H. Scott). Once (Heb. 6 : 8) it is postpositive.

9. vEkto,j. It is a combination of evk and the adverbial ending - toj with which may be compared Latin coelitus.367 The case used with it is, of course, the ablative and it is just a fuller expression of evk, meaning 'without.' In the N. T. we find it only eight times, four of these with the ablative, as in 1 Cor. 6:18 (cf. with the relative in Ac. 26:22). Note position of evkto.j le,gwn w-n in Ac. 26:22. Three times we have evkto.j eiv mh, (1 Cor. 14:5; 15:2; 1 Tim. 5:19), which is a pleonasm due first to the use of evkto.j eiv. Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 118) cites an inscription of Mopsuestia for "this jumbled phrase," peculiarly apropos since Paul was Cilician, evkto.j eiv mh. [ ev] a.n Ma,gna mo,nh qe[ lh,] sh|. Once (Mt. 23:26) evkto,j is probably a mere adverb used as a substantive, though even here it may be regarded as a preposition.

10. ;Emprosqen. This is merely evn and pro,sqen which adverb used the ablative368 when it had a case. In the N. T. it is still four times a mere adverb of place, as in Rev. 4:6, but it is usually a preposition with the ablative. It occurs with words of place, as in Mt. 5:24, with persons (Mt. 5:16), and sometimes with the notion of rank (Jo. 1:15). As a preposition it appears 44 times in the N. T.

11. ;Enanti. (Cf. e;nanta in Homer.) It is one of the avnti, compounds and is found" with the genitive case when it has a case. It is very common in the LXX even after Swete369 has properly replaced it often by evnanti,on. The old Greek did not use it. In the N. T., W. H. accept it in Lu. 1:8 and Ac. 8:21 (though some MSS. in both places read evnanti,ow) and reject it in Ac. 7:10. It is not found in the N. T. as a mere adverb.

12. vEnanti,on. This is, of course, merely the neuter singular of evnanti,oj (cf. Mk. 6:48), and is common in the older Greek as in the LXX. For the papyri see evnanti,on avndrw/n triw/n P. Eleph. 1


(B.C. 311). In the N. T. it does not occur as a mere adverb, but we find it five times as a preposition with the genitive (cf. Lu. 1:6), all with persons (cf. Latin coram).

13. [Eneka. It occurs in three forms in the N. T., either e[neka. (Lu. 6:22), e[neken grk(9:24) or ei[nekengrk grk(18:29), but always as a preposition ('for the sake of'), never as mere adverb. These variations existed in the earlier Greek also. In the koinh,, e[neken is the more usual (Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 35). Only twice, however, is it postpositive in the N. T., and this after the interrogative (Ac. 19: 32) or the relative (Lu. 4:18, LXX). The case used is the genitive. The etymology is quite uncertain, but the form ei[neken is Ionic and partially in the koinh, supersedes the Attic.370 The preposition occurs 26 times in the N. T. Once (2 Cor. 7:12) we find it used with tou/ and the infinitive. Cf. e[neken and dia,. Lu. 21:12, 17.

14. vEnto,j. It is like the Latin in-tus (opposite of evkto,j) and has the same ending - toj. It means 'within' and as a preposition is used with the genitive. The word occurs only twice in the N. T., once as an adverb with the article (Mt. 23:26), though even this may be regarded as a preposition with the article and the genitive (cf. evkto,j, Mt. 23:26), and once as a preposition (Lu. 17:21) with the genitive. Thayer cites two passages from Xenophon where evnto,j may have the idea of 'among' and claims that this is the idea in Lu. 17:21, because of the context. But the meaning in Xenophon is disputed and Liddell and Scott give only 'within' for evnto,j. Besides, in one of the new Logia371 of Jesus we have a similar saying in a context that makes 'within' necessary and would seem to settle the point about the passage in. Luke: h` basilei,a tw/n ouvran/wn evnto.j u`mw/n evsti,n)

15. vEnw,pion. This is the neuter singular of the adjective evnw,pioj which (Thayer) is from the phrase evn wvpi, $o` evn wvpi. w;n% Homer uses ta. evnw,pia, but no example of the adverb or preposition evnw,pion occurs before the time of the LXX. Deissmann372 thinks it possible, but not probable, that it was first used in this sense as a translation of the Hebrew ynep.oli. A papyrus of the Thebaid from the second or third century B.C. has it also. As a preposition it is very common373 in the LXX and in the N. T. also. Curiously enough it does not occur in Matthew and Mark, though very


common in Luke's writings and Revelation. The Gospel of John has only one example and the Johannine Epistles two. Cf. also katenw,pion. In the N. T., evnw,pion is always a preposition with the genitive and it occurs 92 times. It appears sometimes with place (Rev. 4:10), but usually with persons (Lu. 5:25; 12:9 bis), and especially of God God(1:15). Sometimes the notion is that of judgment, as in 1 Tim. 2:3. See Wikenhauser, vEnw,pioj - evnw,pion- katenw,pion (Bibl. Z., 1910, pp. 263-270).

16. ;Exw. It is an adverb from evx (cf. e;sw, evj) and is probably in the ablative case like ou;tw$j%. As adverb and preposition it is common in the N. T. (16 times) as in the older Greek. It is found as preposition only with the ablative and that 19 times. It means 'outside' or 'without' and is used in the N. T. only with places, like e;xw th/j oivki,aj (Mt. 10:14). John's Gospel has it 13 times, first Ep. 1, Rev. 2; ; Paul has it 5, and only as adverb.

17. ;Exwqen. It is the same word plus the suffix --- qen, 'from without,' and was common in the poets (cf. e;swqen). The case used is the ablative. In the N. T. it is much less frequent (13 times) both as adverb and preposition than e;xw. Indeed, if to. e;xwqen tou/ pothri,ou (Mt. 23:25; Lu. 11:39) be not considered the prepositional usage, there would be only three left (Mk. 7:15; Rev. 11:2; 14:20). There is the same ambiguity in the two passages above that was noted about evkto,j and evnto,j (Mt. 23:26 = Lu. 11:40). Cf. 547 vi.

