iiummimunuiimiuMiiuimiiiiniiiiimiiiuiiimMmuBiul ( j EIBRARY 3 IsIBMRY ¥ViTXD. I'"" "" iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimBiiiiimiiiiniiiuiiiiiiiiiimwniTin SYNTAX OF THE MOODS AND TENSES IN NEW TESTAMENT GREEK BY ERNEST DE WITT BUETON Professor in the University of Chicago SECOND EDITION, REVISED AND ENLARGED 3 J J « J- J •) > J 3 J J , J ^ 3 J , i ' , 3 } J J J > J ' > EDINBURGH T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET 1894 COPTEIGHT, 1892, By ERNEST D. BURTON. • • • • « • ( • • • • . • t • . . . * • • .* • • NortoootJ freest J. S. Gushing & Co. — Berwick & Smith. Boston, Mass., U.S.A. TO MY FATHER AND MOTHER in grateful recognition of the instruction of early years and the helpful interest and encouragement in the work of later years THIS BOOK IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED 221375 ff> 85 7 o j»\nil^ PREFACE. -♦<>*- The first edition of this work appeared as a pamplilet in 1888. In issuing this revised and enlarged edition, it seems desirable to state somewhat more fully than was done in the former preface the purpose which it is hoped the book will serve. Classified according to its intent, it belongs among the aids to the interpretation of the New Testament. It is de- signed to assist English-speaking students in the task of translating the Greek New Testament into English forms of thought and expression. The work has not been undertaken under the impression that grammar is an end in itself, or that a knoAvledge of it is the sole qualification for successful in- terpretation, but in the conviction that grammar is one of the indispensable auxiliaries of interpretation. The book is written, therefore, in the interest not of historical but of exegetical grammar, not of philology as such, but of philology as an auxiliary of interpretation. If it has any value for historical grammar, this is incidental. Its main purpose is to contribute to the interpretation of the New Testament by the exposition of the functions of the verb in New Testament Greek, so far as those functions are expressed by the dis- tinctions of mood and tense. The student of the New Testament who would interpret it with accuracy and clearness must possess — along with other qualifications for his work — a knowledge of the distinctions of thought which are marked by the different moods and tenses of the Greek verb. If he would acquire facility in the work of interpretation, he must have an easy familiarity with the leading uses of each mood and tense. It is not enough V VI PREFACE. that he have at hand for reference an encyclopedic treatise on the subject. He must acquire, as a personal mental posses- sion, a knowledge of the leading functions of the several forms of the Greek verb, and of the forms which express those functions in English. ¥ov this purpose he needs a book which, availing itself of the assured results of comparative and historical grammar, and applying to the interpretation of the Greek verb the princii)les of grammar and logic, the laws both of Greek and of English speech, shall enumerate the various functions of each mood and tense, exhibit in some degree their relative importance, and define each clearly. The definitions should be scientifically accurate, but they shoukl at the same time be constructed with reference to the point of view of the interpreter. For the English-speaking student English usage must be constantly considered and must frequently be defined and compared with Greek usage. If such a book does not solve all the problems of iSTew Testament grammar, it should, by its treatment of those which it discusses, illustrate to the student the right method of investigation and so suggest the course which he must pursue in solving for himself those problems which the book leaves unsolved. My aim has been to provide a book fulfilling these conditions. The aim of the book has determined the method of its con- struction. The usages which are of most frequent occurrence, or otherwise of especial importance, have been emphasized by being set in the largest type, with a title in bold-faced type. The table of contents also has been so constructed as to make prominent a conspectus of the leading uses. It may be well to require of students who use the book as a