The Article

CHAPTER XVI

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON)

I. Other Uses of o`Ã h` to,. For the demonstrative o` and the relative o` see chapter on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart¹: "Der Artikel hat die ursprungliche demonstrative Bedeutung." It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative.

II. Origin and Development of the Article.

(a) A GREEK CONTRIBUTION. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.² Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is "a new Greek departure."³ It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic⁴ and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed, the existence of the genuine article in Homer is denied by some.⁵ But it seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the article in such Homeric phrases as oi` ple,onejÃ oi` a;ristoi, etc.⁶ And it is beyond dispute that it is in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the Greek article reaches its perfection.⁷ The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modern Greek.⁸ In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.⁹ But Volker¹⁰ finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox¹¹ points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article.

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 755

(b) DERIVED FROM THE DEMONSTRATIVE. The Greek article is the same form as the demonstrative o`Ã h`Ã to,. Indeed the German der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde (Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a "mere enfeeblement" of the demonstrative. So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied avrqron to all three in truth, but distinguished them as a;rqron protaktiko,n (dem.), a;rqron u`potaktiko,n (rel.), a;rqron o`ristiko,n (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonstrative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of the article. It is only of recent years that a really scientific study of the article has been made.¹² Even Brugmann¹³ gives no separate treatment for the article. But Part II of Gildersleeve's Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller collected material for it. But even here I must demur against "the substantive use of the article" (p. 216) instead of plain substantival demonstrative. Gildersleeve uses "article" in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek a;rqron ( ar- as seen in avrÄarÄi,skw, 'to fit,' 'join'). The origin of the article from the demonstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro¹⁴ thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative o`. So Iliad, 4. 501, h` d v e`te,roio dia. krota,foio pe,rhsen aivchm. calkei,h. Here aivcmh, explains h` and h` wavers between demonstrative and article and illustrates the transition. So with new proper names o` anticipates the name which is loosely added later. "In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in Homer it marks the turning of attention to a person."¹⁵ In Homer the article usually marks contrast and not mere definiteness. But this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence the real article which is thus attributive.

III. Significance of the Article. The article, unlike the demonstrative, does not point out the object as far or near. It is not deictic. There is either contrast in the distinction drawn or allusion (anaphoric) to what is already mentioned or assumed as well

756 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

known. The article is therefore to. o`ristiko.n a;rqron, the definite article. The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing out like an index finger. It is a pointer. It is not essential to language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not "otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentum," as Scaliger¹⁶ called it. The Greek article is not the only means of making words definite. Many words are definite from the nature of the case.¹⁷ The word itself may be definite, like gh/Ã ouvrano,jÃ vIhsou/j. The use of a preposition with definite anarthrous nouns is old, as evn oi;kw|. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is certainly definite. When it is not used, the object may or may not be. The article is never meaningless in Greek, though it often fails to correspond with the English idiom, as in h` sofi,ajÃ o` Pau/loj) It is not a matter of translation. The older language and higher poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article than any one. Its free use leads to exactness and finesse (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215 f.).

IV. The Method Employed by the Article. The Greek article points out in one of three ways.¹⁸ It distinguishes:

(a) INDIVIDUALS FROM INDIVIDUALS. The article does not give the reason for the distinction drawn between individuals. That is usually apparent in the context. The translators of the King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.¹⁹ A goodly list of such sins is given in "The Revision of the New Testament,"²⁰ such as 'a pinnacle' for to. pteru,gion (Mt. 4:5). Here the whole point lies in the article, the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. So in Mt. 5:1 to. o;roj was the mountain right at hand, not 'a mountain.' On the other hand, the King James translators missed the point of meta. gunaiko,j (Jo. 4:27) when they said 'the woman.' It was 'a woman,' any woman, not the particular woman in question. But the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18:13, tw|/ a`martwlw|/. The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 757

find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13:55, o` tou/ te,ktonoj ui`o,j, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In 1 Cor. 4:5 o` e;painoj means the praise due to each one. Cf. o` misqo,j in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5:9, evn th|/ evpistolh|/, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15:8, tw|/ evktrw,mati, Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5:15, to.n mo,dionÃ th.n lucni,anÃ the article singles out the bushel, the lampstand present in the room. In 15:26, toi/j kunari,oij, Jesus points to the little dogs by the table. In Lu. 4:20, to. bibli,on avpodou.j tw|/ u`phre,th|, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at his place. So in Jo. 13:5, ba,llei u[dwr eivj to.n nipth/ra, the basin was there in the room. The article in Jo. 7:17, gnw,setai peri. th/j didach/j, means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled.

(b) CLASSES FROM OTHER CLASSES. The (generic) article is not always necessary here any more than under (a). See pnhrou.j kai. avgaqou,j (Mt. 5:45); di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn (1 Pet. 3:18). Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 12:13 ei;te vIoudai/oi ei;te [Ellhnej, 12:29. So also pou/ sofo,j* pou/ grammateu,j; (1 Cor. 1:20). But it is quite common to use the article with different classes. So in Mt. 8:20 note ai` avlw,pekejÃ ta. peteina,. So ai` gunai/kej (Eph. 5:22), oi` a;ndrejgrk grk(5:25), ta. te,knagrk grk(6:1), oi` pate,rejgrk grk(6:4), oi` dou/loigrk grk(6:5). In these examples the vocative often has the article. Cf. Col. 3:18 ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5:3-10 (the Beatitudes), oi` ptwcoi,, etc. Cf. tou.j sofou.jÃ ta. avsqenh|/Ã etc., in 1 Cor. 1:27. So oi` avkroatai, and oi` poihtai, in Ro. 2:13. Cf. Rev. 11:18; 22:14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in o` ui`o.j tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 8:20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10:7, o` evrga,thj, where the labourer represents all labourers. In Mt. 18:17 note o` evqniko.j kai. o` telw,nhj. The Gospel of John is especially rich in examples of this kind (both ideals and types).²¹ Other examples are Mt. 12:35 o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj, 12:29 tou/ ivscurou/, Jas. 5:6 to.n di,kaion, 2 Cor. 12:12 tou/ avposto,lou, Gal. 4:1 o` klhrono,moj, Mt. 13:3 o` spei,rwn. But even here the article is not always needed. So vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj (Ro. 2:9). Cf. kalou/ te kai. kakou/, Heb. 5:14. In examples like o` ouvrano.j kai. h` gh/ (Mt. 24:35), where there is only one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class

758 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

idea. So qeo,j, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3:16). Volker (Syntax, p. 19) notes in the papyri examples like gunh. kai. ui`oi,Ã h` gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,Ã gunh. kai. oi` ui`oi,Ã o` avnh.r kai. te,kan. For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff.

(c) QUALITIES FROM OTHER QUALITIES. The English does not use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 : 9-11 the gifts mentioned have no article. So in chapter 13, avga,phn in verses 1-3, but h` avga,ph in 4, 8; but pi,stijÃ evlpi,j avga,ph (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4:18 fo,boj is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while h` avga,ph each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro. 12:7, 9; 13:9 f.; Col. 3:5. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150) from the standpoint of the German sees more difficulty in the absence than in the presence of such articles. But he is correct in saying that the relative in Col. 3:5 explains the use of the article. It is interesting to observe that in the list of attributes of God in the songs in Rev. 4:11; 5:13; 7:12, the article is expressed with each quality, while in 5:12 one article ( th,n) is used with the whole list. In Ro. 13:7 the article is used with each thing and quality. It is possible that tw|/ here is the article also for which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence of me,n and de, one might suspect tw|/ to be the demonstrative. In Ro. 16:17, skopei/n tou.j ta.j dicostasi,aj ka. ta. ska,ndala para. th.n didach.n ha}n u`mei/j evma,qete poiou/ntaj, note how neatly tou,jÃ ta,jÃ ta, th,n come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the neat classic idiom tou.j- poiou/ntaj. For the article with abstract nouns see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 257 ff.

V. Varied Usages of the Article.

(a) WITH SUBSTANTIVES.

1. Context. Whether the substantive is pointed out as an individual, class or quality, the context makes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27:23, tou/ qeou/ ou- eivmi,, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, o` qeo,j, we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the angel has the notion of "the special God.". Cf. also Jo. 1 : 1. In Mt. 23:2, oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, the two classes are

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 759

Addenda 3rd ed.

distinguished as in English. In Ro. 11:36, h` do,xa, it is the glory due to God. See o` misqo,j, 1 Cor. 9:18 (cf. Ro. 4:4).

2. Gender of the Article. It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. th,n - to,n - to, in Lu. 2:16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4:13, th.n Nazara,, because of the implied po,lin. Cf. also Kafarnaou.m th,n. But in Gal. 4:25, to. de. [Agar, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gender of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to. avmh,n in 1 Cor. 14:16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the LXX (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. tw|/ beelei,m, (Ezek. 27:4).

3. With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, since the proper name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substantive requires the article. But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that the article meant nothing to the Greek. It meant definiteness to him. We often have the same difficulty with the article with classes and qualities. Sometimes we can see the reason for the use of the article with proper names. So to.n vIhsou/n o[n Pau/loj khru,ssei, Ac. 19:13. But in most instances the matter seems quite capricious to us. The writer may have in mind a previous mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4:9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, , even when the adjective is not anarthrous, as in vApellh/n to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (verse 10). So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use with persons is a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South Germany der is used with the name alone.²²

It seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers,, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. uber den

760 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Addenda 2nd ed.

Addenda 3rd ed.

griech. Art., 1891). See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of Philol., XI, pp. 483-487. Different words vary. "Names of cities most rarely have the article when connected with prepositions,"²³ but that is true of other words also. vIerousalh,m does not have the article save when an adjective is used (so Gal. 4:25 f.; Rev. 3: 12) except in one instance (Ac. 5:28). Curiously vIeroso,luma has the article (in the oblique cases) only²⁴ in Jo. 2:23; 5:2; 10:22; 11:18. As instances of the article used with a city mentioned the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17:10, eivj Be,roian, and 17: 13, evn th|/ Beroi,a|; 17:15, e[wj vAqhnw/n; and 17:16, evn tai/j vAqh,naij. For further details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152 f.

Substantives in apposition with proper names may have the article, as in `Hrw|,dhj o` basileu,j, Mt. 2:1; and o` basileu.j `Hrw|,dhj, Mt. 2:3; or not, as `Hrw|,dou basileu,wj, Lu. 1:5. In basileu/ vAgri,ppa, Ac. 25:26, it is like our 'King George.' So in Xenophon, when the King of Persia is meant we find basileu,j. In Mt. 3:6, o` vIorda,nhj potamo,j, we have the usual order, but see the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9:14; 16:12. Cf. tou/ o;rouj Sina, (Ac. 7:30) and o;rouj Sina, (Gal. 4:24), to. o;roj Siw,n (Rev. 14:1) and Siw.n o;rei (Heb. 12:22). For the article with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231. Cf. vIou,daj o` vIskariw,thj, Mt. 10:4; `Hrw|,dhj o` tetraa,rchj and vIwa,nhj o` baptisth,j, 14:1 f.; vIshou/j o` Nazarhno,j, Mk. 10:47; Ac. 1:13, Si,mwn o` zhlwth,j, etc. Here the word in apposition has the article, but not the proper name.²⁵ Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1.

In the Gospels as a rule vIhsou/j has the article. Cristo,j in the Gospels usually has the article= the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly without the article,²⁶ illustrating the development of Christology in the N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article if the case would not otherwise be clear. Cf. the list in Mt. 1: 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So vIsrah,l in Ro. 10:19, but to.n vIsrah,l in 1 Cor. 10:18. See also Mt. 22:42; Mk. 15:45; Lu. 2:16; Ac. 7:8; 15:1 f.; Ro. 9:13; Heb. 11:17. The use of to.n Barabba/n in Lu. 23:18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon's Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 761

mentioned.²⁷ In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and "marks the turning of attention to a person,"²⁸ rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. "In short the Homeric article contrasts, the Attic article defines." But, as a matter of fact, no satisfactory principle can be laid down for the use or non-use of the article with proper names.²⁹ For good discussion of the matter see Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb, Handb., p. 41). Moulton (Prol., p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve "completely the problem of the article with proper names." Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John generally introduces a proper name without the article and then uses it. The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the article with proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man's father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have the article. Cf. Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; Moulton, Prol., p. 83. The papyri throw no great light on the subject. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri confirm the N. T. usage. In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For Sau/loj o` kai. Pau/loj (Ac. 13:9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes o` here as relative. See also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke's list (Lu. 3:23-38) vIwsh,f has no article, while all the long line of genitives have tou/ including tou/ qeou/. Among the ancient writers o` qeo,j was used of the god of absolute religion in distinction from the mythological gods.³⁰ Gildersleeve (Syntax, pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject. In the N. T., however, while we have pro.j to.n qeo,n (Jo. 1:1, 2), it is far more common to find simply qeo,j, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3:5) or not have it it(8:9). The same thing holds true about pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gionÃ ku,irojÃ Cristo,j. These words will come up for further discussion later.

762 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Addenda 3rd ed.

4. Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with the second mention of a word is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6:9, a;rtouj kai. ovya,ria, but in verse 11 tou.j a;rtoujÄÄkai. evk tw/n ovyari,wn. See Lu. 9:13, 16. Cf. u[dwr in Jo. 4:10 and to. u[dwr in verse 11. So ma,goi in Mt. 2:1, but tou.j ma,gouj in verse 7; ziza,nia in 13:25, but ta. ziza,nia in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9:4, 7; 9:11, 17; Jas. 2:2, 3; Rev. 15:1, 6. In Jo. 4:43, ta.j du,o h`me,raj, the article refers to verse 40. Cf. Jo. 20:1 with 19:41; 12:12 with 12:1; Heb. 5:4 with 5:1; 2 Cor. 5:4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19:13 we have Pau/loj, but o` Pau/loj in 19:15. Volker (Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds the anaphoric use of the article common enough in the papyri.

(b) WITH ADJECTIVES. The discussion of the adjective as attributive or predicate comes up later. Thus kalo.j o` no,moj (1 Tim. 1:8) is a different construction from tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n (Jo. 10:11).

1. The Resumptive Article. The use of the article and the adjective is perfectly normal in tw/n a`gi,wn profhtw/n, (2 Pet. 3:2). Cf. th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:40). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2:7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in o` poimh.n o` kalo,j above is quite common also. Abbott³¹ thinks that this reduplication of the article "adds weight and emphasis to the article." Cf. th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| (Lu. 9:22) with th|/ h`me,ra| th|/ tri,th| grk(18:33). Abbott³² considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings about him. Cf. Jo. 1: 9, 41; 2:1; 3:16; 5:43; 7:18; 10:11, 14. But this is hardly true of Jo. 6:13; 18:10. He notes also that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always has the reduplicated article. Cf. ta. pro,bata ta. evma,,grk grk(10:27). So to.n avdelfo.n to.n i;dion in Jo. 1:41. In Homer the substantive usually comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive article "repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word."³³ Cf. Rev. 1:17; 3:7; 22:16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12:10. So tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,ntwn (Jo. 1:40). In Lu. 6:45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, o` ponhro.j evk tou/ ponhrou/ profe,rei to. ponhro,n. See in the papyri to. kitw,nion auvth/j to. leuko.n to. para. soi, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.).