18. vEp─a,nw. This is just the preposition evpi, and the adverb a;nw. It occurs in Attic Greek both as adverb and as preposition. As an adverb it is rare in the N. T. (4 times), once with the relative adverb ou- (Mt. 2:9), once with a numeral with no effect on the case (1 Cor. 15:6; cf. Mk. 14:5 where the case may arise from praqh/nai), once where a pronoun is really implied (Lu. 11:44). As a preposition we find it fifteen times in the N. T. Cf. evpa,nw o;rouj (Mt. 5:14) where it has the somewhat weakened374 sense of 'upon' rather than 'above.' The case used is the genitive. Modern Greek vernacular uses it as ( av) pa,nw vj (Thumb, Handbook, p. 109).

19. vEpe,keina. It is merely evpi, and evkei/na. Thayer suggests the ellipsis of me,rh. It occurs in the Attic Greek both as adverb and as preposition. In the N. T. it appears only once in a quotation from Amos 5:27 and as a preposition with the ablative in the sense of 'beyond' (Ac. 7:43. Cf. u`pere,keina).

20. ;Esw. It is the adverb of evj (cf. e;xw) and is in the ablative


Addenda 3rd ed.

Addenda 3rd ed.

case. The form ei;sw $eivj% does not occur in the N. T. nor in the LXX. Indeed the word e;sw is found only nine times in the N. T. and only one, e;sw th/j auvtlh/j (Mk. 15:16), is the prepositional use. The case used with it is the genitive. This, however, is a genuine example, while e;swqen (12 times) is never a preposition in the N. T., unless in Lu. 11:39, to. e;swqen u`mw/n, (see p. 642). Cf. evsw,teron th/j kolumbh,qraj (Is. 22:11).

21. [Ewj. In Homer it is both demonstrative and relative adverb (from ei-oj├ ei[wj).375 Cf. w[j and w`j. The use of e[wj as a preposition appears in Demosthenes, Aristotle, Polybius, etc. In Northern England and Scotland "while" is used as "till" (Liddell and Scott) and illustrates how e [wj as conjunction is used in the N. T. It is more common in the N. T. as preposition than conjunction, if the phrases e[wj ou-├ e[wj o[tou be treated as conjunctions, as indeed they are, though technically composed of the preposition e[wj with the genitive of the relative. It is in the later Greek mainly, therefore, that it appears as a preposition (cf. LXX and papyri). The case used with it is the genitive (but very late Greek shows accusative sometimes), and it is found 86 times in the N. T. and 51 of the examples are in the Synoptic Gospels. The preposition is used with places, like e[wj a|[dou (Mt. 11:23), e[wj ouvranou/ (Lu. 10:15), e[wj vAntiocei,aj (Ac. 11:22); with persons, like e[wj auvtou/ (Lu. 4:42); with expressions of time, like e[wj th/j sh,meron (Mt. 27:8), e[wj w[raj evna,thjgrk grk(27:45); with abstract expressions, like e[wj qana,tou (Mt. 26:38); with notion of measure, like e[wj h`mi,souj (Mk. 6:23). See Rom. 3:12 e[wj e`no,j (LXX). Cf. avpo,──e[wj in Mt. 1:17; 20:8; 27:51. Seventeen of the examples are uses of e[wj with an adverb, like e[wj ka,tw (Mt. 27:51), e[wj a;rti (Jo. 2:10), while seven instances of e[wj po,te occur, like Mt. 17:17. Four times e[wj occurs with another preposition, like e[wj pro,j (Lu. 24:50), e[wj evpi, (Ac. 17:14), e[wj e;xwgrk grk(21:5). In Mk. 14:54 note e[wj e;sw eivj. Once (cf. Demosthenes, Aristotle, LXX) we find it with the article and the infinitive e[wj tou/ evlqei/n (Ac. 8: 40). In e[wj te,louj (2 Cor. 1:13), the phrase is almost adverbial. In D (Ac. 19:26), e[wj vEfe,sou, Blass376 finds the notion of 'within.' In the LXX 2 [Heb.] Esdr. 6:20, e[wj ei-j pa,ntej, and 1 Chron. 5: 10 A, e[wj pa,ntej, Deissmann (B. S p. 139) sees a Hebraism.

22. Kate,nanti. It is not found in the older Greek, but appears in the LXX and the N. T. It is especially frequent in the Book of Sirach.377 But in poetry we find kate,nanta and the word is merely


Addenda 2nd ed.

the threefold preposition kata,├ evn├ avnti,. The MSS. in the N. T. often vary378 between kate,nanti and avpe,nanti as in Mt. 21:2; 27:24; Ac. 3:16, etc. In Mt. 27:24 and Mk. 12:41 W. H. put avpe,nant in the margin. Katenanti,on, found in Hesiod and Herodotus, does not occur in the N. T. There are only nine examples of kate,nanti, in the N. T. One of these (Lu. 19:30) is merely adverbial, while the rest are prepositional. The idea is 'before,' 'over against,' 'in the presence of,' and the case used with it is the genitive. It occurs with place (Mk. 13:3) and persons (Mt. 27:24). Cf. kate,nanti qeou/ evn Cristw|/ (2 Cor. 2:17; 12:19) and the attraction of relative ( w|-) in the dative to the genitive case of qeou/, the incorporated antecedent (Ro. 4:17).

23. Katenw,pion. It is just evnw,pion (see above) and kata,. Homer uses kate,nwpa with the genitive, but katenw,pion appears in the LXX. The N. T. shows only three examples (cf. the frequency of evnw,pion%├ two with persons (Eph. 1:4; Col. 1:22), one with abstract word (Ju. 24). The case used is the genitive and the word means 'in the presence of.'

24. Kuklo,qen. It is an old adverb in - qen, that occasionally occurs in the LXX (Jer. 17:26) as a preposition. In the N. T. it appears as a preposition twice with the genitive qro,nou (Rev. 4: 3 f.) and once as an adverb adverb(4:8).

25. Ku,klw| is, of course, merely an adverb in the instrumental case and is common from Homer down. In the LXX it is extremely frequent and occasionally as a preposition with the genitive (Is. 6:2). In the N. T. it is merely an adverb except with tou/ qro,nou (Rev. 4:6; 5:11; 7:11). Cf. ku,klw| me,cri (Ro. 15:19).