text-book that they ))e able to name and define these leading usages of each mood and tense ; if they also commit to memory one of the Greek examples under each of these prominent usages, they will do still better. The matter printed in smaller type consists partly of fuller exposition of the usages defined in the more prominently PREFACE. Vll printed sections, partly of enumeratibn and definition of the less frequent usages. The portions in smallest type are chiefly discussions of the rarer or more difficult usages. They are an addition to the text-book proper, and are intended to give the work, to a limited extent, the character of a book of reference. The occasional discussions of English usage would of course have no place in a work on Greek grammar pure and simple, but to the end which this book is intended to serve they are as really germane as any discussions of the force of a Greek tense. One often fails to apprehend accu- rately a thought expressed in Greek quite as much through inexact knowledge of one's own language as through ignorance of Greek usage. As concerns the extent to which I have used the work of others, little need be added to the testimony which the pages of the book themselves bear. While gathering information or suggestion from all accessible sources, I have aimed to make no statement concerning New Testament usage which I have not myself proved by personal examination of the pas- sages. Kespecting classical usage and pre-classical origins, I have relied upon those authorities which are recognized as most trustworthy. On a subsequent page is added a list of books and authors referred to by abbreviations in the body of the book. To all of the works there enumerated, as well as to those mentioned by full title in the body of the book, I am under obligation for assistance or suggestion. It is a pleasure also to acknowledge the valuable assistance privately given by various friends. Prominent among these, though not completing the list, are Professor W. G. Hale of the University of Chicago, Profes- sors M. L. D'Ooge and W. W. Beman of the University of Michigan, my brother. Professor Henry F. Burton of the University of Rochester, and Professor George W. Gilmore of Brooklyn, IST.Y. But I am chiefly indebted to Professor William Arnold Stevens of the Rochester Theological Semi- nary, under whose instructions I first became interested in the Vlll PREFACE. subject of this book, and to whom my obligations in many- directions are larger than can be acknowledged here. In quoting examples from the New Testament I have fol- lowed the Greek text of Westcott and Hort as that which perhaps most nearly represents the original text, but have intended to note any important variations of Tischendorf's eighth edition or of Tregelles in a matter affecting the point under discussion. The word text designates the preferred reading of the editor referred to, as distinguished from the marginal reading. In the English translation of the examples I have preferred to follow the Revised Version of 1881 rather than to construct entirely independent translations. Yet in not a few passages it has seemed necessary to depart from this standard either because the revisers followed a Greek text different from that of Westcott and Hort, or because their translation obscured the value of the passage as an illustration of the grammatical principle under discussion, or occasionally because I was unwilling even to seem to approve what I regarded as unquestionably an error of translation. While I have given all diligence to make the book correct in statement and in type, I dare not hope that it has altogether escaped either typographical errors or those of a more serious character. I shall welcome most cordially criticisms, sugges- tions, or corrections from any teacher or student into whose hands the book may fall. ERNEST D. BURTON. CniCAGO, September, 1893. CONTENTS. KX 1 INTRODUCTORY. SECTION PAGE 1 . Form and Function 1 2. The Interpreter's Relation to Grammar 2-5 3, 4. The four Moods and the seven Tenses 5 THE TENSES. 5. Two-fold Function of the Tenses 6 TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE MOOD. 6, 7. General Definition of the Tenses of the Indicative ... 6, 7 The Present Indicative. 