2. With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. o` a[gioj (Mk. 1:24), th|/ evrh,mw| (Mt. 3:2), ta. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), oi` ptwcoi, (Mt. 5:3), ta. ne,aj (Tit. 2:4), to. ovrata, (Col. 1:16), ta. polla, in Ho. 15:22, oi` sofoi, in 1 Cor. 1:

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 763

27, ai` e[toimoi, in Mt. 25:10, etc. All these examples are obvious enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the context. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone. The individual use appears in such examples as o` a[gioj tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 6:69), o` di,kaioj (Ac. 22:14), o` avlhqino,j (1 Jo. 5:20), o` ponhro,j (1 Jo. 5:18), to. polu, and to. ovli,gon (2 Cor. 8:15), to. avgaqo,n sou (Phil. 1:14), to. avdu,naton tou/ ovli,gon (Ro. 8:3), th.n xhra,n (Mt. 23:15), toi/j a`gi,oij (Ph. 1:1), evn toi/j evpourani,oij (Eph. 1:3). The generic or representative (class from class) is very common also, more frequent indeed. So o` di,kaioj (1 Pet. 4:18), tou/ avgaqou/ (Ro. 5:7), to.n ptwco,n (Jas. 2:6), tou.j ptwcou,jgrk grk(2:5), oi` plou,sioigrk grk(5:1). So ta. kaka, and ta. avgaqa, (Ro. 3:8), to. avgaqo,n (Lu. 6:45). Cf. in particular Ro. 12:21 u`po. tou/ kakou/Ã evn tw|/ avgaqw|/ to. kako,n. Cf. also Ro. 13:3 f., to. avgaqo,n (Gal. 6:10), to. i`kano,n (Ac. 17:9), to. kalo,n (2 Cor. 13:7), to. a[gion (Mt. 7:6), ta. o[ria (Mt. 19:1), tw/n spori,mwn (Mk. 2 : 23). The use of the neuter singular with the article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass³⁴ notes as "a peculiar usage of Paul (and Hebrews)" and considers that "this is the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T., and may be paralleled from the old heathen literature, from Thucydides in particular." But he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo³⁵ and all other writers of the koinh,, not to mention the papyri,³⁶ show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to. doki,mion u`mw/n th/j p`i,stewj in Jas. 1:3 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7) belongs here. See also to. mwro.n tou/ qeou/ (1 Cor. 1:25), to. u`mw/n auvtw/n su,mforongrk grk(7:35), to. evlafro.n th/j qli,yewj (2 Cor. 4:17), to. th/j u`mete,raj avga,phj gnh,siongrk grk(8:8), to. gnwsto.n tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 1:19), to. crhsto.n tou/ qeou/,grk grk(2:4), to. perisso,ngrk grk(3:1), to. dunato.n auvtou/grk grk(9:22), to. evpieike.j u`mw/n (Ph. 4:5), to. avmeta,qeton th/j boulh/j (Heb. 6:17), to. auvth/j avsqene,jgrk grk(7:18). Examples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in ta. pneumaÄ tika. (Eph. 6:12), ta. avo,rata (Ro. 1:20), ta. krupta. tw/n avnqrw,pwngrk grk(2:16), ta. krupta. tou/ sko,touj (1 Cor. 4:5), ta. pa,nta (Col. 1:16), ta. o`rata. kai. ta. avo,rata (ib.). The neuter adjective with the article sometimes appears in the collective sense for persons. So to. e;latton (Heb. 7:7), to. dwdeka,fulon h`mw/n (Ac. 26:7), ta. mwra. tou/ ko,smou- ta. avsqenh/ tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 1:27 f.). See further Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262.

3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,³⁷ who

764 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Addenda 3rd ed.

has the best discussion of the use of the article with adjectives, notes that it is not accidental that, while we have evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Text. Rec., Mt. 6:4), yet eivj fanero.n evlqei/n prevails (Mk. 4:22; Lu. 8:17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a rather fine point, since both evn kruptw|/ (Jo. 7:4, 10) and eivj kru,pthn (a subst. Lu. 11:33) occur as well as evn tw|/ fanerw|/ (Mt. 6:4, Text. Rec.). In Ro. 2:28 evn tw|/ fanerw|/ is genuine. In Jas. 4: 17 note kalo.n poiei/n. The adjective alone may express class as in Mt. 5:45; Lu. 10:21; Ro. 1:14; 1 Cor. 1:20.

4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So e`pta. ÄÄoi` pe,nte - o` ei-j- o` a;lloj (Rev. 17:10).

(c) WITH PARTICIPLES. In all essential respects the article is used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4:17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12:1, 2). For the predicate use see Jo. 10:12. The participle with the article is common without the substantive, as of oi` penqou/ntej (Mt. 5:4). The neuter for a person appears in to. gennw,menon (Lu. 1:35). In to. a`polwlo,j (Lu. 10:10) we have the collective neuter singular. The abstract singular is seen in to. u`pere,con th/j gnw,sewj (Ph. 3:8) and the abstract plural in ta. diafe,ronta (Ro. 2:18). Cf. ta. u`pa,rconta, mou ('my belongings') in 1 Cor. 13:3, for the more individual use. The representative or generic sense is found in o` spei,rwn (Mt. 13:3). The article with the participle is very common as the equivalent of a relative clause.³⁸ In Mt. 5:32 pa/j o` avpolu,wn and o[j eva,n- gamh,sh| are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So oi` pepisteuko,tej (Tit. 3:8), o` eivpw,n (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 7:21. The article is repeated with participles if they refer to different persons (Rev. 1:3) or even if the same person is meant where different aspects are presented (Rev. 1:4, where o` h=n comes in between). But note tw|/ avgapw/nti h`ma/j kai. lu,santi h`ma/jgrk grk(1:5).

Winer³⁹ makes a special point of the use of a definite participle with an indefinite pronoun like tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssontej u`ma/j (Gal. 1:7), mh, tij u`ma/j e;stai o` sulagwgw/n (Col. 2:8), a;lloj evsti.n o` marturw/n (Jo. 5:32).⁴⁰ He also notes the definite subject where the German would have an indefinite one as in ouvk e;stin o` suni,wn (Ro. 3:11). Cf. also the article and the future participle in o` katakrinw/n (Ro. 8:34),

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 765

Ac. 20:22 ta. sunanth,sonta. Cf. Is. 1:31, ouvk e;stai o` sbe,swn. More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the repeated article see th|/ ca,riti th|/ doqei,sh| (1 Cor. 1:4). See further VI, Position with Attributives.

(d) WITH THE INFINITIVE. This idiom is so common that it must be merely touched upon here and the discussion of it reserved for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the koinh, the article is used with the infinitive in any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract substantive. The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, but it occurs once in the Odyssey⁴¹ and is in Pindar. Examples of the articular infinitive may be seen in the nominative to. kaqi,sai (Mt. 20:23), the accusative to. lalei/n (1 Cor. 14:39; cf. Ac. 25:11), the genitive evlpi.j pa/sa tou/ sw,zesqai (Ac. 27:20; cf. Lu. 24:29), the ablative evkratou/nto tou/ mh. evpignw/nai (Lu. 24:16; cf. 2 Cor. 1: 8), the locative evn tw|/ spei,rein (Mt. 13:4), the instrumental tw|/ mh. eu`rei/n (2 Cor. 2:13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with the article, but see qea,sasqai (Mt. 11:7). For the articular infinitive with prepositions see pp. 1068-1075. The article is frequently missing with eivj pei/n rely in the vernacular koinh, (papyri), as Herodotus three times has avnti. ei=nai.⁴² Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, p. 13 f. But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is curiously rare in the Gospel of John, "almost non-existent."⁴³ It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1:48; 2: 24; 13:19; 17:5).

(e) WITH ADVERBS. This is no peculiarity of the koinh, not to say of the N. T. It is common in the older Greek with adverbs of place, time, quality, rank, manner.⁴⁴ It is not necessary to repeat what is said under Cases and Adverbs concerning the adverbial expressions (really adjectives), like to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. loipo,n (Ph. 4:8), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). The point to note is that the article is used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe ta. a;nw and ta. ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34, ellipsis of h`me,ra), h` evpau,riongrk grk(27:62), h` sh,meron (Ac. 20:26), o` avmh,n (Rev. 3:14), to. avmh,n (1 Cor. 14:16), to. nu/n (Lu. 5:10), ta. nu/n (Ac. 4:29), o` plhsi,on (Lu. 10:27) and note plhsi,on alone 'neighbour' in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to. nai, and to. ouv (2 Cor. 1:17), to. e;xwqen (Mt. 23:25), oi` e;xwqen (1 Tim. 3:7), oi` e;xw (Mk. 4:11, W. H. text), to. evnto,j (Mt. 23:26), ta. e;mproÄ sqen and ta. ovpi,sw (Ph. 3:13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb.

766 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

12:27, to. vEti a[pax (quotation). In some of these examples there is the ellipsis of a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like o` e;sw a;nÄ qrwpoj (Eph. 3:16), o` e;xw a;nqrwpoj (2 Cor. 4:16), o` nu/n kairo,j (Ro. 3:26). Clyde⁴⁵ compares to. nu/n with Scotch "the noo."

(f) WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES.⁴⁶ Cf. of oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24), oi` evk no,mou (Ro. 4:14), oi` evk peritomh/j (Ac. 11:2), oi` kaq v e[na (Eph. 5:33), to. evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 13:10), ta. peri. u`mw/n (Ph. 1:27), oi` su.n auvtw|/ (Lu. 9:32), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 11:3), to. kat v evme, (Ph. 1:12; cf. Ro. 1:15), to. kata. sa,rka (Ro. 9:5), to. evx u`mw/n (12: 18), to. avna. dhna,rion (Mt. 20:10, W. H. text); oi` peri. Pau/lon (Ac. 13:13, classic idiom), oi` met v auvtou/ (Mk. 1:36), toi/j evn th|/ oivki,a| (Mt. 5:15), ta. kata. to.n no,mon (Lu. 2:39), ta. evn toi/j ouvranoi/j and ta. evpi. th/j gh/j (Eph. 1:10), th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,oujgrk grk(1:15), to. kaq v ei=j (Ro. 12:5), o` evn tw|/ fanerw|/grk grk(2:28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18:15 note no,mou tou/ kaq v u`ma/j, where the article occurs with the prepositional phrase, but not with the substantive. On oi` peri,= a man and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264.

(g) WITH SINGLE WORDS OR WHOLE SENTENCES. Here the word is used verbatim, as to. evgw, (Plato, Crat., 405 .d).⁴⁷ Cf. to. ;Eti a[pax dhloi/ above (Heb. 12:27) and to. [Agar (the name Hagar, Gal. 4:25). So to. de. vAne,bh (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to. Eiv du,nh| (Mk. 9:23), to. Ouv foneu,seij- w`j seauto,n (Mt. 19:18 f.), evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij to.n plhsi,on w`j seauto,n (Gal. 5:14), to. ga.r Ouv moiceu,seij and evn tw|/ vAgaph,seij ktl) (Ro. 13:9), to. Kai. meta. avno,mwn evlogi,sqh (Lu. 22:37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom.⁴⁸ Blass⁴⁹ remarks that the article makes no essential difference to the meaning of the question. It does this at least: it makes clearer the substantival idea of the indirect question and its relation to the principal clause. See 1 Th. 4:1 paraela,bete par v h`mw/n to. pw/j dei/ u`ma/j, Ro. 8:26 to. ga.r ti, proseuxw,meqa, Lu. 1:62 evne,neuon to. ti, a'n qe,loi kalei/sqaiÃ 9:46 eivsh/lÄ qen dialogismo.j to. ti,j a'n ei;h mei,zwn, 19:48 ouvc hu[riskon to. ti, poih,swsinÃ 22:2 evzh,toun to. pw/j avne,lwsinÃ 22:4 sunela,lshen to. pw/j paradw|/ 22:23 sunzhtei/n to. ti,j ei;hÃ 22:24 evge,neto filoneiki,a to. ti,j dokei/Ã Ac. 4:21 mhde.n eu`ri,skontej to. pw/j kola,swntaiÃ 22:30 gnw/nai to. ti, kathgorei/tai.

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 767

(h) WITH GENITIVE ALONE. This is also a common idiom in the ancient Greek.⁵⁰ The koinh, uses this idiom very often (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 94), as seen both in the inscriptions and the papyri. The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually very plain, as is shown by the gender and number as well as the context. So vIa,kwboj o` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Mt. 10:2), where ui`o,j is implied; Maria, h` tou/ Klwpa/, (Jo. 19:25), where gunh, is to be supplied; Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Lu. 24:10), where mh,thr is meant; to. th/j do,xhj (1 Pet. 4:14), where pneu/ma is to be understood; oi` tou/ Zebedai,ou (Jo. 21:2), where ui`oi, is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15:23 maqhtai, is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5:24), and avdelfo,j in Lu. 6:16 (cf. Ju. 1). The neuter plural is common for the notion of "affairs" or "things." So ta. e`autw/n and ta. Cristou/ vIhsou/ (Ph. 2:21), ta. Kai,saroj and ta. tou/ qeou/ (Lu. 20:25), ta. th/j au;rion (marg. W. H., Jas. 4:14), ta. tou/ ko,smou (1 Cor. 7:33), ta. th/j sarko,j and ta. tou/ pneu,matoj (Ro. 8:5), ta. th/j eivrh,nhjgrk grk(14:19), etc. One may note also here evn toi/j tou/ patro,j mou (Lu. 2:49) for 'house of my Father.' Cf. evn toi/j Klaud$i,ou%, P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eivj ta. i;dia and oi` i;dioi (Jo. 1:11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to. th/j avlhqou/j paroimi,aj (2 Pet. 2:22), to. th/j sukh/j (Mt. 21:21).

(i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech. It is, however, "invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj."⁵¹ As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. Mk. 9:50; Lu. 7:8. This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.⁵² Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and therefore the article is not much used except in convertible propositions. Winer,⁵³ indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not. The subject is then definite and distributed, the predicate indefinite and undistributed. The word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1:1, qeo.j h=n o` lo,gojÃ the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. o` lo,goj sa.rx evge,neto (Jo. 1:14). It is true also that o` qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (convertible terms) would have

768 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

been Sabellianism.⁵⁴ See also o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:16). "God" and "love" are not convertible terms any more than " God" and "Logos" or "Logos" and "flesh." Cf. also oi` qeristai. a;ggeloi, eivsin (Mt. 13:39), o` lo,goj o` so.j avlh,qeia, evstin (Jo. 17:17), o` no,moj a`marti,a; (Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here is on purpose and essential to the true idea. Cf. also avnqrwpokto,noj and yeu,sthj (Jo. 8: 44). In Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh,, the context makes it clear (W. H. marg. avnh.r kefalh, evstin) that avnh,r is subject even without the article. In Jo. 9:34, evn a`marti,aij su. evgennh,qhj o[loj, the article with o[loj is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however, as Winer rather implied. Hence W. F. Moulton,⁵⁵ in his note to Winer, properly corrects this error. He finds that when the article is used in the predicate the article is due to a previous mention of the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject and predicate are identical.⁵⁶ The words that are identical are convertible as in the older idiom.⁵⁷ If he had added what is in Winer-Schmiedel,⁵⁸ that the article also occurs when it is the only one of its kind, he would have said all that is to be said on the subject. But even here Moulton's rule of identity and convertibility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedel's many subdivisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pronoun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently. Cf. o` lu,cnoj tou/ sw,mato,j evstin o` ovfqalmo,j (Mt. 6:22), u`mei/j evste. to. a[laj th/j gh/j (Mt. 5:13), o` de. avrgo,j evstin o` ko,smojgrk grk(13:38), su. ei= o` Cristo,jgrk grk(16:16), ei-j evstin o` avgaqo,jgrk grk(19:17), ti,j a;ra evsti.n o` pisto.j dou/lojgrk grk(24:45), tou/to, evstin to. sw/ma, mouÃ tou/to, evstin to. ai-ma, mougrk grk(26:26, 28), su. ei= o` basileu,jgrk grk(27:11), su. ei= o` ui`o.j mou (Mk. 1:11), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` te,ktwngrk grk(6:3), ou-to,j evstin o` klhrono,mojgrk grk(12:7), ouv ga,r evste u`mei/j oi` lalou/ntejgrk grk(13:11), h` zwh. h=n to. fw/j (Jo. 1:4), o` profh,thj ei= su,grk grk(1:21), su. ei= o` dida,skalojgrk grk(3:10), ou-to,j evstin o` profh,thjgrk grk(6:14), ou-to,j evstin o` a;rtojgrk grk(6:50; cf. 51), to. pneu/ma, evstin to. zwopoiou/ngrk grk(6:63), evgw, eivmi to. fw/j grk(8:12), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` kaqh,menojgrk grk(9:8; cf. 19 f.), evgw, eivmi h` qu,ragrk grk(10:7), evgw, eivmi o` poimh,ngrk grk(10:11), evgw, eivmi h` avna,stasij kai. h` zwh,grk grk(11:25, note both articles), evgw, eivmi h` o`do.j kai. h` avlh,qeia kai.