26. Me,son. As a preposition it occurs in Herodotus 7, 170, but was not common. It appears in the late Greek writers and the papyri.379 Many adverbial phrases were made from me,son which were used as prepositions, some of which survive in the N. T., like avna. me,son├ dia. me,sou $─on%├ eivj me,son (and as eivj to. me,son%├ evn me,sw| (and evn tw|/ me,sw|%├ evk me,sou├ kata. me,son) But these will be discussed later. The adjective me,soj occurs with the genitive (Lu. 22:55; Jo. 1:26), so that it is not strange to find the adverb with the genitive as in Ph. 2:15, me,son genea/j. In Mt. 14:24 W. H. put me,son in the margin and D reads me,son in Lu. 8:7; 10:3. See Hatzidakis, Einl., p. 214, for examples. Cf. Homeric messhgu,j. The modern Greek vernacular uses me,sa vj├ me,s v avpo, (Thumb, Handbook, p. 108).


27. Metaxu,. Like so many of the adverbial prepositions, it is a compound ( meta,├ xu,n). As a mere adverb, we meet it only twice in the N. T., once in the sense of 'meanwhile' (Jo. 4:31), once in the sense of 'afterwards' (Ac. 13:42), as commonly in the later Greek.380 Cf. twofold use of meta,. As a preposition it occurs seven times in the N. T., with places (Mt. 23:35), persons (Mt. 18:15) and in abstract relations (Ro. 2:15). A good example occurs in Ac. 15:9 where both dia, and metaxu, appear.

28. Me,cri. Like a;cri and e[wj, it is both preposition and conjunction as well as originally adverb. No example of the mere adverb is found in the N. T., as it was rare in the older Greek. The form is akin to a;cri and the sense is the same. If me,crij ou- be treated as a conjunction (cf. a;cri ou-├ e[wj ou-), the preposition with the genitive appears fifteen times with another doubtful reading in Mt. 13:30. It is used with places (Ro. 15:19), persons (Lu. 16:16), time (Ac. 10:30), abstract expressions (Ph. 2:8). Like a;cri, the notion of 'measure' or ' degree' is sometimes present (Heb. 12:4).

29. ;Opisqen. It is of uncertain etymology, perhaps related to It occurs in Homer both as adverb and as preposition. In the N. T. we find it five times as adverb and twice as preposition, and some MSS. have it in Rev. 1:10. The case used with it is the ablative. So o;pisqen tou/ vIhsou/ (Lu. 23:26). It means 'from behind' and so 'after' (Mt. 15:23). It is the opposite of e;mprosqen.

30. vOpi,sw. It is the opposite of pro,sw (cf. po,rrw) and is an ablative adverb from o;pij (as above). It is very common in the older Greek as an adverb, but it is extremely common iris the LXX as a preposition.381 In the N. T. ovpi,sw occurs alone as an adverb only twice (Mt. 24:18; Lu. 7:38), though we meet ta. ovpi,sw seven times as in Mk. 13:16. But as a preposition we find it 26 times, mostly with persons, as in the common ovpi,sw mou (Mt. 3:11). It is used with the ablative, 'behind.' Cf. deu/te ovpi,sw mou in Mt. 4:19.

31. vOye,) This word seems to be another variation of o;pij and occurs in the ancient Greek, both as an adverb and as a preposition with the genitive (Thuc. 4, 93) with the sense of 'late on.' But Philostratus shows examples where ovye, with the ablative has the sense of 'after,' like ovye. tou,twn='after these things.'382 Philostratus uses it also in the sense of 'late on.' The papyri use it in the sense of ' late on' with the genitive.383 So ovye. th/j w[raj P. Par.


37 (ii/B.C.). Hence in Mt. 28:1, ovye. sabba,twn may be either late on the Sabbath or after the Sabbath. Either has good support. Moulton384 is uncertain, while Blass385 prefers 'after.' It is a point for exegesis, not for grammar, to decide. If Matthew has in mind just before sunset, 'late on' would be his idea; if he means after sunset, then 'after' is correct. Cf. di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12).

32. Para─plh,sion. It is merely the neuter of the adjective paraplh,sioj. This adjective usually had the associative-instrumental, seldom the genitive. But the one example of the adverbial preposition in the N. T. (Ph. 2:27), qana,tou, has the genitive. See plhsi,on.

33. Par─ekto,j. It is a late compound for the earlier pare,k. It appears in the N. T. only three times, save in the margin of Mt. 19:9 of W. H.'s text. Once it is a mere adverb (2 Cor. 11:28), and twice it is a preposition with the ablative (Mt. 5:32; Ac. 26:29) meaning 'without.'

34. Pe,ran. It comes from the root per (cf. pera,w, 'fare,' 'ferry,' etc.). Ionic pe,rhn. It is an adverb (cf. adv. pe,ra), probably accusative case. Both as adverb and as preposition with ablative (sometimes with accusative), it survives from Homer. In the N. T. it occurs ten times as an adverb in the phrase eivj to. pe,ran (Mt. 8:18). It is found 13 times as a preposition with the ablative, chiefly in the expression pe,ran tou/ vIorda,nou (Mt. 4:15).

35. Plh,n├ Doric pla,n. It is probably from ple,on, 'more,' and so is used with the ablative. In the N. T. it occurs only four times as a preposition with the ablative and in one of these we find ple,on ──plh.n tou,twn (Ac. 15:28). Twice it is a mere adverb, plh.n o[ti (Ac. 20:23; Ph. 1:18), unless indeed the o[ti clause is in the ablative. Cf. English "except that." In all the other rather numerous instances plh,n is an adversative conjunction at the beginning of a clause (cf. de,) as in Mt. 11:22. These three usages come on clown from the older Greek.

36. Plhsi,on, Doric plati,on. The word is allied to pe,laj and is neuter adj. from plhsi,oj. In the older Greek the adverb occurs absolutely or with the art. o` plhsi,on, 'neighbour,' as in the N. T. (Mt. 5:43). As a preposition it appears with the associativeinstrumental or with the genitive. But in the N. T., it is found only once and with the genitive in Jo. 4:5. In Lu. 10:29, 36, the genitive is also found with plhsi,on, but the word here has more of the substantive idea ('neighbour') than the prepositional usage.