8-10. Progressive Present 7, 8 11. Conative Present 8 12. General or Gnomic Present 8 13. AoRiSTic Present 9 14. Historical Present 9 15. Present for the Future 9, 10 16. Present of rJKOj, irdpeifMi, etc 10 17. Present of past Action still in Progress .... 10 18. Similar use of the Aorist 11 19. Present in Indirect Discourse 11 20. Periphrastic Form of the Present 11 The Imperfect Indicative. 21, 22. Progressive Imperfect 12 23. Conative Imperfect • . . . . 12 24. Imperfect of Repeated Action 12 25-27. Minor uses of Secondary Tenses 13 28, 29. Imperfect translated by English Perfect and Pluperfect 13, 14 30-32. Imperfect of Verbs denoting obligation, etc. . . . 14, 15 33. Imperfect of Verbs of xoishing 15, 16 34. Periphrastic Form of the Imperfect 16 ix X CONTENTS, The Aorist Indicative. SECTION PAGE 35. Fundamental Idea of the Aorist 16, 17 36. Additional uses of the Aorist Indicative 17, 18 37. Functions of the Aorist distinguished 18, 19 38-40. Historical Aokist 19,20 41. Inceptive Aorist 20,21 42. Resultative Aorist 21 43. Gnomic Aorist 21 44. Epistolary Aorist 21 45. Dramatic Aorist 22 4G. Aorist for the (English) Perfect 22 47. Use of the Aorists diridavov, i^^a-Trjp, cYj/wv .... 22 48. Aorist for the (English) Pluperfect 22, 23 49. Aorist Indicative in Indirect Discourse .... 23 50. Aorist used proleptically 23 51. Minor uses of the Aorist 23 52-55. English Equivalents of the Greek Aorist Indica- tive 23-30 56, 57. Distinction between the Aorist and the Imperfect . 30, 31 58-66. 59. 60. 61,62. 63,64. 65. 66. 67,68. 69. 70. 71. 72, 73. The Future Indicative. Predictive Future 31-35 Aoristic Future 31 Progressive Future 32 Relation of Aoristic and Progressive Future 32, 33 Types of Aoristic Future 33, 34 Predictive Future as assertive or promissory . . 34, 35 Predictive Future with oi fiifi . . Imperative Future Gnomic Future Deliberative Future Periphrastic Form of the Future 35 35 35 35 36 MAXw with the Infinitive 36, 37 The Perfect Indicative. 74. Perfect of Completed Action 75,76. Perfect of Existing State. . 77. Intensive Perfect 78. Historical Perfect .... 79. Gnomic Perfect 37 37, 38 38 38, 39 39 CONTENTS. XI SECTION PAGE 80. Aoristic Perfect , 39 81. Perfect Indicative in Indirect Discourse ... 39 82. Perfect Indicative translated by English Past . 39, 40 83. Perfect used proleptically 40 84. Periphrastic Form of the Perfect 40 85. Definition of the term " complete " 40,41 86-88. Aorist and Perfect compared 41-44 The Pluperfect. 89. Pluperfect of Completed Action 44 90. Pluperfect op Existing State 44, 45 91. Periphrastic Form of the Pluperfect .... 45 92. Pluperfect and Aorist similarly translated . . 45 The Future Perfect. 93.- Simple Future Perfect 4i5 94. Periphrastic Future Perfect 45 TENSES OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. 95. General Principles 46 96, 97. Present of the Dependent Moods 46 98. Aorist of the Dependent Moods 46, 47 99, 100. Future of the Dependent Moods 47, 48 101-103. Perfect of the Dependent Moods 48, 49 104-109. Tenses of the Infinitive after Prepositions . . . 49-51 110-114. Tenses of the Dependent Moods in Indirect Discourse ' . 51-53 TENSES OF THE PARTICIPLE. 115-118. General Principles 53, 54 The Present Participle. 119. Present Participle of Simultaneous Action . . 54, 55 120-122. Present Participle of Identical Action . . . . 55, 56 123-126. General Present Participle 56-58 127. Present Participle for the Imperfect .... 58 128-131. Minor uses of the Present Participle 58, 59 Xll CONTENTSo The Aorist Participle. SBCTION '^ PAGE 132, 133. General Force of the Aorist Participle .... 59-63 134-138. Aorist Participle of Antecedent Action . . . 63, 64 139-141. Aorist Participle of Identical Action . . . . 64,65 142-145. Aorist Participle of Subsequent Action .... 65-67 146. Aorist Participle with the object of a Verb of Perception 67 147. Aorist Participle with XavddviAi 67 148, 149. Exceptional uses of the Aorist Participle . . . . 67, 68 150, 151. Equivalence of the Aorist Participle .... 68-70 The Future Participle. 152. General Force of the Future Participle . . . 70, 71 153. MAXajj/ with the Infinitive, denoting inten- tion, etc 71 The Perfect Participle. 154, 155. General Force of the Perfect Participle ... 