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 769

h` zwh,grk grk(14:6, note three separate articles), evkei/no,j evstin o` avgapw/n megrk grk(14:21), ou-to,j evstin o` li,qoj (Ac. 4:11), ou-to,j evstin h` du,namijgrk grk(8:10), ouvc ou-to,j evstin o` porqh,sajgrk grk(9:21), ou-to,j evstin o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(21:28), ouvk a;ra su. ei= o` Aivgu,ptiojgrk grk(21:38), h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j evstin (1 Cor. 11:3), o` de. ku,rioj to. pneu/ma, evstin (2 Cor. 3:17), auvto,j evstin h` eivrh,nh h`mw/n (Eph. 2:14), h`mei/j h` peritomh, (Ph. 3:3), h`mei/j ga,r evsmen h` peritomh,grk grk(3:3), h` a`marti,a evsti.n h`p avnomi,a (1 Jo. 3:4), evgw. eivmi to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W (Rev. 1:8), evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj grk(1:17, note both articles), su. ei= o` talai,pwrojgrk grk(3:17), etc. This list is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient to illustrate the points involved. Note o` basileu,j (Mt. 27:11) and basileu,j (Jo. 1:49). Even the superlative adjective may have the article as in Rev. 1:17 above. But see oi` e;scatoi prw/toi kai. oi` prw/toi e;scatoi (Mt. 20:16) for the usual construction. Cf. evsca,th w[ra (1 Jo. 2:18). See further evn evsca,taij h`me,raij, Jas. 5:3; 2 Tim. 3:1; evn kairw|/ evsca,tw|, 1 Pet. 1:5, and th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra|, Jo. 6:39. For the common predicate accusative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15:15), and note 1 Cor. 4:9 h`ma/j tou.j avposto,louj evsta,touj avpe,deixen. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 326.

(j) DISTRIBUTIVE. Cf. evk dhnari,ou th.n h`me,ran (Mt. 20:2), a[pax tou/ evniautou/ (Heb. 9:7), di.j tou/ sabba,tou (Lu. 18:12), e`pta,kij th/j h`me,raj (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom familiar also to the English (cf. our "by the yard," "by the pound," etc.). It is found in the papyri.⁵⁹ But e[kastoj is not used in the N. T. with the article. Cf. oi` kaq v e[na e[kastoj (Eph. 5:33). We have once avmfo,tera ta. ploi/a (Lu. 5:7), and several times oi` avmfo,Ä teroi (Eph. 2:18), ta. avmfo,teragrk grk(2:14). Cf. tou.j du,o in Eph. 2:15. Cf. Thompson, Syntax of Attic Gk., p. 51.

(k) NOMINATIVE WITH THE ARTICLE =VOCATIVE. This matter was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see nai,Ã o` path,r (Mt. 11:26) to. a;lalon kai. kwfo.n pneu/ma (Mk. 9:25), h` pai/j (Lu. 8:54), o` basileu,j (Jo. 19:3).

(1) As THE EQUIVALENT OF A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN. The article does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case makes it plain that the word in question belongs to the person mentioned. The French can say j'ai mal a la tete, avlgw/ th.n kefalh,n.⁶⁰ The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See,

770 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Addenda 3rd ed.

for instance, avpeni,yato ta.j cei/raj (Mt. 27:24; cf. Lu. 13:13). In Mt. 4:20 we have ta. di,ktua, while in verse 21 we find ta. di,ktua auvtw/n. Cf. kate,seise th|/ ceiri,. (Ac. 21:40; cf. Mk. 7:32), to.n ui`o.n to.n monogenh/ (Jo. 3:16), tw|/ noi> douleu,w (Ro. 7:25), tou/ patro,j (1 Cor. 5:1). Ti,ton kai. to.n avfelfo,n, (2 Cor. 12:18; cf. also 8:18).⁶¹ Cf. Mt. 8:3; Jo. 1:41.

(m) WITH POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. The article is always used in the N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun is predicate. So ta. evma. pa,nta sa, evstin kai. ta. sa. evma, (Jo. 17:10) h`me,teroj (Ac. 2:11) and u`me,teroj (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6:20). The article is frequently repeated as in o` kairo.j o` evmo,j (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.⁶² The Gospel of John shows o` evmo,j very frequently. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With i;dioj the article is customary, as in eivj th.n ivdi,an po,lin (Mt. 9:1). This construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet i;dioj without the article, as in ivdi,oij ovywni,oij (1 Cor. 9:7), kairoi/j ivdi,oij (1 Tim. 2:6). The anarthrous examples may be only members of a class, not the particular individual in the case. See further ch. XV, Pronouns.

(n) WITH Auvto,j. It is only necessary to mention the order auvth. h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:21), and h` auvth. sa,rx (1 Cor. 15:39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with auvto,j. So auvto. to. pneu/ma (Ro. 8:26), but to. auvto. pneu/ma (1 Cor. 12:8). See Pronouns.

(o) WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. The essential facts have been already stated in the chapter on Pronouns. Here a bare summary is sufficient. [Ode occurs in the N. T. once with the article, eivj th,nde th.n po,lin (Jas. 4:13). The usual position of the demonstrative with the article has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ou-tojÃ evkei/noj with the ordinary predicate position of adjectives. The construction may be paralleled to some extent by the French la republique francaise. Still in Homer⁶³ tou/ton to.n a;nalton= 'this man,' a;naltoj, 'that he is.' Here we probably see the origin of the idiom ou-toj o`) So fixed did the usage become that in the Attic inscriptions the construction is uniform.⁶⁴ The Boeotian inscriptions reveal the same thing.⁶⁵ The order is immaterial, whether o` a;nqrwpoj ou-toj (Lu. 2:25) or ou-toj o` a;nqrwpojgrk grk(14:30).

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 771

In general it may be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ou-toj is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, tau,thn evpoi,hsen avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn. Cf. Lu. 24:21; Ac. 1:5. Even with proper names the article occurs, as in ou-toj o` vIhsou/j (Ac. 1:11). For further details see chapter on Pronouns. It may be remarked that the rigidity apparent in the use of the article in connection with ou-toj and evkei/noj does not exist in the case of the correlative demonstratives. The article is wanting in the N. T. in connection with toio,sde and thlikou/toj) Tosou/toj occurs once only with the article, a true attributive, o` tosou/toj plou/toj (Rev. 18:16). Toiou/toj, on the other hand, usually appears with the article and in the attributive position, as in tw/n toiou,twn paidi,wn (Mk. 9:37), though once the predicate position is found, ai` duna,meij toiau/tai (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive, like oi` toiou/toi (Ro. 16:18), ta. toiau/ta (Gal. 5:21).

(p) WITH [OlojÃ Pa/j ( [Apaj). [Apaj is found chiefly in Luke and Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between a[paj and pa/j) The text of W. H. now has pa/j in the margin (Lu. 9:15), now a[pajgrk grk(15:13). Blass⁶⁶ fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of a[paj, the Attic distinction of a[paj after a consonant and pa/j after a vowel not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general a[paj does occur (when used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6:32). [Apaj, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, th.n a[pasan makroquÄ mi,an (1 Tim. 1:16), 'the total sum of his long-suffering.' Elsewe have either the order o` lao.j a[paj (Lu. 19:48) or a[panta to.n lao,n (Lu. 3:21). If ou-toj also is used, we have th.n evxousi,an tau,thn a[pasan (Lu. 4:6). Cf. oi` auvtou/ a[pantej (Ac. 16:33).

The construction of pa/j is varied and interesting. It is an exceedingly common adjective in all parts of the N. T. In general it may be said that the idiom of the N. T. is in harmony with the ancient Greek in the use of rag and the article.⁶⁷ In the singular pa/j may be used without the article in the sense of 'every.' So pa,nta peirasmo,n (Lu. 4:13), pa/n sto,ma (Ro. 3:19), pa/san sunei,dhsin avnqrw,pwn (2 Con 4:2), pa/n sto,ma (Mt. 3:10), etc. Blass⁶⁸ distinguishes between e[kastoj= 'each individual' and pa/j ='any one you please.'

Pa/j o`= 'all.' So pa/sa h` po,lij (Mt. 8:34) = 'all the city' (die ganze Stadt).⁶⁹ This is the order and it is very common. Cf. pa/san th,n

772 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

gh.n (Mt. 27:45), panti. tw|/ oi;kw| (Ac. 10:2). Even without the article pa/j may be 'all,' if it is a proper noun, like pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3), pa/j vIsrah,l (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, pa/j oi=koj vIsrah,l, there is only one "house of Israel," so that 'all' is the idea. Winer⁷⁰ says that it is treated as a proper name. Abstract substantives also may be used with or without the article. There is very little difference in idea between pa,sh| gnw,sei (1 Cor. 1:5) and pa/san th.n gnw/sin (1 Cor. 13:2). With the abstract word "every" and "all" amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So pa/san th.n pi,stin (1 Cor. 13:2), but pa,sh| sofi,a| (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like pa,sh| th|/ qli,yei h`mw/n (2 Cor. 1:4) and a general situation like pa,sh| qli,yei (ib.).⁷¹ But see pa,sh| u`pomonh|/ (2 Cor. 12:12), pa,sh| a`gni,a| (1 Tim. 5:2), meta. parrhsi,aj pa,shj (Ac. 4:29), etc. See also pa/sa sa,rxÊ rf'B'-lK' (Lu. 3:6), usually with ouv (Mt. 24:22). But note again plhrw/sai pa/san dikaiosu,nhn (Mt. 3:15) and pa,shj th/j prosdoki,aj (Ac. 12:11). See pa/sa evxousi,a (Mt. 28:18), pa,shj pleonexi,aj (Lu. 12:15). Cf. 2 Tim. 1:15. In Ph. 1:3, pa,sh| th|/ mnei,a|, the article is pertinent as in pa/sa h` kti,sij (Ro. 8:22). But in Col. 1:15, 23; 1 Pet. 2:13 pa/sa kti,sij has its true idea of 'every created thing.' But what about prwto,tokoj pa,shj kti,sewj (Col. 1:15)? See also Co1.1:9 ff. and pa/san cara,n (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are pa/sa oivkodomh, (Eph. 2:21) which is most probably 'every building' because of eivj nao,n. So in Eph. 3:15 pa/sa patria, is 'every family,' though 'all the family' is possible. In 2 Tim. 3:16 pa/sa grafh, is 'every Scripture,' if separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, e`te,ra grafh,. Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have h` grafh,, but twice grafh, occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet. 2:6, evn grafh|/, once in 2 Pet. 1:20, grafh/j. Twice in the plural (Ro. 1:2; 16:26) the article is absent. In Col. 4:12 evn panti. qelh,Ä mati tou/ qeou/ it is 'every,' 'whatever be the will of God for you' (Moffatt). In Jas. 1:17, pa/sa do,sij, we have 'every,' as in panto.j prosw,pou (Ac. 17 : 26).⁷²

Pa/j o` and the participle is a very common construction in the N. T. Here the idea is 'every,' and o` and the participle are in apposition. Thus pa/j o` avkou,wn (Mt. 7:26) is practically equivalent to pa/j o[stij avkou,eigrk grk(7:24). Cf. pa/j o` ovrgizo,menoj (Mt. 5:22), pa/j o`

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 773

Addenda 3rd ed.

ble,pwngrk grk(5:28), pa/j o` avpolu,wn grk(5:32), pa/j o` aivtw/ngrk grk(7:8), etc. But sometimes we find pa/j without the article as in panto.j avkou,ontoj (Mt. 13:19), panti. ovfei,lonti (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read tw|/) See panti. tw|/ pisteu,onti (Ro. 1:16). The abstract neuter pa/n to, is regular. So pa/n to. eivsporeuo,menon (Mt. 15:17), pa/n to. ovfeilo,Ä menongrk grk(18:34). Cf. pa/n o[ in Jo. 6:37, 39.

The idiom o` pa/j= 'the whole,' 'the totality,' is not frequent in the singular. It occurs twice.⁷³ See to.n pa,nta cro,non (Ac. 20:18), o` pa/j no,moj (Gal. 5:14), das gesamte Gesetz.⁷⁴ Cf. also Barn. 4:9, 6 pa/j cronoj. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. `O pa/j no,mojÊ 'the entire law,' 'the whole law.' It was never so common a construction in the ancient Greek⁷⁵ as pa/j o`.

In the plural pa,ntej is used sometimes without the article. The article is not necessary with proper names, like pa,ntej vAqhnai/oi (Ac. 17:21). Cf. pa,ntej vIoudai/oigrk grk(26:4). But the article is absent elsewhere also, as in pa,ntej evrga,tai avdiki,aj (Lu. 13:27), pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (Ac. 22:15; cf. Ro. 5:12, 18), pa/sin avgaqoi/j (Gal. 6:6; cf. pa/sin toi/j in 3:10), pa,ntwn a`gi,wn (Eph. 3:8), pa,ntej a;ggeloi (Heb. 1: 6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 1 Pet. 2:1; 2 Pet. 3:16. Blass⁷⁶ considers it a violation of classical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3:8 and 2 Pet. 3:16, because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4:20, pa,ntwn evn th|/ sunaÄ gwgh|/, because of the adjunct. But that objection applies chiefly to the literary style. See of oi` a[gioi pa,ntej (2 Cor. 13:12). The usual construction is pa/sai ai` geneai,. (Mt. 1:17), pa,ntaj tou.j avrcierei/jgrk grk(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ta.j po,leij pa,saj (Mt. 9:35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13:12. Pa/j may be repeated with separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see Mt. 8:16. A few examples of the attributive position are found, like oi` pa,ntej a;ndrej (Ac. 19:7)= 'the total number of the men,' as in the ancient idiom. See, also, ai` pa/sai yucai, (Ac. 27:37), tou.j su.n auvtoi/j pa,ntaj a`gi,ouj (Ro. 16:15), oi` su.n evmoi. pa,ntej avdelfoi, (Gal. 1:2), tou.j pa,ntaj h`ma/j (2 Cor. 5:10). The last example= 'we the whole number of us.' Cf. Ac. 21:21.

But we also find oi` pa,ntej without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5: 15; 1 Cor. 9:22; Ro. 11:32; Eph. 4:13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, oi` pa,ntej evk tou/ e`no.j a;rtou mete,comenÃ note the contrast with tou/ e`no,j. Still more common is ta. pa,nta for 'the sum of things,' the all.' Cf. Ro. 8:32; 11:36; 1 Cor. 11:12; 12:6, 19 (cf. here ta. pa,nta

774 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Addenda 3rd ed.

and e[n); 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:17, etc. The use of pa,ntej alone (1 Cor. 12:29), or of pa,nta (1 Cor. 13:7), calls for no comment.

The story of o[loj is brief. It is never attributive in position in the N. T. It has also an indefinite meaning which pa/j does not have. Thus evniauto.n o[lon (Ac. 11:26)= 'a whole year.' Pa/j does not have this idea apart from the article. So Jo. 7:23, o[lon a;nÄ qrwpon u`gih/, 'a whole man sound.'⁷⁷ Cf. Lu. 5:5; Ac. 28:30. In Mk. 12:30 compare evx o[lhj kardi,aj ( evn o[lh| kardi,a| Mt. 22:37) with evx o[lhj th/j yuch/j. In this sense the plural also is found as in o[louj oi;kouj (Tit. 1:11). One may compare o[lh vIerousalh,m (Ac. 21:31), with pa/sa vIeroso,luma (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order o[lh h` po,lij (Mk. 1:33), but sometimes h` po,lij o[lh (Ac. 21:30). Sometimes we have o[loj and pa/j in the same sentence as in 2 Cor. 1: 1; 1 Th. 4:10. The word may be repeated several times (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9:34), or with tou/to (Mt. 1:22).