37. `Uper─a,nw. It is a simple compound that in the late Greek


gradually displaced386 u`pe,r. It occurs in writers from Aristotle on both as adverb and as preposition and is common in the LXX.387 In the N. T. we find it only three times and with the ablative each time. Twice it occurs literally of place (Heb. 9:5; Eph. 4:10) and once of rank (Eph. 1:21).

38. `Uper─e,keina. It is merely u`pe,r and the pronoun evkei/na (cf. evp─e,keina in Ac. 7:43) which appears in the Byzantine Greek. It occurs only once in the N. T. (2 Cor. 10:16), eivj ta. u`pere,keina u`mw/n with the ablative in the sense of 'beyond,' 'into the (regions) beyond you.'

39. `Uper─ek─perissou/. It is written separately in Liddell and Scott and some N. T. editors print it u`pe.r evkperi,ssou/. It is found in Dan. 3:22 (Ald., Compl.). W. H. read it three times (Eph. 3:20; 1 Th. 3:10; 5:13), though in the last passage u`perek─ perissw/j is put in the margin by W. H. As a preposition with the ablative, we find it only in Eph. 3:20 ( w-n, attracted to case of omitted antecedent).

40. `Upo─ka,tw. It is another compound word which in the ancient Greek was used both as adverb and as preposition and especially in the koinh, writers (Polybius, Diodorus, Plutarch). In the late Greek it gradually388 displaced u`po,. In the LXX both u`per─ a,nwqen and u`perka,twqen occur as prepositions as well as kato,pisqen.389 In the N. T. it is no longer adverb, but appears as preposition eleven times with, the ablative, five of them with tw/n podw/n (as Mk. 6:11). The examples are all literal, not metaphorical. Cf. u`poka,tw th/j trape,zhj (Mk. 7:28).

41. Ca,rin. This word is just the accusative of ca,rij and it is still common as the substantive in the accusative (Lu. 1:30). The ancients used it freely with the genitive and with the possessive pronoun, evmh.n ca,rin. The idea of 'for the sake of' (cf. Latin gratia) may be due to apposition originally. The usage continues in the late Greek.390 Among the ancients it was generally postpositive, but in the LXX it is now one way, now the other. In the N. T. it occurs nine times, and is postpositive (as Gal. 3:19) always except 1 Jo. 3:12 with interrogative. It is only once in the Gospels (Lu. 7:47).

42. Cwri,j. It is of doubtful etymology (cf. ca,w├ ch,ra), but ap-


pears in Homer freely as an adverb and in Pindar as a preposition. It holds on steadily in both senses. In the N. T. we have only one pure adverbial use (Jo. 20:7), while as a preposition with the ablative we find it 40 times. The usage is chiefly with persons (Mt. 14:21) or abstract relations (Mt. 13:34), though it may be used with place (Lu. 6:49). In Ro. 10:14 note cwri.j khru,ssontoj without the article. It is postpositive once, ou- cwri,j (Heb. 12:14). Ramsay, C. and B., II, 391 (No. 254), cites from the inscriptions cwri.j eiv mh, ti pa,qh| (Moulton, Prol., p. 239).

Of these 42 words in the N. T. the following are only used as prepositions: a;neu├ avnti,pera├ avpe,nanti├ a;ter├ e;nanti├ e[neka├ evnw,pioin├ evpe,keina├ katenw,pion├ paraplh,sion├ u`pere,keina├ u`pera,nw├ u`poka,tw. Of the rest me,son is also adjective; ca,rij substantive; plhsi,on substantive and adjective; a;cri├ e[wj├ me,cri├ plh,n, conjunctions; and the rest are also adverbs.

IX. Compound Prepositions. A considerable number of these adverbial prepositions are compound words. So are avnti─kru,$j%├ avnti,─pera├ avp─e,n─anti├ e;m─prosqen├ e;n─anti├ evn─anti,on├ evn─w,pion├ evp─a,nw├ evp─e,keina├ meta─xu,├ para─plh,sion├ par─ekto,j├ u`per─a,nw├ u`per─ek─perissou/├ u`po─ka,tw. The modern Greek vernacular shows similar forms in avpoka,tw avpo,├ avpopi,sw avpo,├ avpe,xw avpo, (Thumb, Handb., p. 110). See chapter XII, vi.

X. Prepositional Circumlocutions. Blass calls these Hebraisms and it is true that the frequency of these phrases in the LXX and the N. T. is due to the influence of the Hebrew idiom. But the construction itself is good Greek, though not so common, as the papyri show.391

(a) Me,son. This word furnishes a number, one of which, avna. me,son├ "has turned up abundantly in the papyri."392 In the N. T. we find this compound preposition only four times. Moulton thinks that in 1 Cor. 6:5, diakri/nai vana. me,son tou/ avdelfou/├ the text is corrupt, but probably the phrase is not to be taken too literally and etymologically (cf. dia, here). Dia. me,son is read once (Lu. 17:11) and dia. me,sou once in W. H. (Lu. 4:30). Eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60) appears once, but eivj to. me,son (Lu. 4:35) six times. vEk me,sou, like all the circumlocutions with me,son, is followed by the genitive (Mt. 13:49) and it occurs 7 times. Kata. me,son is found once (Ac. 27:27). The commonest (27 times) of these circumlocutions is evn me,sw| $evmme,sw| some MSS.) as in Mt. 10:16. vEn tw|/ me,sw| (Mt. 14:6; Ac. 4:7) is not a prepositional phrase. Cf. evk tou/ me,sou (Col. 2:14). See also chapter XII, x, (b).


(b) ;Onoma. It is sometimes adduced as an example of a prepositional circumlocution and as a pure Hebraism. Deissmann393 has given abundant illustrations from the papyri to show that the use of eivj to. o;noma├ evn tw|/ ovno,mati is common enough in the vernacular koinh, where, as in the LXX and the N. T., o;noma represents the person. It is more than doubtful if we are justified in considering these phrases as mere prepositional circumlocutions with the genitive. The examples that come nearest to it are eivj o;noma profh,tou, eivj o;noma dikai,ou├ eivj o;noma maqhtou/ (Mt. 10:41 f.); but even here o;noma brings out the notion that one has the name or character of prophet, righteous man, disciple. In Mt. 28:19, o;noma has the idea of 'the authority of.'

(c) Pro,swpon. This word also furnishes a number of such phrases which in the LXX seem to be based on Hebrew originals (translation Hebraisms).394 Thus avpo. prosw,pou tou/ kuri,ou (Ac. 3:19) is like yneP.mi while pro. prosw,pou sou is like ynep.li, and kata. pro,swpon Peila,tou (Ac. 3:13) Blass395 finds like ynep.Bi. Cf. pro,swpon pro.j pro,swpon (1 Cor. 13:12).

(d) Sto,ma. This again is a Hebraism in the LXX due to translation. In Mt. 4:4 we have dia. sto,matoj qeou/├ a quotation from Deut. 8:3. In Mt. 18:16, evpi. sto,matoj du,o martu,rwn is likewise from Deut. 19:15. So in Mt. 21:16, evk sto,matoj nhpi,wn is from Ps. 8:3. Cf. also avpo. tou/ sto,matoj auvtou/ (Lu. 22:71), evn tw|/ sto,mati, sou (Ro. 10:8 from Deut. 30:14). But this picturesque phraseology belongs to all language as a matter of fact.

(e) Cei,r. It shows several similar examples. Thus dia. ceiro.j auvtw/n (Ac. 15:23), dia. tw/n ceirw/n auvtw/n (Ac. 14:3), eivj cei/raj (Lu. 24:7), eivj th/n cei/ra auvtou/ (Lu. 15:22), evk ceiro.j pa,ntwn (Lu. 1:71), evn th|/ ceiri. auvtou/ (Jo. 3:35), su.n ceiri. avgge,lou (Ac. 7:35). Here again the Greek idiom follows the Hebrew particularity, but with perfect ease. The classical Greek is not without examples396 of this use of cei,r and one may note the English idiom also.397 See 2 Sam. 15:2, avna. cei/ra th/j o`dou/ th/j pu,lhj.

See also evx evnanti,aj auvtou/ (Mk. 15:39) and parekto.j lo,gou por─ nei,aj in the margin (W. H.) of Mt. 19: 9.

1 Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 95.

2 Monro, Hom. Gr., pp. 123, 147. Courtoz (Les Prefixes en Grec, en Lat. et en Francais, 1894, p. 51) says: "Outre les dix-huit prepositions que nous venons de passer en revue, it y a encore, en grec, quelques particules inseparabies, qui s'emploient comme prefixes dans les mots composes. Ces particules sont av├ avri ou evri├ dus├ za et nh." But these are not the "prepositions" under discussion.

3 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 414.

4 W.-Th., p. 356.

5 Man., etc., p. 341.

6 Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 659. Cf. Munro, Hom. Gr., p. 123.

7 Ib., p. 659. Cf. Grundl., IV, p. 134.

8 Griech. Gr., p. 429.

9 lb., p. 430.

10 Giles, Man., etc., p. 341.

11 Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 94.

12 Ib.

13 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 414.

14 Monro, Hom.. Cr., p. 123.

15 Ib., p. 124.

16 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 121.

17 Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 95; Egger, Gr. Comp., p. 195.

18 Moulton, Prol., p. 100.

19 Ib.

20 Die Prap. bei Polyb., 1882; cf. p. 3.

21 Die Prap. bei Herod. und andern Hist., 1904.

22 Johannessohn, Der Gebr. der Casus und der Prap. in der Sept., T1. I, 1910. Cf. also C. and S., p. 80 f.

23 Prol., p. 98.

24 Ib., p. 62.

25 Moulton, Prol., p. 62.

26 See Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 365 f., for careful comparison between anc. and mod. Gk. Cf. Hatz., Einl., p. 151.

27 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 123.

28 The LXX in particular shows a great variety of uses of the prep. with verbs, partly clue to transl. from the Heb., partly to the koinh,) Cf. C. and S., p.88, for list. Cf. Johannessohn, Der Gebr. d. Casus and der Prap. in der LXX.

29 Moulton, Prol., p. 118. Cf. W.-Th., p. 426.

30 Zur Rect. der Casus in der spateren hist. Grac., III. Heft, p. 3.

31 Moulton, Prol., p. 115.

32 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 70.

33 Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 486 ff. Kuhring (de praepositionum Graecarum in chartis Aegyptiis usu quaestiones selectae, 1906) and Rossberg (de praep. Grace. in chartis Aegypt. Ptol. aetatis usu, 1909) have both attacked the problems in the pap., as Geyer (Observationes epigraphicae de praep. Graec. forma et usu, 1880) has done for the inscr.

34 Moulton, Prol., p. 116 f. The great work on prepositions is Tycho Mommsen's Beitr. zu der Lehre von den griech. Prap., 1895.

35 W.-Th., p. 427.

36 W.-Th., p. 433.

37 Prol., p. 115,

38 Ib.

39 Moulton, Prol., p. 112.

40 Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 815.

41 Moulton, Prol., p. 111.

42 Prol., p. 116.

43 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 158.

44 W.-Th., p. 420.

45 W.-Th., p. 422.

46 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 174.

47 K.-G., I, p. 448. "La preposition ne fait que confirmer, que preciser une idee exprimee par un cas employe adverbialement." Riem. and Cucuel, Synt. Grec., 1888, p. 213.

48 Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 653. Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 433 f.

49 K.-G., I, p. 451. Cf. Delbruck, Grundl. etc., p. 134.

50 K.-G., I, p. 450.

51 K.-G., I, p. 451.

52 Ib.

53 Delbruck, Grundl. etc., pp. 130, 134. Cf. also Monro, Hom, Gr. p. 125.

54 Ib., p. 130.

55 Ib., p. 134.

56 Delbruck, Grundl., p. 129. Cf. Hadley and Allen, pp. 252-260.

57 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 449 f.