(q) WITH Polu,j. There is a peculiar use of the article with polu,j that calls for a word. The regular construction with the article (attributive) like to. polu. auvtou/ e;leoj (1 Pet. 1:3) occurs in the singular (cf. o` to. polu,, 2 Cor. 8:15) and much more frequently in the plural. So oi` polloi, alone (Ro. 5:15; 12:5; Heb. 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:17), ta. polla, (Ro. 15:22). With the substantive added note u`da,twn pollw/n (Rev. 17:1), ai` a`marti,ai ai` pollai, (Lu. 7:47), ta. polla. gra,mmata (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with classic idiom⁷⁸ as well as the frequent use of polu,j without the article in an indefinite sense. But in o` o;coloj polu,j (Jo. 12:9, 12) Moulton⁷⁹ finds "a curious misplacement of the article." Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, avpo. tw/n plhrwma,twn avrcei,wn. It is possible that o;cloj polu,j came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type o` avnh.r avgaqo,j from Homer and AEschylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also evk th/j matai,aj u`mw/n avnastrofh/j patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1:18) and u`po. th|/j legome,nhj peritomh/j evn sarki. ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order o` polu.j o;cloj in Mk. 12 : 37. But it is a fact that o;cloj polu,j is the usual order in the N. T. (Mt. 26:47 Mk. 5:24;. Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of pa/jÃ o[lojÃ ou-toj may have played some part in the matter. For o;cloi polloi, see Mt. 19:2; Lu. 14:25. In Mt. 21:8 (parallel

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 775

with Mk. 12:37, o` polu.j o;cloj) we have o` plei/stoj o;cloj, but it is difficult to lay much stress on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom oi` plei,onej may be seen in 1 Cor. 9:19. See further ch. XIV.

(r) ;AkrojÃ [HmisujÃ ;EscatojÃ Me,soj. As to a;kroj, it does not appear as an adjective in the N. T. In Lu. 16:24 and Heb. 11:21 to. a;kron is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of a;krou and a;krwn in Mk. 13:27 and Mt. 24:31. This is in harmony with the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20; Is. 5: 26).⁸⁰ The same situation is repeated in the case of h[misuj. Cf. e[wj h`misouj th/j basilei,aj (Mk. 6:23), h[misu kairou/ (Rev. 12:14). Cf. h[misu alone (Rev. 11:9, 11). But e;sca,th| is used attributively as in h` evsca,th pla,nh (Mt. 27:64), th|/ evsca,th| h`me,ra| (Jo. 6:39, etc.), to. e;scaton lepto,n (Lu. 12:59), etc. The construction o` e;scatoj alone (Rev. 2:8) and ta. e;scata tou/ avnqrw,pou (Lu. 11:26) is classical.⁸¹ So is indeed also pa,ntwn e;scatoj (Mk. 9:35), evn kairw|/ evsca,tw| (1 Pet. 1:5). vEp v evsca,Ä tou tw/n h`merw/n (Heb. 1:2) is probably a substantive use. But in 2 Pet. 3:3 evp v evsca,twn tw/n h`merw/n we may have the partitive construction in the predicate position. There is no doubt of it as to me,soj. Here also we find usually to. me,son (like to. a;kron above) absolutely (Mk. 3:3), or the various prepositional phrases like eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), evnme,sw| (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), avna. me,son (Mk. 7:31), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49) or me,son as preposition (Ph. 2:15). But the old partitive construction occurs in me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6), h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13) without the article. The true predicate is found in to. katape,tasma tou/ naou/ me,son (Lu. 23:45). So me,soj in Ac. 1:18. Cf. also to. ploi/on me,son th/j qala,sshj (Mt. 14:24, marg. W. H.), where me,son is probably a preposition. In Jo. 19:18, me,son to.n vIhsou/n, we have 'Jesus in the midst.' There is, however, no example in the N. T. like the old classic idiom which is seen in the LXX. Cf. evk me,shj th/j po,lewj (Ezek. 11:23).⁸² See also ch. XIV.

(s) WITH ;Alloj AND [Eteroj. The article is frequent with a;lloj but never in the sense of 'the rest of,' like ancient Greek. But oi` a;lloi. (1 Cor. 14:29) is close to it. It is used where only two are meant, as in o` Pe,troj kai. o` a;lloj maqhth,j (Jo. 20:3), h` a;llh Mari,a (Mt. 28 : 1). The order o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj occurs (Jo. 18:16). Cf. also tou/ a;llou tou/ sunstaurwqe,ntoj (Jo. 19:32) where the article is repeated, like toi/j loipoi/j toi/j, etc. (Rev. 2:24). Blass⁸³

776 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

says that no Attic writer would have said tai/j e`te,raij po,lesin= 'the remaining cities' (Lu. 4:43). He considers eivj th.n e`te,ran (Mt. 10:23 aB) "incorrect" for 'the next' city, as well as o` e[teroj= 'the third' in Lu. 19:20. But it is not the use of the article here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of a;lloj and e[teroj in the koinh,. See ch. XV, Pronouns.

(t) Mo,noj. This need detain us but a moment. The essential facts are succinctly given by Winer-Schmiedel.⁸⁴ Without the article mo,noj occurs usually even with proper names, as vIhsou/j mo,noj (Lu. 9:36). So mo,nw| qew|/ (Ro. 16:27; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the predicate use occurs also. So Mt. 12:4 toi/j i`ereu/si mo,noij;grk grk(24:36) path/r mo,noj ( aBD); mo,noi oi` maqhtai, (Jo. 6:22); mo,noj o` avrciereu,j (Heb. 9:7). The articular attributive use is found a few times, as in tou/ mo,nou qeou/ (Jo. 5:44). Cf. Jo. 17:3; 1 Tim. 6:15 f.; Ju. 4. See ch. XIV.

VI. Position with Attributives. The article does not make a word or phrase attributive. It may be attributive without the article. It is necessary to go over much of the same ground again (Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in order to get the subject clearly before us.

(a) WITH ADJECTIVES. So e;rgon avgaqo,n (Ph. 1:6) is attributive= 'a good work,' though it is anarthrous. Cf. also e;rgoij avgaqoi/j (Eph. 2:10). Cf. mikra. zu,mh (1 Cor. 5:6). But when the article is used before a word or phrase there is no doubt about its being attributive.

1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the article and the substantive, as in to. kalo.n o;noma (Jas. 2:7), o` avgaqo.j a;nqrwpoj (Mt. 12:35), to. evmo.n o;nomagrk grk(18:20). In this normal attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive.⁸⁵ Cf. correct text Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3 (correct text); 1 Jo. 5:20. So tou/ makari,ou qeou/ (1 Tim. 1:11). There must be a special reason for the other construction.⁸⁶

2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the order⁸⁷ o` poimh.n o` kalo,j (Jo. 10:11) both substantive and adjective receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.⁸⁸ Cf. o` ui`o,j mou o` avgaphto,j (Mt.

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 777

17:5), th.n gh/n th.n avgaqh,n (Lu. 8:8), to. fw/j to. avlhqino,n, (Jo. 1:9), to. u[dwr to. zw/ngrk grk(4:11), o` kairo.j o` evmo,jgrk grk(7:6), h` a;mpeloj h` avlhqinh,grk grk grk(15:1), to. pneu/ma to. ponhro,n (Ac. 19:15). Cf. also Mt. 6:6; Lu. 7:47; Jo. 6:13; 1 Cor. 12:31; 2 Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:13; Col. 1:21; Heb. 13:20; 1 Jo. 1:2; 2:25; 4:9. There is an apparent difficulty in Heb. 9:1, to, te a[gion kosmiko,n, which may be compared with o` o;cloj polu,j, p. 774 (Jo. 12:9).⁸⁹ Perhaps both a[gion and kosmiko,n were felt to be adjectives.

3. Article Repeated Several Times. So in Ac. 12:10, th.n pu,lhn th.n sidhra/n th.n fe,rousan. Cf. to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non (Mt. 25:41), o` maqhth.j o` a;lloj o` gnwsto,j (Jo. 18:16), th.n r`omfai,an th.n di,stomon th.n ovxei/an (Rev. 2:12). In particular note the repetition of the article in Heb. 11:12; Rev. 3:14; 17:1; 21:9. In Rev. 1:5 note four articles, o` ma,rtuj o` pisto,jÃ o` prwto,tokoj- kai. o` a;rcwn. Cf. Rev. 12:9; 1 Pet. 4:14. For this common classic idiom see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph. 1:29, u`mi/n evcaÄ ri,sqh to. u`pe.r Cristou/, the two infinitives following, each with to, explain the first to,.

4. One Article with Several Adjectives. When several adjectives are used we find an article with each adjective if the adjectives accent different aspects sharply. So o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj kai. o` zw/n (Rev. 1:17; cf. 22:13). Cf. also o` w;n - kai. o` evrco,menojgrk grk(1:4, 8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of adjectives referring to the same substantive. So o` talai,pwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). In Mt. 24: 45, o` pisto.j dou/loj kai. fro,nimoj, the kai. carries over the force of the article.⁹⁰ So likewise the presence of another attribute may explain the probable predicate position patroparado,tou (1 Pet. 1: 18) and ceiropoih,tou (Eph. 2:11).⁹¹ See further (c), 5.

5. With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.⁹² It is eivrh,nhn th.n evmh,n (Jo. 14:27). Here the substantive is indefinite and general, while the attribute makes a particular application. Cf. no,moj o` duna,menoj (Gal. 3:21). Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 93) finds this idiom frequent in koinh,. So gunai/ka th.n euvgenesta,thn (I. G., XII, 7 N. 240, 13).

6. With Participles. The participle may come between the article and the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an (Mt. 25:34). Cf. 1 Tim. 1:10; Ro. 8:18; 1 Cor. 12:22; 1 Pet. 1:13. On the other hand (cf. 5),

778 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

all else may come between the article and the participle, as in 1 Pet. 1:10, oi- profhteu,santej. A long clause (including a relative clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in Ro. 16:17, tou.j- poiou/ntaj. Once more, the participle may come in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, o`- avnaÄ gennh,saj, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1:3. Either the participle or the modifier may occur outside of the attributive complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 289 f.). Gildersleeve gives copious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive participle. The article may be repeated after the substantive, like to. u[dwr to. zw/n above (Jo. 4:11), oi` grammatei/j oi` ÄÄ kataba,ntej (Mk. 3:22). Cf. Jo. 5:12; 1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Pet. 1:25; 5:10; Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13:20. The article may occur with the participle when not with the substantive. This supplementary addition of the article is more common with the participle than with other adjectives.⁹³ Cf. paidi,oij toi/j evn avgora|/ kaqhme,noij (Lu. 7:32), gunai/kej ai` sunakolouqou/sai auvtw|/ grk(23:49), avgge,lou tou/ ovfqe,ntoj auvtw|/ (Ac. 7:35), crusi,ou tou/ avpollume,nou (1 Pet. 1:7), and in particular ouvde. ga.r o;noma, evstin e[teron to. dedome,non (Ac. 4:12). Cf. also Ac. 1:12; Gal. 3:21; Ro. 2:14 $e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta). But in qeou/ tou/ evgei,rantoj (Gal. 1:1), Cristou/ tou/ do,ntoj grk(1:4), the proper names are definite without the article. So vIhsou/n to.n r`uo,menon (1 Th. 1:10), etc. Participles in apposition with personal pronouns may also have the article. Cf. evgw, eivmi o` lalw/n soi (Jo. 4:26), tw|/ qe,lonti evmoi, (Ro. 7:21), su. o` kri,nwn (Jas. 4: 12), h`mi/n toi/j peripatou/sin (Ro. 8:4), h`ma/j tou.j pisteu,ontaj (Eph. 1:19), auvtoi/j toi/j pisteu,ousin (Jo. 1:12), etc. Note two articles in 1 Th. 4:15, 17, h`mei/j oi` zw/ntej oi` perileipo,menoi. Cf. Eph. 1: 12; 1 Jo. 5:13 ( u`mi/n - toi/j p)); 1 Cor. 8:10. The artic. part. may be in appos. with the verb, as in e;cwmen oi` katafugo,ntej (Heb. 6:18; cf. 4:3). Cf., on the other hand, h`mei/jÃ avporfaÄ nisqe,ntej (1 Th. 2:17). The article and participle may follow tine,jÃ as in tinaj tou.j pepoiqo,taj (Lu. 18:9), tine,j eivsin oi` tara,ssonÄ tej (Gal. 1:7). If the substantive has the article and the participle is anarthrous, the participle may be (cf. above) predicate. So th.n fwnh.n evnecqei/san (2 Pet. 1:18), toi/j pneu,masin- avpeiqh,sasin (1 Pet. 3:19 f.), a`rpage,nta to.n toiou/ton (2 Cor. 12:2), to.n a;ndra tou/ton sullhmfqe,nta (Ac. 23:27). Cf. Lu. 16:14; Jo. 4:6; Ro. 2:27; 1 Cor. 14:7; 2 Cor. 3:2; 11:9; Heb. 10:2; 1 Pet. 1:12. The presence of the article with the participle here would radically change the sense. The same article may be used with several par-

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ACRON) 779

Addenda 3rd ed.

ticiples, as in tou/ avgaph,santo,j me kai. parado,ntoj (Gal. 2:20), tw|/ avgapw/nti kai. lu,santi (Rev. 1:5). The use of the article with the participle in the predicate is illustrated by qeo.j o` dikaiw/n\ ti,j o` kaÄ takrinw/n; (Ro. 8:33; cf. Jo. 5:45). In questions the pronoun, though coming first, may sometimes be really predicate. Then again the article may be absent from both substantive and participle (predicate or attributive), as in gunh. ou=sa (Mk. 5:25), qew|/ zw/nti (1 Th. 1:9), avnqrw,pw| oivkodomou/nti (Lu. 6:48).

(b) WITH GENITIVES. From the nature of the case the genitive as the genus-case is usually attributive. In general the construction in the N. T. follows the ancient idiom.⁹⁴

1. The Position between the Article and the Substantive. This is common enough, and especially so in 1 and 2 Peter. So h` tou/ qeou/ makroqumi,a (1 Pet. 3:20); 1:17; 2:15, 3:1. See in particular demonstrative pronouns like th|/ evkei,nou ca,riti (Tit. 3:7). Plato (Soph., 254a) has ta. th/j tw/n pollw/n yuch/j o;mmata. For a series of such genitives in this position see o` - ko,smoj (1 Pet. 3:3). For adjective and genitive see 3:4, o` krupto.j th/j kardi,aj a;nqrwpoj. Cf. Mt. 12:31; 1 Pet. 5:1. In 1 Pet. 4:14 the article is repeated, to) th/j do,xhj kai. to. tou/ qeou/ pneu/ma. See also Jo. 1:40, tw/n du,o tw/n avkousa,nton.

2. Genitive after the Substantive without Repetition of the Article.⁹⁵ This is even more common. Thus to.n fo,bon tw/n vIoudai,wn (Jo. 20:19), th/j avga,phj tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 8:39). Cf. 2 Cor. 4:4; Ro. 8:2; 1 Th. 1:3. Sometimes the two types are combined, thus h` evpi,geioj h`mw/n oivki,a tou/ skh,nouj (2 Cor. 5:1), th/j tw/n avposto,lwn u`mw/n evntolh/j tou/ kuri,ou kai. swth/roj (2 Pet. 3:2). The personal pronouns illustrate either order except that you is nearly always outside (but see tw/n patrikw/n mou parado,sewn, Gal. 1:14, and evn th|/ prw,th| mou avpologi,a|, 2 Tim. 4:16); either, as is usual, o` ku,rio,j mou (Jo. 20:28) or mou tou.j ovfqalmou,j (Jo. 9:11). We find th|/ auvtou/ ca,riti (Ro. 3:24) and to.n lao.n auvtou/ (Mt. 1:21) and auvtou/ evn th|/ avga,ph| (Jo. 15:10. Cf. 9:6; 11:32), th.n e`autou/ auvlh,n (Lu. 11: 21) and th.n sa,rka e`autou/ (Gal. 6:8), th.n genea.n th.n e`autou/ (Lu. 16: 8) and e`autw/n ta. i`ma,tia (Mt. 21:8). Cf. also to. o;noma, sou (Mt. 6:9), h` dexia, sou cei,r (Mt. 5:30; but not 5:29). Cf. also 1 Tim. 5:23), sou th.n kefalh,n (Mt. 6:17), to.n a;rton h`mw/ngrk grk(6:11), u`mw/n tou/ e;rgou (1 Th. 1:3), th.n u`mw/n avga,phn (Col. 1:8), etc. With the partitive the usual (but see Jo. 6:70; 9:16, 40) position is this: to. tri,ton th/j gh/j (Rev. 8:7). Cf. 1 Cor. 15:9.

780 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

3. Repetition of Article with Genitive. The genitive may follow the other substantive with a repeated article. Here the article closely resembles the original demonstrative. So o` lo,goj o` tou/ staurou/ (1 Cor. 1:18), tw|/ e;qei tw|/ Mwuse,wj (Ac. 15:1), th.n didaÄ skali,an th.n tou/ swth/roj h`mw/n (Tit. 2:10). This construction is not very common.⁹⁶

4. The Article Only with Genitive. Cf. evxousi,aj kai. evpitroph/j th/j tw/n avrciere,wn (Ac. 26:12). Cf. Ac. 1:12, o;rouj tou/, with Lu. 19:29, to. o;roj to,. Here again the article is almost pure demonstrative as in Jas. 1:25, no,mon te,leion to.n th/j evleuqeri,aj= 'perfect law, that of liberty.' Volker (Syntax, p. 16) finds abundant illustrations of these positions in the papyri. So with proper names like Mari,a h` vIakw,bou (Mk. 15:40), Dauei.d to.n tou/ vIessai, (Ac. 13:22), etc. Cf. Mt. 4:21.

5. Article Absent with Both. The genitive may still be attributive and both substantives definite. Cf. pu,lai a|[dou (Mt. 16:18), shmei/on peritomh/j (Ro. 4:11), no,mou pi,stewjgrk grk(3:27), etc. The context must decide whether the phrase is definite or not. Cf. qeou/ ui`o,j (Mt. 27:54), euvergesi,a| avnqrw,pou (Ac. 4: 9).

6. The Correlation of the Article. In such cases, according to Middleton,⁹⁷ if two substantives are united by the genitive, the article occurs with both or is absent from both.⁹⁸ But note (H. Scott) that (1) the genitive may be anarthrous if it is a proper name, (2) the governing noun may be anarthrous if it depends on a preposition. The normal type may be well illustrated by tw|/ no,mw| th/j a`marti,aj (Ro. 7:23) and no,mw| a`marti,ajgrk grk(7:25). The genitive a`marti,aj is an abstract noun which may or may not have the article. But no,mw| is definite in either instance in 'the law of sin.' See again tw|/ no,mw| tou/ qeou/grk grk(7:22) and no,mw| qeou/grk grk(7:25). Ceo,j can be definite with or without the article. So, again, to. fro,nhma tou/ pneu,matojgrk grk(8:6) and pneu/ma qeou/Ã pneu/ma Cristou/grk grk(8:9), o`moiw,mati sarko,jgrk grk(8:3) and to. fro,nhma th/j sarko,jgrk grk(8:6). Cf. also o` nomo,j tou/ pneu,matoj th/j zwh/j grk(8:2), th.n evleu,qeri,an th/j do,xhj tw/n te,knwn tou/ qeou/ grk(8:21), th.n dwrea.n tou/ a`gi,ou pneu,matoj (Ac. 2:38), bi,bloj gene,sewj vIhsou/ Cristou/ (Mt. 1:1). Cf. 1 Th. 1:3;. Rev. 1:1. These examples could be multiplied indefinitely. If one member of the group is a proper name, the article does not always appear. So th|/ evkklhsi,a| qessalonike,wn (1 Th. 1:1), but tai/j evkklhsi,aij th/j GalaÄ ti,aj (Gal. 1:2). Note also qeou/ patro.j h`mw/n (Eph. 1:2) and o` qeo.j

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 781

kai. path.r tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n grk(1:3). Cf. also to. e;rgon Kuri,ou (Ph. 2:30), to. pneu/ma Cristou/ (1 Pet. 1:11; cf. Ac. 16:7). Such examples as these with proper names are after all "very rare."⁹⁹ See Mt. 1: 12; 16:13; Ac. 2:38; Rev. 12:17. Then again other phrases otherwise definite do not require the article. So the prepositional phrase evn dexia|/ tou/ qeou/ (Ro. 8:34; cf. Heb. 1:3), but note th|/ dexia|/ tou/ qeou/ (Ac. 2:33). In general, where the word without the article is not otherwise definite, it is indefinite even when the other one has the article. One is indefinite, the other definite. So avrch.n tw/n shmei,wn (Jo. 2:11)- 'a beginning of miracles.' In Mk. 1: 1, avrch. tou/ euvaggeli,ou vIhsou/ Cristou/, the notion may be the same, though here avrch, is more absolute as the title of the book. In Ro. 3:25 it is possible to take eivj e;ndeixin th/j dikaiosu,nhj auvtou/= 'for a showing of his righteousness,' while in 3:26 pro.j th.n e;ndeixin th/j dikaiosunhj auvtou/ may refer to the previous mention of it as a more definite conception. Compare also th.n tou/ qeou/ dikaiosu,nhn (Ro. 10: 3) and dikaiosunh qeou/grk grk(3:21), where, however, as in 1:17, the idea may be, probably is, 'a righteousness of God,' not 'the righteousness of God.' In examples like this (cf. qeou/ ui`o,j, Mt. 27:54) only the context can decide. Sometimes the matter is wholly doubtful. Cf. ui`o.j avnqrw,pou (Heb. 2:6) and to.n ui`o.n tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 16:13). In an example like dia,konoj tou/ Cristou/ (Col. 1:7), therefore, the idea is a minister of the Christ, not the minister of Christ. So sfraÄ gi/da th/j dikaiosu,nhjs (Ro. 4:11), a`plo,thti th/j koinwni,aj (2 Cor. 9:13). Hence ui`o.j tou/ qeou/ (Mt. 4:3, 6; Lu. 4:3) and o` ui`o.j tou/ qeou/ (Jo. 1:49; Mt. 16:16; Jo. 11:27) do not mean the same thing. The devil is represented as admitting that Jesus is a son of God, not the Son of God. In Jo. 5:25 Jesus claims o[ti oi` nekroi. avkou,sousin th/j fwnh/j tou/ ui`ou/ tou/ qeou/. In Jo. 10:36 Jesus uses argumentum ad hominem and only claims to be ui`o.j tou/ qeou/. Cf. the sneer of the passers-by in Mt. 27:40 (W. H.), ui`o.j tou/ qeou/, and the demand of Caiaphas in 26:63, o` ui`o.j tou/ qeou/. In Jo. 5:27 ui`o.j avnqrw,pou may be either 'the son of man' or 'a son of man.' Cf. a similar ambiguity in the Aramaic barnasha. The point may become very fine indeed. Cf. panto.j avndro.j h` kefalh. o` Cristo,j and kefalh. gunaiko.j o` avnh,r (1 Cor. 11:3). At any rate man is not affirmed to be woman's head in quite the same sense that Christ is man's head. But see also kefalh. tou/ Cristou/ o` qeo,j. In these examples the anarthrous substantive is predicate as is the case with avnh,r evstin kefalh. th/j gunaiko.j w`j o` Cristo.j kefalh. th/j evkklhsi,aj (Eph. 5:23). Hence the matter is not to be stressed here, as another

782 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

principle comes into play. It is possible also that the qualitative force of anarthrous nouns comes in here (Eph. 5:23, kefalh. th/j gunaiko,jÃ kefalh. th/j evkklhsi,ajÃ swth.r tou/ sw,matoj). See VIII, (j). Cf. xe,noi tw/n diaqhkw/n th/j evpaggeli,aj (Eph. 2:12). So e`orth. tw/n vIoudai,wn (Jo. 5:1) = 'a feast of the Jews,' a;rcwn tw/n vIoudai,wn (3: 1). Cf. Ac. 6:1. Cf. ba,ptisma metanoi,aj eivj a;fesin a`martiw/n (Mk. 1:4) and eivj a;fesin tw/n a`martiw/n u`mw/n (Ac. 2:38), ei`j koinwni,an tou/ ui`ou/ (1 Cor. 1:9), prepositional phrase. But enough of a somewhat thorny subject.¹⁰⁰

1. Between the Article and the Noun. Thus h` a;nw klh/sij (Ph. 3:14), h` kat v evklogh.n pro,qesij (Ro. 9:11), h` par v evmou/ diaqh,kh grk(11:27), o` evn evlaci,stw| a;dikoj (Lu. 16:10), th.n evn tw|/ sw|/ ovfqalmw|/ doko,n (Mt. 7:3), oi` evk peritomh/j pistoi, (Ac. 10:45), tai/j pro,teron evn th|/ avgnoi,a| u`mw/n evpiqumi,aij (1 Pet. 1:14). Cf. Ro. 2:27.

2. Article Repeated.¹⁰¹ Thus pa,ntwn tw/n sperma,twn tw/n evpi. th/j gh/j (Mk. 4:31), ai` duna,meij ai` evn toi/j ouvranoi/jgrk grk(13:25), th/j avpoluÄ trw,sewj th/j evn Cristw|/ vIhsou/ (Ro. 3:24), ta. paqh,mata ta. dia. tou/ no,mougrk grk(7:5), h` evntolh. h` eivj zwh,ngrk grk(7:10). See further Mt. 5:16; Lu. 20:35; Jo. 1:45; Ac. 8:1; 24:5; 26:4; Ro. 4:11; 8:39; 15:26; 16:1; 1 Cor. 2:11 f.; 4:17; 2 Cor. 2:6; 9:1; 11:3; Ph. 3:9; 1 Th. 1:8; 1 Tim. 1:14; Rev. 5:5; 11:2, 19, etc. In Eph. 1:15 we find both constructions th.n kaq v upma/j pi,stin kai. th.n eivj pa,ntaj tou.j a`gi,ouj. In Rev. 8:3 (9:13), to. qusiasth,rion to. cruÄ sou/n to. evnw,pion tou/ qro,nou, the article is repeated with both adjective and adjunct.

3. Only with Adjunct. So oivkonomi,an qeou/ th.n evn pi,stei (1 Tim. 1:4), dikaiosu,nhn th.n evk pi,stewj (Ro. 9:30), evn avga,ph| th|/ evn Cristw|/ vIhsou/ (2 Tim. 1:13). For numerous classic illustrations of these three positions see Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 285 ff.

4. Only with the Noun. In such cases the adjunct may be either attributive or predicate. Only the context can decide. In conversation the tone of voice, the manner, the inflection make clear what in written speech is ambiguous. Still in most instances in the N. T. the point is plain.¹⁰² The cases here dealt with are those that occur without other defining phrases. In Eph. 6:5 some MSS. read toi/j kuri,oij kata. sa,rka. So in Lu. 16:10 we find both o` evn evlaci,stw|/ a;dikoj and o` pisto.j evn evlaci,stw|. I see no point in Blass'

THE ARTICLE ( TO;ARQRON) 783

Addenda 3rd ed.

remark¹⁰³ that "the closely connected predicative clause could not be severed by the insertion of the article." The article could easily have been repeated or the same order preserved in both clauses. It is much simpler and truer to say that the need of another article was not felt. The same remark applies to toi/j plousi,oij evn tw|/ nu/n aivw/ni (1 Tim. 6:17), tw/n avpeiqou,ntwn evn th|/ vIoudai,a| (Ro. 15:31), to.n vIsrah.l kata. sa,rka (1 Cor. 10:18), ta. e;qnh evn sakri, (Eph. 2:11), tw/n evntolw/n evn do,gmasingrk grk(2:15), o` de,smioj evn kuri,w| (4 : 1), oi` nekroi. evn Cristw|/ (1 Th. 4:16), th/j koinwni,aj eivj auvtou,j (2 Cor. 9:13), to.n do,kimon evn Cristw|/ (Ro. 16:10), oi` koimhqe,ntej evn Cristw|/ (1 Cor. 15: 18). Cf. Ph. 1:1. In Col. 1:4, th.n pi,stin u`mw/n evn Cristw|/, and Ph. 4:19, to. plou/toj auvtou/ evn do,xh| evn Cristw|/ vIhsou/ more than one adjunct occurs outside the article. Cf. Eph. 3:4, 13. Blass¹⁰⁴ considers this idiom peculiar to the N. T., but pertinent examples are cited¹⁰⁵ from Herodotus V, 108, h` avggeli,a peri. tw/n Sardi,wn, Thucydides, II, 52. 1, etc. The vernacular character of the N. T. diction renders it more frequent. It is not common in classic Greek.¹⁰⁶

5. When Several Adjuncts Occur. "It often becomes inconvenient and clumsy to insert all of these between the article and the substantive."¹⁰⁷ Even so, but at bottom the matter does not differ in principle from the examples above. We have seen the same freedom with a second attributive adjective (cf. Mt. 24:45). See a good example of two adjuncts in Eph. 1:15, th.n kaq v u`ma/j pi,stin evn tw|/ kuri,w| vIhsou/. The first attribute may be adjective, genitive, adverb or adjunct. So to. kaq v h`mw/n ceiro,grafon toi/j do,gmasin (Col. 2:14), th/j evmh/j parousi,aj pa,lin pro.j u`ma/j (Ph. 1:26), th.n evk qeou/ dikaiosu,nhn evpi. th|/ pi,stieigrk grk(3:9), th.n evmh.n avnastrofh,n pote evn tw|/ vIoudai?smw|/ (Gal. 1:13). Cf. Ph. 1:5. The article and the participle readily yield examples like o` kata. polu. avnagennh,saj eivj evlpi,da (1 Pet. 1:3), tou.j evn duna,mei qeou/ frouroume,nouj dia. pi,stewjgrk grk(1:5). But sometimes the several adjuncts (cf. adjectives and genitives) are inserted between the article and the substantive. So th/j evn tw|/ ko,smw| evn evpiqumi,a| fqora/j (2 Pet. 1:4). Cf. Ac. 21: 28. For similar position of several genitives and adjuncts see 2 Pet. 2:7; Lu. 1:70. In particular note Ro. 16:17 for the various phrases between tou,j and poiou/ntaj. Note the many adjuncts in Ro. 3:25 f. See further VI, (a), 6.