58 Die Prap. bei Herod., p. 8 f. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Voc., etc., pp. 357 ff., for prep. in the Gospels.

59 Die Prap. bei Polyb., p. 6 f.

60 Mullach, Gr. Volg., pp. 376 ff.; Volker, Pap. Graec. Synt., p. 30.

61 Cf. Geldart, Guide to mod. Gk., p. 247; Thumb, Handb., pp. 100ff.

62 Moulton, Prol., p. 106.

63 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 436; K.-G., I, p. 473. On the N. T. prep. see also Tycho Mommsen, Beitr. zu d. Lehre von d. griech. Prap. (1895).

64 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 178, cites some late Gk. exx. of avna,, as adv. Clearly not a Hebraism. Deiss., B. S., p. 139.

65 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 122, cites Polyb.

66 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 368. Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 740.

67 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 437; Monro, Hom. Gr., pp. 126, 149 f.

68 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 150.

69 Gr. of N. T. Gr., p. 124.

70 Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 487.

71 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 124.

72 W.-Th., p. 364.

73 Lang. of the N. T., p. 137. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 225 f. The vague word avnti,lhmyij (1 Cor. 12:28) is frequent in petitions to the Ptolemies (pap.). Cf. P. Par. 26 (B.C. 163-2).

74 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 437. Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, pp. 666 ff.

75 Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 369 ff.

76 Ib., p. 373.

77 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 137. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 369.

78 Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 487.

79 Prol., p. 102.

80 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 95. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 227, also sees Lat. influence here.

81 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 371.

82 W.-Th., p. 372.

83 Deiss., B. S., p. 196, for numerous exx.; Moulton, Prol., p. 102. Cf. Kuhring, De Praep. in Usu, p. 54.

84 Moulton, Prol., p. 102.

85 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 126.

86 Sel., etc., p. 83.

87 Moulton, Prol., p. 102.

88 Moulton, Prol., p. 102.

89 Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 227 f.

90 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 125.

91 Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 228.

92 Ib., p. 229.

93 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 125.

94 W.-Th., p. 370. Cf. Blass, Cr. of N. T. Gk., p. 125.

95 Cf. W.-Th., p. 370.

96 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 138.

97 C. and S., p. 83.

98 Vergl. Synt., I, p. 759.

99 K.-B1., II, p. 250. Cf. katai,├ parai,├ u`pai,.

100 Jann., Hist. Gr. Gk., p. 374.

101 Moulton, Prol., p. 105.

102 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 145.

103 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 132.

104 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 374.

105 Ib., p. 375.

106 Thumb, Handb., p. 104.

107 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 374.

108 K.-G., I, p. 468.

109 Griech. Gr., p. 439. Cf. Brug., Furze vergl. Gr., II, p. 465.

110 Ib., p. 438.

111 Meister, Die griech. Dial., Bd. I, p. 284.

112 Solmsen, Inscr. Graecae, p. 4.

113 Meister, Gr. Dial., Bd. II, p. 283 f.

114 Hoffmann, Gr. Dial., Bd. II, p. 591. Boeotian also knows only evn with either loc. or ace. Cf. Claflin, Synt. of Boeotian Dial. Inscr., p. 56 f. Pindar shows evn, with acc.

115 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 438.

116 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 147.

117 V. and D., Mod. Gk., p. 109 f.

118 Sirncox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 142.

119 Prol., p. 103. In the Ptol., papyri, Rossberg (Prap., p. 8) finds 2245 examples of. iv and it is the most common preposition.

120 Prol., p. 103. On the retreat of evn before eivj see Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 380.

121 See especially Field's valuable note on this verse showing how impossible it is for the resurrection to have occurred on the fourth day. Cf. also Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 255 f.

122 Moulton, Prol., p. 215.

123 Ib., p. 14. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 379.

124 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 131. Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 144, considers this an "extra-grammatical" point.

125 Prol., p. 103. With this cf. poie,w evn (Mt. 17:12; Lu. 23:31), an idiom paralleled in the LXX. Cf. evxele,xato evn evmoi, (1 Chron. 28:4), h|vre,tika evn auvtw|/ (1 Chron. 28:6).

126 Prol., p. 103.

127 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 131.

128 Prol., p. 103.

129 lb., p. 104.

130 C. and S., Sel., etc., p. 82. Cf. Thack., Gr., p. 47, for the frequent use of iv of accompanying circumstance in the LXX.

131 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130.

132 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 131.

133 Prol., p. 103.

134 Rare and possibly Hebraistic. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 380.

135 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130.

136 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 379. But see Deiss., B. S., p. 119 f.

137 W.-Th., p. 388.

138 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 144.

139 C. and S., p. 82; Thack., p. 47.

140 Moulton, Prol., pp. 12, 61, 104, 234 f.

141 Ib., p. 61.

142 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 379.

143 Joh. Gr., p. 256.

144 Solmsen, Inscr. Graecae, p. 46.

145 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 438. He treats evn, and eivj together.

146 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 376.

147 Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, II, p. 525. Cf. also Psichari, Etudes de Philol., 1892, p. v.

148 Cf. H. W. Smyth, p. 80, Transactions of Am. Philol. Assoc. for 1887. J. Fraser (Cl. Quarterly, 1908, p. 270) shows that in Cretan we have evnj ovrqo,n (before vowel), but evj to,n (before consonant).

149 K.-G., I, p. 468.

150 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 376.

151 Ib., p. 377. Cf. Mullach, Gr. d. griech. Vulgarsp., p. 380. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 123, calls it a "provincialism." Cf. further Hatz., Einl., p. 210 f.; Moulton, Prol., p. 234 f.

152 Moulton, Prol., p. 62 f.

153 C. and S., Sel., p. 81.

154 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 122.

155 Moulton, Prol., p. 63; C. and S., p. 82; W.-Th., p. 396 f.

156 This can no longer be called a Hebraism, since the pap. have it. Moulton, Prol., p. 14. Cf. eivj avpa,nthsin, Tb. P. 43 (ii/B.C.). Rouffiac (Recherches, p. 28) finds ei=nai eivj fulakh,n in inscr. of Priene 50, 39 (ii/B.C.).