784 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

6. Phrases of Verbal Origin. Phrases that are consciously verbal in origin readily do without the repeated article.¹⁰⁸ So in Ro. 6:3 we have eivj to.n qa,naton auvtou/ evbapti,sqhmen and in the next verse we read suneta,fhmen auvtw|/ dia. tou/ bapti,smatoj eivj to.n qa,naton. It is plain, therefore, that here eivj to.n qa,naton is to be construed with bapti,smaÄ tojÃ not with suneta,fhmen. In other examples the verbal construction appears in other contexts. It is, however, possible that the usage with the verb renders the anarthrous construction more frequent. So Ph. 1:26, th/j evmh/j parousi,aj pa,lin pro.j u`ma/j, may be compared with parei/nai pro.j u`ma/j (Gal. 4:20). Cf. also paqh,mata u`pe,r (Col. 1:24) with pa,scein u`pe,r (1 Pet. 2:21), qli,yesin u`pe,r (Eph. 3:13) with qlibo,meqa u`pe,r (2 Cor. 1:6). The classic idiom shows similar examples.¹⁰⁹

7. Exegetical Questions. Sometimes it is quite important for doctrinal reasons to be careful to note whether the adjunct is attributive or predicate. Thus in Ro. 8:3, kate,krine th.n a`marti,an evn th|/ sarki,Ã if evn th|/ sarki, is attributive with a`marti,an, there is a definite assertion of sin in the flesh of Jesus. But if the phrase is predicate and is to be construed with kate,krine, no such statement is made. Here the grammarian is helpless to decide the point. The interpreter must step in and appeal to the context or other passages for light. One conversant with Paul's theology will feel sure that evn sarki, is here meant to be taken as predicate. The same ambiguity arises in verse 2, o` no,moj tou/ pneu,matoj th/j zwh/j evn Cristw|/ hvleuqe,rwse,n se avpo. tou/ no,mou th/j a`marti,aj kai. tou/ qana,tou) Here it is reasonably clear that evn Cristw|/ is predicate with hvleuqe,rwsen. So in Ro. 3:25 probably evn tw|/ auvtou/ ai[mati, as well as eivj e[ndeixin is predicate with proe,qeto. Another example from Romans is found in 5:8, where eivj h`ma/j belongs to suni,sthsin, not avga,phn. So in Jo. 15:11 evn u`mi/n is construed with h|= not h` evmh,. For further illustration see Ac. 22:18; 1 Cor. 2:7; 9:18; Eph. 2:7; 3:12; 5:26; Ph. 1:14; 3:9; Col. 1:9; Phil. 1:20; Heb. 13:20.

8. Anarthrous Attributives. Examples occur also of attributives when the article is absent from both substantive and adjunct. Thus a;nqrwpon tuflo.n evk geneth/j (Jo. 9:1), a;nqrwpoj evn pneu,mati avkaqa,rtw| (Mk. 1:23), cara. evn pneu,mati a`gi,w| (Ro. 14:17), e;ti kaq v u`perbolh.n o`do,n (1 Cor. 12:31), etc. Note in particular 2 Cor. 11:23, 27. The older Greek furnishes illustration of this idiom.¹¹⁰

THE ARTICLE ( TO;ARQRON) 785

Addenda 3rd ed.

(d) SEVERAL ATTRIBUTIVES WITH Kai,.

1. Several Epithets Applied to the Same Person or Thing. See already under VI, (a), 4. Usually only one article is then used. For classic examples see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 330. So, for instance, o` talaipwroj kai. evleino.j kai. ptwco.j kai. tuflo.j kai. gumno,j (Rev. 3:17). This is the normal idiom in accord with ancient usage. So Mk. 6:3 o` ui`o.j th/j Mari,aj kai. avdelfo.j vIakw,bou, Lu. 6:49 o` de. avkou,saj kai. mh. poih,saj, Ac. 3:14 to.n a[gion kai. di,kaion, Jas. 3:9 to.n ku,rion kai. pate,ra, 2 Pet. 2:20 (3:2) tou/ kuri,ou kai. swth/roj, 1 Tim. 4:3 toi/j pistoi/j kai. evpegnwko,si) also Gal. 1:7; Eph. 6:21; 1 Tim. 6:15; Heb. 3:1; Rev. 1:9 (both o` and th|/). When a second article does occur, it accents sharply a different aspect of the person or phase of the subject. So in Rev. 1:17 o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatojÃ kai. o` zw/n, one article would have been sufficient, but would have obscured the separate affirmations here made. Cf. also to. ;Alfa kai. to. =W in 1:8; 21:6. In Jo. 21:24 W. H. read o` marturw/n peri. tou,twn kai. o` gra,yaj tau/ta, but they bracket kai. o`. The second article is very doubtful. A similar superfluity of the second article appears in the second h` (brackets W. H.) in Ac. 17:19, and in the second to, in 1 Pet. 4:14, to. th/j do,xhj kai. to. tou/ qeou/ pneu/ma (due probably to the second genitive to emphasize each). So Jo. 1:40. See pp. 762, 782. Outside of special cases like these only one article is found when several epithets are applied to the same person. The presence of a genitive with the group of words does not materially alter the construction. The genitive may occur with either substantive and apply to both.¹¹¹ So o` qeo.j kai. path.r h`mw/n (1 Th. 3:11) and tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n kai. swth/roj (2 Pet. 1:11). As a matter of fact such genitives (see above) occur either inside or outside of the regimen of the article. Cf. tw|/ qew|/ kai. patri. h`mw/n (Ph. 4:20), o` qeo.j kai. path.r tou/ kui,ou h`mw/n (1 Pet. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:3; Eph. 1:3). The presence of h`mw/n, with kuri,ou does not affect the construction any more than the use of kuri,ou itself or h`mw/n above. In Ph. 3:3 one adjunct comes before one participle, the other after the other participle, but only one article occurs. A most important passage is 2 Pet. 1:1, tou/ qeou/ h`mw/n kai. swth/roj vIhsou/ Cristou/. Curiously enough Winer¹¹² endeavours to draw a distinction between this passage, "where there is not even a pronoun with swth/roj" and the identical construction in 2 Pet. 1:11, tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n kai. swth/roj vIhsou/ Cristou/, which he cites¹¹³ as an example of "merely predicates of the same person." Stranger

786 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

still, he bases his objection on doctrinal grounds, a matter that does not per se concern the grammarian. The matter is handled in Winer-Schmiedel,¹¹⁴ where it is frankly admitted that the construction in 2 Pet. 1:1 is the same as that in 1:11 and also in 2:20; 3:2, 18. Schmiedel says also that "grammar demands that one person be meant." In Ju. 4, <, to.n mo,non despo,thn kai. ku,rion h`mw/n vIhsou/n Cristo,n, the same point holds, but the fact that ku,rioj is so often anarthrous like a proper name slightly weakens it. The same remark applies also to 2 Th. 1:12, tou/ qeou/ h`mw/n kai. kuri,ou vIhsou/ Cristou/, and Eph. 5:5, evn th|/ basilei,a| tou/ Cristou/ kai. qeou/; (since qeou/ often occurs without the article). One person may be described in these three examples, but they are not so clear as the type tou/ kuri,ou h`mw/n kai. swth/roj (2 Pet. 1:1, 11). In Tit. 2:13, tou/ mega,lou qeou/ kai. swth/roj h`mw/n Cristou/ vIhsou/, it is almost certain that one person is again described. Cf. also th.n makari,an evlpi,da kai. evpifa,neian th/j do,xhj where the one article unites closely the two substantives. Moulton¹¹⁵ quotes most pertinently papyri examples of vii/A.D., which show that among Greek-speaking Christians "our great God and Saviour" was a current form of speech as well as the Ptolemaic formula, tou/ mega,lou qeou/ euverge,tou kai. swth/roj (G. H. 15, ii/B.C.). He cites also Wendland's argument¹¹⁶ that the rival rendering in Titus is as great an "exegetical mistake" as to make two persons in 2 Pet. 1:1. Moulton's conclusion¹¹⁷ is clear enough to close the matter: "Familiarity with the everlasting apotheosis that flaunts itself in the papyri and inscriptions of Ptolemaic and Imperial times lends strong support to Wendland's contention that Christians, from the latter part of i/A.D. onward, deliberately annexed for their divine Master the phraseology that was impiously arrogated to themselves by some of the worst of men."

2. When to be Distinguished. Then the article is repeated. So Mt. 23:2 oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi, Mk. 2:18 oi` maqhtai. vIwa,nou kai. oi` Farisai/oi, 6:21 toi/j megista/sin auvtou/ kai. toi/j cilia,rcoij kai. toi/j prw,toij 11: 9 oi` proa,gontej kai. oi` avkolouqou/ntej 11:18 (cf. 14:43) oi` avrcierei/j kai. oi` grtammatei/jÃ Mk. 12:13 tw/n Farisai,wn kai. tw/n `Hrw|dianw/n, 11: 39 tou/ pothri,ou kai. tou/ pi,nakojÃ 15:6 stou.j fi,louj kai. tou.j gei,tonaj, 23:4 tou.j avrcierei/j kai. tou.j o;cloujÃ Jo. 4:37 o` spei,rwn kai. o` qeri,zwn, 1 Cor. 3:8 o` futeu,wn kai. o` poti,zwnÃ Jas. 3:11 to. gluku. kai. to. pikro,nÃ Ac. 26:30 o` basileu.j kai. o` h`gemw,nÃ Rev. 18:20 oi` a[gioi kai. oi` avpo,stoloi kai. oi` profh/tai) Cf. Rev. 11: 4;

THE ARTICLE ( TO;ARQRON) 787

13:16; 2 Th. 1:8. The list can be extended almost indefinitely.¹¹⁸ But these are examples of the same number, gender and case. Nor have I referred to abstract words of quality like the list in Rev. 7:12, or examples like ta.j sunagwga.j kai. ta.j avrca.j kai. ta.j evxousi,aj (Lu. 12:11). It is not contended that these groups are all absolutely distinct (cf. oi` grammatei/j kai. oi` Farisai/oi), but that they are treated as separate. Even with the scribes and Pharisees they did not quite coincide. Cf. Mt. 21:45; Ac. 11:6. The use of another attributive may sometimes be partly responsible for two articles. So Lu. 8:24 tw|/ avne,mw| kai. tw|/ klu,dwni tou/ u[datoj, Mk. 2:18 oi` maqhtai/ vIwa,nou kai. oi` Farisai/oi, 11:15 ta.j trape,zaj tw/n kollubistw/n kai. ta.j kaqe,draj tw/n pwlou,ntwn. Cf. also Lu. 20:20; Ac. 25:15; 1 Cor. 11:27; Rev. 13:10.

3. Groups Treated as One. Sometimes groups more or less distinct are treated as one for the purpose in hand, and hence use only one article. Cf ta.j fi,laj kai. gei,tonaj (Lu. 15:9), tou.j nomikou.j kai. Farisai,oujgrk grk(14:3), ta. platei,aj kai. r`u,majgrk grk(14:21), tw/n presbute,rwn kai. grammate,wn (Mk. 15:1), tw/n vEpikouri,wn kai. Stwkw/n (Ac. 17: 18), tw/n Farisai,wn kai. Saddoukai,wn (Ac. 23:7), tw/n avposto,lwn kai. profhtw/n (Eph. 2:20), th|/ avpologi,a| kai. bebaiw,sei tou/ euvaggeli,ou (Ph. 1:7), to. pla,toj kai. mh/koj kai. ba,qoj kai. u[yoj (Eph. 3:18), th.n klh/sin kai. evklogh,n (2 Pet. 1:10). Cf. th,n in Tit. 2:13. So in Mt. 17:1 (W. H. text) we have to.n Pe,tron kai. vIa,kwbon kai. vIwa,nhn, where the three are one group. This is probably more frequent in examples where a genitive occurs also, or some other attribute.¹¹⁹ So Ph. 1:20 th.n avpokaradoki,an kai. evlpi,da mou, 1:19 th/j u`mw/n deh,sewj kai. evpicorhri,aj tou/ pneu,matoj, 2:17 th|/ qusi,a| kai. leitourgi,a| th/j pi,stewj. Cf. also 1 Th. 2:12; 3:7; Mt. 24:3; Ro. 1:20; Col. 2:8; Eph. 3:5; 2 Cor. 1:6; 1 Pet. 2:25; Ph. 1:25. These are all the simplest and clearest illustrations.

4. Point of View. Obviously, therefore, whether one or more articles are to be used depends on the point of view of the speaker or writer. In geographical terms the matter of freedom is well illustrated. Thus in 1 Th. 1: 7 we have evn th|/ Makedoni,a| kai. evn th|/ vAcai,a|, while in the very next verse we meet evn th|/ Makedoni,a| kai. vAcai,a|, as in Ac. 19:21. These two Roman provinces are distinct, but adjacent. Cf. also th/j vIoudai,aj kai. Samari,aj (Ac. 8:1; cf. 1: 8), th/j vIoudai,aj kai. Falilai,aj kai. Samari,angrk grk(9:31), where these sections of Palestine are treated together. Cf. Ac. 27:5. In Ac. 15:3 note th,n te Foini,khn kai. Samari,an, the two sections treated together are not even contiguous. In Ac. 15:23, kata. th.n vAntio,Ä

788 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

ceian kai. Suri,an kai. Kiliki,an, we have a city grouped with two countries (as in Lu. 5:17; Mt. 4:25), while in 15:41 we meet th.n Suri,an kai. th.n Kiliki,an (W. H. text). Hence no absolute conclusions can be drawn from the one article in Ac. 16:6, th.n Frugi,an kai. Galaltikh.n cw,ran (cf. reverse order in 18 : 23) as to the separateness¹²⁰ of the terms "Phrygia" and " Galatic region." Cf. also Lu. 3:1, th/j vItourai,aj kai. Tracwni,tidoj cw,raj. But the matter is not wholly whimsical. In Ac. 2:9 f. note the th,n with MesoÄ potami,an, which stands alone, while we have also Po,ton kai. th.n vAsi,an, probably because the province of Asia (not Asia Minor as a whole) is meant. Then again we meet ta. me,rh th/j Libu,hj th/j kata. Kurh,nhn, because of the details stated. In Ac. 6:9 the use of tw/n twice divides the synagogues into two groups (men from Cilicia and Asia on the one hand, men from Alexandria, Cyrene and Libertines (?) on the other). The matter is simple geography but for Liberti,nwn, and may be after all if we only knew what that term means. See Winer-Schmiedel, p. 158. Cf. also Rev. 14:7, where two words have articles and two do not, and Ac. 15:20, where three words in the list have articles and one, pniktou/, does not. So in Ac. 13:50 we have to.n Pau/lon kai. B., while in 15:2 we find tw|/ P) kai. tw|/ B. Then (cf. 4) in Mt. 17:1 observe the one article with Peter, James and John, while in Heb. 11:20 we see euvlo,ghsen vIsaa.k to.n vIakw.b kai. to.n vHsau/. The articles here emphasize the distinction between subject and object as in Mt. 1:2-16. Cf. also tw/n avp) kai. tw/n pr. (Ac. 15:4) and oi` avp) kai. oi` pr)grk grk(15:6) with tw/n avp) kai. pr) tw/ngrk grk(16:4).

5. Difference in Number. If the words combined differ in number, usually each one has its own article. The reason is that they generally fall into separate classes. So o` avnaginw,skwn kai. oi` avkou,ontej (Rev. 1:3), th/j sarko.j kai. tw/n dianoiw/n (Eph. 2:3), th.n avse,beian kai. ta.j kosmika.j evpiqumi,aj (Tit. 2:12). But one article may also be found, as in tw|/ ko,smw| kai. avgge,loij kai. avnqrw,poij (1 Cor. 4:9). Here, however, the anarthrous words "particularize the tw|/ ko,smw|."¹²¹ Yet in 1 Jo. 2:16 pa/n to. evn tw|/ ko,smw| is "particularized" by three words each with the article.

6. Difference in Gender. So, if the gender is different, there is likewise usually the repetition of the article. Cf. Ac. 17:18 to.n vIshou/n kai. th.n avna,stasin, Mt. 22:4 oi` tau/roi, mou kai. ta. sitista,, Lu. 10:21 tou/ ouvranou/ kai. th/j gh/jÃ Ac. 13:50 ta.j euvsch,monaj kai. tou.j prw,touj, Ro. 8:2 th/j a`marti,aj kai. tou/ qana,tou, Col. 4:17 to. di,kaion

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 789

kai. th.n ivso,thta, Eph. 2:1 toi/j paraptw,masin kai. tai/j a`marti,aij, Heb. 3:6 th.n parrhsi,an kai. to. kau,chma. Though usual, the repeated article is not necessary.¹²² See ta.j o`dou.j kai. fragmou,j (Lu. 14:23), tw/n o`lokautwma,twn kai. qusiw/n (Mk. 12:33), ta. evnta,lmata kai. didaskali,aj (Col. 2:22).

If indeed the words differ in both gender and number, in that case it is still more customary to have separate articles. Cf., for instance, Lu. 14:26, to.n pate,ra e`autou/ kai. th.n mhte,ra kai. th.n gunai/ka kai. ta. te,kna kai. tou.j avdelfou.j kai. ta.j avdelfa,j. So also Ac. 15:4, 20; 26:30; Col. 2:13; 1 Tim. 5:23; Rev. 2:19. The papyri illustrate the N. T. usage of the article with several substantives (cf. Volker, Syntax, p. 20). So o` h[lioj kai. selh,nh, Pap. L, Dieterich, Abraxas, p. 195. 9.

7. With Disjunctive Particle. If a disjunctive preposition be used, there will naturally be separate articles (even when kai, is the connective), whatever be true about number and gender. So metaxu. tou/ naou/ kai. tou/ qusiasthri,ou (Mt. 23:35 = Lu. 11:51). So when the conjunction occurs as in to.n no,mon h' tou.j profh,taj (Mt. 5:17), tw|/ patri. h' th|/ mhtri. grk(15:5), to. sko,toj h' to. fw/j (Jo. 3:19), u`po. to.n mo,dion h' u`po. thn kli,nhn. (Mk. 4:21), tw|/ law|/ h' toi/j e;qesi (Ac. 28:17). Blass¹²³ makes the point that outside of Ac. 14:5, tw/n evqnw/n te kai. vIoudai,wn, we generally find the repeated article with te kai,. Even here vIoudai,wn as a proper name does not need the article. Cf. vIoudai,wn te kai. `Ellh,nwn in 14:1, but o[ te strathgo.j kai. oi` avrcierei/jgrk grk(5:24) with difference in number also.

VII. Position with Predicates. It is not the use of the article with the predicate noun, like ou-toj evstin o` klhrono,moj (Mk. 12:7), that is here before us. That point has already been discussed under v, (i). When the article occurs with the substantive, but not with the adjective, the result is the equivalent of a relative clause. Cf. mega,lh| fwnh|/ (Ac. 14:10) and fwnh|/ mega,lh|grk grk(7:57)= 'with a loud voice,' with mega,lh| th|/ fwnh|/grk grk(26:24)= 'with the voice elevated.' See also avnakekalumme,nw| prosw,pw| (2 Cor. 3:18)- 'with unveiled face' and avkatakalu,ptw| th|/ kefalh|/ (1 Cor. 11:5) = 'with the head unveiled.' Cf. Mk. 3:1, evxhramme,nhn e;cwn th.n cei/ra. Other examples are pepwrwme,nhn th.n kardi,an (Mk. 8:17), th.n martuÄ ri,an mei,zw (Jo. 5:36), th.n avga,phn evktenh/ (1 Pet. 4:8), th.n avnastrofh.n kalh,ngrk grk(2:12), avpara,baton th.n i`erwsu,nhn (Heb. 7:24), ta. aivsqhth,ria gegumnasme,nagrk grk(5:14). In all these and similar examples the point is quite different from that of the attributive position of the article. Most of the instances occur with e;cw. Note the absence of the

790 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

article with avpografh. prw,th (Lu. 2:2) because it is in the predicate. Cf. tou/to avlhqe.j ei;rhkaj (Jo. 4:18). The position of auvth|/ th|/ kaloume,nh| (Lu. 1:36) may be noted. D in Mk. 7:5 reads koiÄ nai/j tai/j cersi,n.¹²⁴ Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 292) considers this use of the predicate position "a gnomon of artificial style" outside of the more simple combinations. See also Milden, The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek (1900, p. 43). It is noticeable in prepositional phrases, as in Xen., Anab., 1, 3, 14, dia. fili,aj th/j cw,raj.

VIII. The Absence of the Article. I do not care to use the term "omission" in connection with the article. That word implies that the article ought to be present. As has been already shown, the article is not the only means of showing that a word is definite. This luxury in language did not become indispensable. The servant never became master. There remained in the classic period many parallel phrases which were intelligible without the article. Indeed, new phrases came into use by analogy without the article. I do not think it is necessary to devote so much space to this phase of the subject as is done in most grammars. Most of the cases have already come up for discussion in one way or another. It is sufficient here to give a résumé of the chief idioms in the N. T. which are without the article and are still definite. Much of the modern difficulty about the absence of the Greek article is due to the effort to interpret it by the standard of the English or German article. So Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 119) speaks of "appellatives, which as expressing definite objects should have the article"! Even Gildersleeve, in discussing the "Absence of the Article" (note the phrase, Syntax, p. 259), says. that "prepositional phrases and other formulae may dispense with the article as in the earlier language," and he adds "but anaphora or contrast may bring back the article at any time and there is no pedantical uniformity." Admirably said, except "dispense with" and "bring back," dim ghosts of the old grammar. Moulton¹²⁵ cites Jo. 6:68, r`h,mata zwh/j aivwni,ou, which should be translated 'words of eternal life' (as marg. of R. V.). There are indeed "few of the finer points of Greek which need more constant attention"' than the absence of the article. The word may be either definite or indefinite when the article is absent. The context and history of the phrase in question must decide. The translation of the expression into English or German is not determined by the mere

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 791

Addenda 3rd ed.

absence of the Greek article. If the word is indefinite, as in Jo. 4:27; 6:68, no article, of course, occurs. But the article is absent in a good many definite phrases also. It is about these that a few words further are needed. A brief summary of the various types of anarthrous definite phrases is given.¹²⁶ A sane treatment of the subject occurs in Winer-Schmiedel.¹²⁷

(a) WITH PROPER NAMES. Here the article is used or not at the will of the writer. So to.n vIhsou/n oa}n Pau/loj khru,ssei (Ac. 19:13), but to.n Pau/lon in verse 15. The reason is apparent in these three examples. Words in apposition with proper names are usually anarthrous. Cf. Mt. 3:6 = Mk. 1:5. See further v, (a), 3.

(b) WITH GENITIVES. We have seen that the substantive may still be definite if anarthrous, though not necessarily so. Cf. pu,lai a|[dou (Mt. 16:18), avna,stasij nekrw/n (Ac. 23:6), ca,riti qeou/ (1 Cor. 15:10), lo,gon qeou/ (1 Th. 2:13), poth,rion kuri,ou (1 Cor. 10:21), ui`e. diabo,lou (Ac. 13:10), etc.¹²⁸ In particular, personal pronouns in the genitive were not always felt to need the article. Cf. kh/pon e`autou/ (Lu. 13:19). See further v, (h). The LXX uses this idiom freely (Blass-Debrunner, p. 151). English can show the same construction.

"Eye of newt and toe of frog,
Wool of bat and tongue of dog,
Adder's fork and blind worm's sting,
Lizard's leg and hornet's wing." — Macbeth.

(c) PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES. These were also often considered definite enough without the article. So evn oi;kw| (1 Cor. 11:34. Cf. evn tw|/ oi;kw|, 'in the house,' Jo. 11:20)= 'at home.' So we say "go to bed," etc. Moulton¹²⁹ pertinently cites English "down town," "on change," "in bed," "from start to finish." This idiom is not therefore peculiar to Greek. It is hardly necessary to mention all the N. T. examples, so common is the matter.

Thus with avna, observe avna. me,roj (1 Cor. 14:27). With avpo, note avp v avgrou/ (Mk. 15:21), avp v avgora/j (Mk. 7:4), avp v ouvranou/ (Lu. 17:29), avp v ouvranw/n (Heb. 12:25), avpo. avnatolh/j (Rev. 21:13), avpo. avnatolw/n, (Mt. 2:1), avp v avrch/j (1 Jo. 1:1), avpo. katabolh/j (Mt. 13: 35), avpo. me,rouj (Ro. 11:25), avpo. nekrw/n (Lu. 16:30). Cf. Rev. 21:13, avpo. borra/Ã avpo. no,touÃ avpo. dusmw/n. So a;cri kairou/ (Lu. 4:13).

For dia. note dia. nukto,j (Ac. 5:19), dia. me,sou (Lu. 4:30), dia. me,son (17: 11).

792 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

For eivj see eivj a|[dhn (Ac. 2:27), eivj ouvrano,n (1 Pet. 3:22), eivj a`gro,n (Mk. 16:12), eivj qa,lassan (Mt. 17:27), eivj oi=kon (Mk. 3:20), eivj pro,swpon (Mk. 12:14), eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), eivj oivki,an (2 Jo. 1:10), eivj te,loj (Mt. 10:22).

Examples of evx are evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 12:27), evk yuch/j (Eph. 6:6), evk neo,thtoj (Ac. 26:4), evx avrch/j (Jo. 6:64), evk dexiw/n (Mt. 27:38), evx euvwnu,mwn (Mt. 25:41), evx avristerw/n (Lu. 23:33), evk me,sou (2 Th. 2:7), evk kardi,aj (Ro. 6:17), evk nekrw/n (Lu. 9:7), evx ouvranou/ (Jo. 1:32).

For e[wj observe e[wj a|[dou (Mt. 11:23), e[wj ouvranou/ (Mt. 11:23), e[wj dusmw/n (Mt. 24:27), e[wj e`spe,raj (Ac. 28:23), e[wj te,louj (1 Cor. 1:8).

Examples of evpi,, are evpi. gh/j (Lu. 2:14), evpi. qu,raij (Mt. 24:33), evpi. pro,swpon (Lu. 5:12).

For kata, see kat v ovfqalmou,j (Gal. 3:1), kata. li,ba kai. kata. cw/ron (Ac. 27:12), kata. meshmbri,an (Ac. 8:26), kat v avrca,j (Heb. 1:10), kata. pro,swpon (Ac. 25:16), kata. me,roj (Heb. 9:5), kata. sa,rka (2 Cor. 10:3), kata. avnqrw,pouj (1 Pet. 4:6).

For me,cri observe me,cri mesonukti,ou (Ac. 20:7), me,cri te,louj (Heb. 3:6).

For para, note para. qa,lassan (Ac. 10:32), para. potamo,n (Ac. 16:13).

For peri, see peri, meshmbri,an (Ac. 22:6).

For pro, see pro. kairou/ (Mt. 8:29).

For pro,j observe pro,swpon pro.j pro,swpon (1 Cor. 13:12), pro.j e`spe,ran (Lu. 24:29).

For u`po, see u`p v ouvrano,n (Lu. 17:24).

It will be noted that this usage after all is confined to a rather narrow range of words, some of which, like ouvrano,j and gh/, represent single objects. More of this a little later. Most of these examples have articular parallels. See also v, (f). For classic examples see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 259 f. The papyri furnish abundant parallels (Volker, Syntax, pp. 15-17) as do the inscriptions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 92).

(d) WITH BOTH PREPOSITION AND GENITIVE. It is not surprising to find no article with phrases which use both preposition

THE ARTICLE ( TO;ARQRON) 793

and genitive like eivj euvagge,lion qeou/ (Ro. 1:1), avpo. ovfqalmw/n sou (Lu. 19:42), evk dexiw/n mou (Mt. 20:23), avp v avrch/j ko,smou (Mt. 24:21), para. kairo.n h`liki,aj (Heb. 11:11), evn kairw|/ peirasmou/ (Lu. 8:13), avpo. katabolh/j ko,smou (Mt. 25:34), evn braci,oni auvtou/ (Lu. 1:51), etc.

(e) TITLES OF BOOKS OR SECTIONS. These may be without the article, being already specific enough. So Euvagge,lion kata. Ma,rkon before the Gospel in many MSS., avrch. tou/ euvaggeli,ou (Mk. 1:1), bi,bloj gene,sewj vIhsou/ Cristou/ (Mt. 1:1), vApoka,luyij vIhsou/ Cristou/ (Rev. 1:1). A good example of anarthrous headings may be seen in 1 Pet. 1 f. (cf. Hort, 1 Peter, p. 15), where no article occurs in the whole opening sentence of five lines. The article is used quite idiomatically in 1 Peter.

(f) WORDS IN PAIRS. These often do without the article. Very often, of course, the article is used. Words for day and night (as in English) frequently occur together. Cf. nukto.j kai. h`me,raj (Mk. 5:5), h`me,raj kai. nukto,j (Rev. 4:8). They occur singly also without the article, as nukto,j (Jo. 3:2), h`me,raj (Rev. 21:25), me,shj nukto,j (Mt. 25:6). See also other pairs like evn ouvranw| ei;te evpi. gh/j (1 Cor. 8:5; cf. 2 Pet. 3:5), pate,ra h' mhte,ra (Mk. 7:10), zw/ntaj kai. nekrou,j (1 Pet. 4:5). Indeed the anarthrous construction is common in contrast with h;Ã ei;teÃ ou;teÃ mh,teÃ ouv- avlla, (cf. Ro. 6:14). For long lists of anarthrous words (definite and indefinite together) see Ro. 8:35; 1 Cor. 3:22; 12:13, 28; 2 Cor. 11:25 f.; 1 Pet. 1:2; Heb. 12:18, 23; 1 Tim. 3:16.¹³⁰ Cf. also avnh.r evk gunaiko,j (1 Cor. 11:8). Some of these usages belong to proverbs, formulae and enumerations. See Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 260. The koinh, (inscriptions and papyri) shows the idiom (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 94).

(g) ORDINAL NUMERALS. The article is usually absent in expressions of time. The ancient idiom is here followed.¹³¹ The ordinal was often felt to be definite enough alone. This was true of the predicate. Cf. avpografh. prw,th (Lu. 2:2), h=n w[ra tri,th (Mk. 15:25), h=n w`j e[kth (Jo. 19:14). Cf. Eph. 6:2; Ac. 2:15. But it was not confined to the predicate by any means, nor even to prepositional phrases like avpo. prw,thj h`me,raj (Ac. 20:18), e[wj tri,tou ouvranou/ (2 Cor. 12:2), avpo. teta,rthj h`me,raj (Ac. 10:30), peri. w[ran e[kthn, (Ac. 10:9), evn e;tei pentekaideka,tw| (Lu. 3:1), e[wj w[raj evna,thj (Mk. 15:33), etc. Cf. Ac. 23:23. The same construction occurs also

794 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

in dielqo,ntej prw,thn fulakh.n kai. deute,ran (Ac. 12:10). Cf. Mk. 15:33, genome,nhj w[raj e[kthj. Examples with the article are not wanting. Cf. Mt. 27:64; Lu. 12:38; Ac. 10:40.

(h) IN THE PREDICATE. As already shown in v, (i), in the predicate the article is often absent. See v, (i). Cf. qeo,j h=n o` lo,goj (Jo. 1:1), o` qeo.j avga,ph evsti,n (1 Jo. 4:8), etc. This is the rule unless the terms be convertible or the predicate is singled out as prominent. For the superlative without the article see also 1 Jo. 2:18. Cf. 1 Pet. 1:5, evn evsca,tw| kairw|/.

(i) ABSTRACT WORDS. In English the presence, not the absence, of the article with abstract words needs explanation. Hence the anarthrous lists in Gal. 5:20 f., 22 f., seem to us much more in harmony with our idiom than the lists with the article in Rev. 5:12, 13; 7:12. In German,¹³² however, the opposite is often true. The article is often absent in the Greek, where the German would have it. Cf. Ro. 1:29. See iv, (c), for discussion of article with abstract nouns. No vital difference was felt between articular and anarthrous abstract nouns (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 259).