157 C. and S., p. 81 f.

158 Moulton, Prol., p. 71 f. Cf. K.P. 46 (ii/A.D.) e;scon par v u`mw/n da, $neion% spe,rmata, 'for a loan.' Cf. our "to wife." Moulton (Prol., p. 67) cites M. Aurelius, VI, 42.

159 C. and S., p. 81. Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 143, cites an ex. from Theogn.

160 Gr. of N. T. Gk.

161 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 440.

162 Moulton, Prol., p. 102. On p. 246 he cites Psichari as saying that evk to,n is still "une forme vivante."

163 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 145.

164 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 381.

165 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 126.

166 Griech. Gr., p. 440.

167 Delbruck, Die Grunell., p. 129; Meister, Griech. Dial., I, pp. 285, 307.

168 Moulton, Prol., P. 237.

169 Joh. Gr., p. 251 f.

170 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 145.

171 Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 100.

172 Ib., p. 258. Cf. also Field, Ot. Norv., Pars III, Mk. 5:30, on th.n evx auvtou/ du,namin)

173 K.-G., I, p. 495.

174 Ib.

175 Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 113.

176 Jann., Mist. Gk. Gr., p. 383; Mullach, Vulg., p. 381.

177 Moulton, Prol., p. 107.

178 K.-G., I, p. 495; Delbruck, Grundl., p. 130; Vergl. Synt., I, p. 676 f.

179 Greek Synt., p. 102.

180 Lang. of the N. T., p. 146.

181 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 136. For LXX ex. of rest see C. and S., p. 85.

182 Joh. Gr., p. 259.

183 A postclassical usage, Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 147.

184 Joh. Gr., p. 261.

185 Lang of the N. T., p. 147.

186 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 137.

187 For evpi. tou/ Euverge,tou in Prol. to Sirach see Deiss., B. S., p. 339 f.

188 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 137.

189 Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 342.

190 Griech. Gr., p. 443. Cf. also Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 759 f.

191 Ib.

192 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 178.

193 Ib.; Moulton, Prol., p. 105.

194 Cf. ib., pp. 115 ff.

195 Griech. Gr., p. 443.

196 Hom. Gr., p. 145.

197 I, p. 475.

198 Vergl. Synt., I, p. 760.

199 Delbruck, ib., p. 761.

200 Jebb, in V. and D., Handb., etc., p. 313.

201 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 133.

202 Gk. Synt., p. 100.

203 Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 266.

204 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 149; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 133.

205 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 384.

206 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 133.

207 Ib.

208 Jann., Hist. Gr. Gk., p. 388; Hatz., Einl., p. 153.

209 Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 342.

210 Lang. of the N. T., p. 149. Cf. Thayer, under su,n.

211 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 444.

212 K.-G.; I, p. 505.

213 T. Mommsen, Die Prap. su,n and meta, bei den nachhomerischen Epikern, 1879, p. 1 f. Cf. also Mommsen, Beitr. zu der Lehre von der griech. Prap., 1895.

214 Moulton, Prol., p. 105.

215 Delbrtick, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 741 f.

216 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 136.

217 Lang. of the N. T., p. 150.

218 Joh. Gr., p. 267.

219 Prol., p. 106.

220 Lang. of the N. T., p. 150.

221 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 133 f.

222 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 387. For meta, compared with para, see Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 268.

223 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 387.

224 Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 266.

225 Lang. of the N. T., p. 151.

226 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 386.

227 Vergl. Synt., I, pp. 755, 761.

228 Kurze Vergl. Gr., II, p. 474; Griech. Gr., p. 446.

229 Comp. Philol., p. 342.

230 K.-G., I, p. 509.

231 Delbruck, Die Grundl., p. 130.

232 Thumb., FIandb., p. 102.

233 Moulton, Prol., p. 106.

234 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 134.

235 Simcox, Lang. of N. T., p. 151.

236 Abbott Joh. Gr., p. 271.

237 Prol., p. 106. In G. H. 36 (ii/B.C.), B. U. 998 (ii/B.C.), P. Par. 36 (ii/B.C.). Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 138.

238 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 391.

239 Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 270.

240 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 138.

241 W.-Th., p. 404. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 138, less naturally explains para, here as meaning 'by virtue of,' but not Debrunner.

242 C. and S., p. 85 f.; Thack., Gr., p. 23.

243 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 389.

244 Ib., p. 390.

245 Gk. Synt., p. 104.

246 K. Z., 14, pp. 1ff. Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 700.

247 Kurze vergl. Gr., II, p. 475.

248 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 447; Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 700.

249 K.-G., I, p. 491.

250 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 447.

251 Die Grundi., p. 131 f.; Vergl. Synt., I, p. 711 f.

252 Cf. also Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 447.

253 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 133; Sterrett, The Dial. of Hom. in Hom. Il., N 47.

254 Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 714. Cf. peraite,rw, Ac. 19 : 39.

255 Griech. Gr., p. 448. Cf. Furze vergl. Gr., II, p. 476.

256 Hom. Gr., p. 133.

257 Moulton, Prol., p. 105.

258 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 392.

259 W.-Th., p. 373.

260 Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 272.

261 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135.

262 W.-Th., p. 406.

263 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 134.

264 Ib.

265 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 149.

266 K.-G., I, p. 454. Cf. Delbruck, Vergl; Synt., I, p. 716.

267 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 449.

268 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 149. Cf. Delbruck, Die Grundl., p. 132. The inscr. show the loc. also. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 393.

269 Griech. Gr., p. 449.

270 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 393.

271 Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 722.

272 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 394. Cf. Viereck, Sermo Graecus, p. 12 f.

273 Prol., pp. 100. He refers also to the numerous ex. in W. Schulze, Graec. Lat., pp. 14-19.

274 Joh. Gr., p. 227.

275 Lang. of the N. T., p. 153 f.

276 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 449.

277 Ib.

278 Delbrilek, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 726. Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 449.

279 Die Grundl., p. 132.

280 Griech. Gr., p. 449.

281 Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 728. Pro,j, as well as meta,, still appears as adv. in Polyb. Cf. Kaelker, Quest. de Eloc. Polyb., p. 283.