(j) QUALITATIVE FORCE. This is best brought out in anarthrous nouns. So eiv e;xestin avndri. gunai/ka avpolu/sai (Mk. 10:2; cf. 1 Cor. 7:10), paradw,sei avdelfo.j avdelfo.n eivj qa,naton kai. path/r te,knon- te,kna evpi. gonei/j (13 : 12), w``j monogonou/j para. patro,j (Jo. 1:14), goneu/sin avpeiqei/j (Ro. 1:30). Cf. also Eph. 5:23, avnh,r evstin kefalh. th/j gunaiko,jÃ o` Cristo.j kefalh. th/j evkklhsi,aj and auvto.j swth.r tou/ sw,matoj) In ai` gunai/kej toi/j avndra,sin (verse 24) note the generic article, class and class. See ui`o,j- path,r (Heb. 12:7).¹³³

(k) ONLY OBJECT OF KIND. These partake of the nature of proper names and often occur without the article. They also often have the article. Some of these anarthrous examples appear in prepositional phrases like evx avristerw/n (Lu. 23:33), evk dexiw/n (ib.), etc. These may be passed by (already discussed). The point is best illustrated by such words as evx avristerw/n (2 Pet. 3:5). Cf. English "heaven and earth." Cf. (f), Words in Pairs. qala,ssa we find sometimes anarthrous with prepositions (Ac. 7:36; 10:32) and in Lu. 21:25 hvcou/j qala,sshj kai. sa,lou. But it has the article in contrast with gh/.¹³⁴ See also Lu. 21:25 evn h`li,w| kai. selh,nh| kai. a;stroij, Mt. 13:6 h`li,ou avnatei,lantoj, 1 Cor. 15:41 do,xa h`li,ou. So we can say "sun, moon and stars," etc. qa,natoj should also be noted. Cf. 1 Cor. 15:21; Mt. 16:28; 20:18; Lu. 23:15; Ph. 1:20, etc. It is anarthrous as subject, object, with adjectives and with preposi-

THE ARTICLE ( TO ;ARQRON) 795

tions. Many of these examples occur with prepositions like Lu. 21: 25 above, or with a genitive like ui`e. diabo,lou (Ac. 13:10).¹³⁵ Cf. 1 Pet. 5:8. The word qeo,j, like a proper name, is freely used with and without the article. But it is "beyond comparison the most frequently in the Epistles without the article."¹³⁶ I doubt that. As subject o` qeo,j, but as a predicate, qeo.j h=n o` lo,goj (Jo. 1:1); as genitive, gnw,sewj qeou/ (Ro. 11:33); with prepositions, evn qew|/ (Jo. 3:21); with adjectives, qeo.j euvloghto,j (Ro. 9:5); with participles also, qew|/ zw/nti kai. avlhqinw|/ (1 Th. 1:9); in conjunction with path,r (Gal. 1:1). These illustrations can be greatly multiplied. So also pneu/ma and pneu/ma a[gion may occur with and without the article. Garvie¹³⁷ quotes Bartlet on Acts as saying that when pneu/ma a[gion is anarthrous it describes the human condition, not the divine agency. But it may be questioned if this is not a purely artificial rule, as there are evident exceptions to it. The use of pneu/ma with a genitive like pneu/ma Cristou/ (Ro. 8:9) and with a preposition, evk pneumatoj (Jo. 3:5), accounts for some examples. An example like of ou;pw h=n pneu/ma (Jo. 7:39) merely illustrates the use of pneu/ma like qeo,j as substantially a proper name. As for Middleton's rule that the article is present when the personality of the Holy Spirit is taught,¹³⁸ that is illustrated by Jo. 14:26, to. pneu/ma to. a[gion, where the Holy Spirit is spoken of in distinction from the Father and the Son. Cf. also 15:26. See also to. pneu/ma to. a[gion (Lu. 3:22), at the baptism of Jesus. Ku,rioj, like qeo,j and pneu/ma, is often practically a proper name in the N. T. In the Gospels it usually refers to God, like the O. T. Lord, while in the Epistles of Paul in particular it nearly always means the Lord Jesus.¹³⁹ It is not merely in a prepositional phrase like the common evn kuri,w| (1 Cor. 7:22), or the genitive like to. e;rgon kuri,ou (1 Cor. 16:10), but especially ku,rioj vIhsou/j Cristo,j (Ph. 1:2; 2:11, etc.). In the Gospels o` Cristo,j is usually a verbal adjective= 'the Anointed One,' the Messiah (Mt. 2:4; Jo. 1:41). In Mt. 1:1; Mk. 1:1, we have Cristo,j as a proper name and even in the words of Jesus as reported in Mk. 9:41, Cristou/, and in the address of Peter in Ac. 2: 38, vIhsou/ Cristou/. It was a natural growth. In Paul's Epistles Cristo,j is more frequent than o` Cristo,j.¹⁴⁰ There is even a development in Paul's use of vIhsou/j Cristo,j and Cristo.j vIhsou/j.

796 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

In his earlier Epistles the former is the rule (cf. 1 Th. 1:1), while in the later Epistles he prefers Cristo.j vIhsou/j (2 Tim. 1:1). Other examples of this idiom are seen in ko,smoj, which even in the nominative is anarthrous, evmoi. ko,smoj evstau,rwtai (Gal. 6:14). Cf. Ro. 4:13. See also evn ko,smw| (Ro. 5:13) and avpo. katabolh/j ko,smou (Lu. 11:50), etc. No,moj is a word that is used with a deal of freedom by Paul. In general when no,moj is anarthrous in Paul it refers to the Mosaic law, as in evpanapau,h| nomw| (Ro. 2:17). So eva.n no,mon pra,ssh|jgrk grk(2:25), etc. It occurs so with prepositions, as evn no,mw|grk grk(2:23), and in the genitive, like evx e;rwn no,mw| (Gal. 2:16). Cf. evgw. dia. no,mou no,mw| avpe,qanongrk grk(2:19), u`po. no,mon avlla. u`po. ca,rin (Ro. 6:14). In e[teron no,mon grk(7:23) no,moj = 'principle,' and is here indeterminate. In 2:14, e;qnh ta. mh. no,mon e;conta, the Mosaic law is meant, but not in e`autoi/j eivsi.n no,moj. It is at least problematical whether no,moj in 2:13, of oi` avkroatai. no,mou, and oi` poihtai. no,mou (note the article with the other words) means the Mosaic law and so really definite or law as law (the hearers of law, the doers of law).¹⁴¹

IX. The Indefinite Article. The Greek had no indefinite article. It would have been very easy if the absence of the article in Greek always meant that the noun was indefinite, but we have seen that this is not the case. The anarthrous noun may per se be either definite or indefinite. But the Greek made an approach to the modern indefinite article in the use of ei-j and tij. The later writers show an increasing use of these words as the practical equivalent of the present indefinite article. This matter has already been discussed under these two words (ch. XV). An example of tij is seen in nomiko,j tij (Lu. 10:25). The tendency was constantly for ei-j to displace tij, so that "in modern Greek the process is complete,"¹⁴² i.e. ei-j drives out tij in this sense. This use of ei-j is seen in the papyri and need not be denied in the N. T.¹⁴³ As a N. T. example of ei-j= 'a' see ei-j grammateu,j (Mt. 8:19).¹⁴⁴ The indefinite article does not appear with predicates in the modern Greek.¹⁴⁵ Unus in the sense of the indefinite article is one of the peculiarities of the Latin Vulgate (Jacquier, Le N. T. dans l' Egl. Chr., Tome II, p. 122).

¹ Hauptr. der gricch. Synt., p. 1.

² Cf. Schneider, Vorles. uber griech. Gr.

³ Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 41.

⁴ Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, pp. 507 ff. Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 424.

⁵ Delbruck, op. cit. Cf. also Thompson, Synt., p. 41 f.

⁶ Monro, Hom. Gr., pp. 178 ff.

⁷ Thompson, Synt., p. 41 f.

⁸ Cf. Thumb, Handb., pp. 40 ff.; Jebb. in V. and D.'s Handb., p. 193 f.

⁹ Moulton, Prol., p. 80 f.

¹⁰ Synt. d. griech. Pap., pp. 5 ff.

¹¹ Lang. of the N. T., p. 45.

¹² Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 794.

¹³ Griech. Gr.

¹⁴ Hom. Gr., p. 178.

¹⁵ Ib.

¹⁶ Quoted by Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 57.

¹⁷ The old idea that the article was necessary to make a word definite is seen in Madvig, Synt. of the Gk. Lang., p. 8.

¹⁸ Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 70.

¹⁹ Ib.

²⁰ Lightfoot, Trench, Ellicott, p. xxx f,

²¹ Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 47. On literature upon the article see E. Schwartz in the Index to Eusebius, p. 209.

²² W.-Th., p. 113.

²³ W.-Th., p. 112.

²⁴ Ib. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 153.

²⁵ See further W.-Sch., p. 153.

²⁶ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 152.

²⁷ Zucker, Beobachtungen fiber den Gebr. des Artik. bei Personenn. in Xen. Anabasis, p. 6.

²⁸ Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 179.

²⁹ Cf. Schmidt, De Articulo in nominibus propriis apud Att. scriptores (1890); K.-G., I, pp. 602 ff.; Kallenberg, Stu. uber den griech. Artikel (1891).

³⁰ Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 48. Cf. also B. Weiss, Der Gebr. des Artikels bei den Gottesnamen, Th. Stu. Krit., 1911, pp. 319-392.

³¹ Joh. Gr., P. 63.

³² Ib., p. 64.

³³ Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 181.

³⁴ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 155.

³⁵ Cf. Schmid, Atticismus, IV, p. 608.

³⁶ Deiss., B. S., p. 259.

³⁷ Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 156.

³⁸ Cf. K.-G., I, p. 594.

³⁹ W.-M., p. 136.

⁴⁰ More frequent in John than in the Synoptists. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 59 f.

⁴¹ Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 179.

⁴² Moulton, Prol., pp. 81, 216.

⁴³ Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 69.

⁴⁴ K.-G., I, p. 594 f.

⁴⁵ Gk. Synt., p. 14.

⁴⁶ Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 263.

⁴⁷ Thompson, p. 45. Cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 265.

⁴⁸ Jebb, V. and D.'s Handb., p. 295 f.

⁴⁹ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 158.

⁵⁰ K.-G., I, p. 268 f.; Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 280 f. The neuter article with the gen. is extremely common in Herod. Cf. Staurac, Uber den Gebr. d. Gen. bei Herod., p. 25.

⁵¹ Milden, The Limitations of the .Pred. Position in Gk., p. 9 f.

⁵² Cf. Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 46; Gildersleeve, Synt., p.. 325.

⁵³ Winer-Moulton, p. 142.

⁵⁴ See per contra, Simcox, Lang. of the N. T., p. 48.

⁵⁵ W.-M., p. 142.

⁵⁶ Cf. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 522; Middleton, Gk. Art., p. 54.

⁵⁷ Thompson, Synt., p. 46.

⁵⁸ P. 159.

⁵⁹ Volker, Synt. d. griech. Pap., p. 8. Volker notes also the presence of e[kastoj or of avna,Ã kata,Ã evkÃ pro,j.

⁶⁰ Cf. Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 16. See K.-G., I, p. 556.

⁶¹ Cf. A. Souter, art. Luke, Hastings' D.C.G., who takes to,n = 'his,' i.e. Luke. For pap. exx. see Volker, Synt. d. griech. Pap., p. 7.

⁶² Thompson, Gk. Synt., p. 51.

⁶³ Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 181.

⁶⁴ Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 231.

⁶⁵ Claflin, Synt. of B.D. Inscr., p. 42.

⁶⁶ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 161. Cf. Diels, Gott. Gel.-Anz., 1894, pp. 298 ff.

⁶⁷ Cf. K.-G., I, pp. 631 ff.

⁶⁸ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 161.

⁶⁹ W.-Sch., p. 187.

⁷⁰ W.-Th., p. 111. Cf. 1 Sam. 7:2 f. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 162) calls this imitation of Hebrew.

⁷¹ Blass. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 162.

⁷² Cf. W.-Sch., p. 187.

⁷³ Green, Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 192. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 189.

⁷⁴ W.-Sch., p. 189.

⁷⁵ Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 52 f.

⁷⁶ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 161.

⁷⁷ Cf. W.-Sch., p. 190.

⁷⁸ Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 53.

⁷⁹ Prol., p. 84.

⁸⁰ Cf. W.-Sch., p. 190.

⁸¹ Ib.

⁸² Ib.; Thompson, Synt., p. 53.

⁸³ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 180.

⁸⁴ P. 190.

⁸⁵ Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 158.

⁸⁶ Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 47.

⁸⁷ For copious classical exx. of both positions see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 281 f.

⁸⁸ In Jas. 3:7, th|/ fu,sei th|/ avnqrwpi,nh|, the repeated article makes for greater clearness.

⁸⁹ Cf. W.-Sch., p. 177.

⁹⁰ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 160.

⁹¹ Cf. W.-Sch., p. 181.

⁹² It is common enough in classic Gk. Cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 283.

⁹³ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 243.

⁹⁴ Cf. K.-G., I, p. 597; Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 49,

⁹⁵ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 159,

⁹⁶ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 159.

⁹⁷ The Doctrine of the Gk. Art., 1833. Cf. Mk. 10:25 W. H. text and marg.

⁹⁸ Cf. W. F. Moulton' remarks, W.-M., pp. 146, 174, 175.

⁹⁹ W.-M., footnote, p. 146.

¹⁰⁰ Cf. K.-G., I, p. 607 f.

¹⁰¹ Cf. W.-Th., p. 133, for long list of exx.

¹⁰² Ib., pp. 135 ff.; p. 179 f.; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 159 f.

¹⁰³ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 160.

¹⁰⁴ p. 159.

¹⁰⁵ W.-Sch., p. 180.

¹⁰⁶ The three regular positions are common. Cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 286.

¹⁰⁷ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 160.

¹⁰⁸ W.-Th., p. 136; W.-Sch., p. 180.

¹⁰⁹ W.-Sch., p. 180.

¹¹⁰ Ib. But Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 159) doubts it.

¹¹¹ Cf. W.-Sch., p. 155.

¹¹² W.-Th., p. 130.

¹¹³ Ib., p. 126.

¹¹⁴ P. 158.

¹¹⁵ Prol., p. S4.

¹¹⁶ On Swth,r in ZNTW, v. 335 f.

¹¹⁷ Prol., p. 84.

¹¹⁸ Cf. W.-Th., p. 128.

¹¹⁹ W.-Sch., p. 156 f.

¹²⁰ Cf. W. M. Ramsay, Expos., 1895, July, pp. 29-40,

¹²¹ W.-Th., p. 127.

¹²² Ib.

¹²³ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 163.

¹²⁴ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315.

¹²⁵ Prol., p. 83.Ib.

¹²⁶ See on the whole subject K.-G., I, pp. 598

¹²⁷ Pp. 162 ff.

¹²⁸ See extensive list in W.-Sch., p. 166 f.

¹²⁹ Prol., p. 82.

¹³⁰ Cf. W.- Sch., p. 168; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 149.

¹³¹ Thompson, Synt., etc., p. 54; W.-Th., p. 126. See further J. Thompson, Cl. Rev., 1906, p. 304; Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 261.

¹³² Blass, Cr. of N. T. Gk., p. 150.

¹³³ Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 82 f.; W.-Sch., p. 170.

¹³⁴ W.-Th., p. 121.

¹³⁵ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 148.

¹³⁶ W.-Th., p. 122.

¹³⁷ Expos., Oct., 1909, p. 327.

¹³⁸ Cf. W.-M., footnote, p. 151.

¹³⁹ W.-Th., p. 124.

¹⁴⁰ See Rose's list for Paul's use of ku,rioj Cristo,j, etc., in Middleton's Doctrine of the Gk. Art., pp. 486 ff. It is based on Textus Rec.

¹⁴¹ For a full and detailed discussion of the whole matter see W.-Sch., pp. 174 ff.

¹⁴² Moulton, Prol., p. 96. See Thumb, Handb., p. 41.

¹⁴³ Moulton, ib., p. 97. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 164 f.

¹⁴⁴ Cf. for LXX use, C. and S., Sel., p. 25.

¹⁴⁵ Thumb., Handb., p. 42.