282 Griech. Gr., p. 448 f.

283 Vergl. Synt., I, p. 729 f.

284 Notes on Gk. and Lat. Synt., p. 163.

285 Prol., p. 106.

286 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 140.

287 Jann., Gk. Gr., p. 366.

288 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 142.

289 Moulton, Prol., p. 106.

290 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 394.

291 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 155.

292 Joh. Gr., p. 273 f.

293 Ib.

294 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 395.

295 Joh. Gr., p. 275.

296 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 139.

297 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 139.

298 Brug., Griech. Cr., p. 454:

299 Vergl. Synt., I, p. 730.

300 Entwick. einiger Cosetze fur d. Gehr. d. Prap. meta,├ su,n and a[ma├ p. 444.

301 Drug., Griech. Or., p. 454.

302 Delbruck, Die Grundl., p. 133.

303 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 132.

304 Cf. Mommsen, Entw. etc., p. 4 f.

305 Hom. Gr., p. 147.

306 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366.

307 Cf. on the whole subject Mommsen, Entw., p. 395.

308 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 396 f.; Jour. of Hell. Stud., XIX, pp. 287-288.

309 Cf. Westcott on Jo. 1:2 for discussion of distinction between su,n and meta,.

310 Cf. the use of su.n kai, in the pap. Deiss., B. S., p.. 265 f.

311 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 146; Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 228.

312 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 398.

313 Jann., ib., p. 366.

314 Ib., p. 398.

315 Griech. Gr., p. 451; Kurze vergl. Gr., II, p. 464.

316 I, p. 486.

317 Hom. Gr., p. 147.

318 Vergl. Synt., I, p. 749.

319 Moulton, Prol., p. 105.

320 Cf. W.-Th., p. 382.

321 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 156. Winer (W.-Th., p. 38) implies the same thing.

322 Ib. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135, has nothing on this use of Moulton, Prol., p. 105, merely calls u`pe,r "the more colourless" as compared with avnti,.

323 Joh. Gr., p. 276.

324 Cf. Thayer, p. 3, under u`pe,r. In Pausanias (Ruger, Die Prap. bei Paus., 1889, p. 12) u`pe,r occurs about twice as often as avnti,. A. Theimer (Beitr. zur Kenntn. des Sprachgeb. im N. T., 1901, p. 25), speaking of Jo. 11:50, says: "Der Zusatz mh. o[lon to. e;qnoj avpo,lhtai die Bedeutung an Stelle anstatt."

325 Prol., p. 105.

326 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 313.

327 Ib., p. 108.

328 C. and S., Sel. from LXX, p. 84.

329 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135.

330 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 452.

331 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 139.

332 Ib. Cf. Brug., ib.

333 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 140.

334 Helbing, Die Prap. bei Herod. and and. Histor., p. 22.

335 Moulton, Prol., p. 63.

336 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 399. Cf. Jebb in V. and D., Handb. to Mod. Gk., p. 313.

337 Moulton, Prol., p. 105.

338 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 398 f.

339 Griech. Gr., p. 452 f.

340 Vergl. Synt., I, p. 698.

341 W.-Th., p. 407.

342 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 308.

343 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135.

344 Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 278.

345 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 157.

346 Joh. Gr., p. 279.

347 Moulton, Prol., p. 156.

348 Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 157.

349 W.-Th., p. 369.

350 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 126. But avpo, occurs in this sense in Xen. Cf. W.-Th., p. 369.

351 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 151.

352 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 414.

353 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366.

354 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 150.

355 Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 122, 127 f.

356 C. and S., Sel. from LXX, p. 86 f.

357 Lang. of the N. T., p. 159.

358 Sel., p. 87.

359 B. S., p. 213 f.

360 Krebs, Die Prapositionsadverbien in der spatteren hist. Grac., I. Tl., p. 4f., gives a list of 61, and 31 of his list do not appear in the N. T., while 12 are in the N. T. that he does not mention, viz. e;nanti├ evnw,pion├ kate,nanti├ katenw,pion├ kuklo,qen├ me,son├ ovpi,sw├ ovye,├ paraplh,sion├ paraekto,j├ u`pe,keina├ u`perekperissou/. This list by Krebs shows the freedom in the koinh, development of adv. prep.

361 Griech. Or., pp. S5, 211, 230.

362 Monro, Hom. Or., p. 151; Brug., Griech. Cr., p. 456.

363 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 397.

364 Brag., Griech. Gr., p. 456.

365 Jann., Mist. Gk. Gr., p. 337. In Eleatic a;neuj occurs with the acc.

366 C. and S., Sel. from the LXX, p. 86.

367 Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 198, 254.

368 Ib., p. 456.

369 C. and S., Se1. from LXX, p. 87. The LXX used a number of prep. to transl. ynep.li. Cf. Swete, Intr. to the 0. T. in Gk., p. 308.

370 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 457.

371 C. Taylor, The Oxyrhyn. Sayings of Jesus, 1905, pp. 7, 11. Besides in Polyb. evnto,j is always the opposite of evkto,j. Cf. Thiemann, Quest. Polyb., 1882, p. 23.

372 B. S., p. 213.

373 C. and S., p. 87.

374 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 129.

375 Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 151.

376 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 127.

377 C. and S., p. 87.

378 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 128.

379 Jann., Hist. Gk. Cr., p. 374.

380 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 129.

381 C. and S., p. 87.

382 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 312.

383 Moulton, Prol., p. 72 f.

384 Moulton, Pro1., p. 72 f.

385 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 97.

386 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 367, 397.

387 Cf. Deiss., B. S., p. 283 f.

388 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366.

389 C. and S., p. 86 f.

390 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 337. Ca,rin as a prep. is in poetry till 50 B.C., when it appears first in prose. Cf. Meisterh., p. 222. He gives an interesting ex. of the prep. in Attic inscr.

391 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 129 f.

392 Moulton, Prol., p. 99 f.

393 B. S., pp. 146 f., 197. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 100. See also Heitmuller's proof, Im Namen Jesu, pp. 100

394 Moulton, Prol., pp. 81, 99; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 129 f.

395 Ib.

396 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130.

397 Cf. for the LXX, Swete, Intr. to 0. T. in Gk., p. 308.