71, 72 156. Perfect Participle used as a Pluperfect 72 THE MOODS. MOODS IN PRINCIPAL CLAUSES. The Indicative Mood. 157. General Force of the Indicative 73 158, 159. Indicative in Qualified Assertions 73, 74 The Subjunctive Mood. 160, 161. Hortatory Subjunctive 74, 75 162-167. Prohibitory Subjunctive 75, 76 168-171. Deliberative Subjunctive 76-78 172, 173. Subjunctive in Negative Assertions 78 The Optative Mood. 174. Iiifroquoncy of the Optative in later Greek . . 79 175-177. Optative of Wishing 79 178, 179. Potential Optative 79, 80 CONTENTS. xiii The Imperative Mood. section ^ page 180. Imperative in Commands and Exhortations ... 80 181. Imperative in Entreaties and Petitions .... 80 182, 183. Imperative to express Consent or an Hypothesis 80, 81 184. Tenses of the Imperative in Commands and Pro- hibitions 81 FINITE MOODS IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES. 185-187. Subordinate Clauses Classified 81-83 Moods in Clauses Introduced by Final Particles. 188,189. Classification and General Usage . . . . • 83, 84 190-196. New Testament Use of Final Particles ... 84, 85 197-199. Pure Final Clauses 85,86 200-204. Object Clauses after Verbs of Exhorting, etc. . 87, 88 205-210. Object Clauses after Verbs of Striving, etc. . . 88-90 211-214. Subject, Predicate, and Appositive Clauses intro- duced BY t'm 90, 91 215-217. Complementary' and Epexegetic Clauses intro- duced BY LPa 91, 92 218-223. Clauses of Conceived Result introduced by IVa . 92-95 224-227. Object Clauses after Verbs of Fear and Danger 95, 96 Moods in Clauses of Cause. 228. Definition 97 229,230. Moods and Tenses in Causal Clauses 97 231,232. Independent Causal Sentences 98 233. Other Methods of expressing Cause 98 Moods in Clauses of Result. 234. Definition 99 235. Distinction between Indicative and Infinitive in Con- secutive Clauses 99 236. Indicative with ciVre 99, 100 237. Independent Consecutive Sentences 100 Moods in Conditional Sentences. 238-241. Definition and Classification 100, 101 242-247. Simple Present or Past Particular Supposition 102, 103 XIV CONTENTS. section page 248, 249. Supposition contrary to Eact 103, 104 250. Future Supposition with more Probability . . 104 251-256. Variant Forms 104, 105 257. Particular and General Suppositions referring to the Future 106 258. Present and Future Suppositions in Indirect Discourse 106 259. Future Supposition with less Probability , . 106, 107 260, 261. Present General Supposition 107, 108 262,263. Third and Fifth Classes compared .... 108 264. First and Fifth Classes compared .... 109 265. [Past General Supposition] 109 266-277. Peculiarities of Conditional Sentences . . . 109-112 Moods in Concessive Sentences. 278. Definition 112, 113 279-282. Ei Kai and kuI el in Concessive Clauses . . 113, 114 283. General Usage of Moods and Tenses in Con- cessive Clauses 114 284. Concessive Clauses of the First Class . . . 114 285. Concessive Clauses referring to the Future . 114, 115 286. Concessive Clauses of the Fourth Class ... 115 287. Concessive Clauses of the Fifth Class .... 115 288. Concessive Particles in English 115, 116 Moods in Relative Clauses. 289-291. Definition and Classification 116, 117 I. Definite Relative Clauses. 292. Definition 117, 118 293. Moods in Definite Relative Clauses 118 294. Definite Relative Clauses implying cause, result, or concession 118 295. Restrictive and Explanatory Relative Clauses . . 119 II. Conditional Relative Sentences. 296-.300. Definition and Classification 119-121 .301. Simple Present or Past Particular Supposition 121 302. [Supposition contraisv to Fact] 121 CONTENTS. XV SECTION PAGE 303-305. Future Supposition with more Probability , . 121, 122 306-309. Variant Forms 122, 123 310. Particular and General Suppositions referring to the future 123 311. [Future Supposition with less Probabilitv] . 123 312-314. Present General Supposition 123, 124 315. Past General Supposition 124,125 316. Clauses conditional in form, but definite in sense 125 III. Relative Clauses Expressing Purpose. 317. Relative Clauses of Pure Purpose 125 318-320. Complementary Relative Clauses 125, 126 IV. Relative Clauses introduced by words meaning Until, While, and Before. 321. Definition ot ecos ..... ' 126, 127 322, 323. Clauses introduced by ea>s and referring to the FUTURE 127 324-326. Clauses introduced by ews and referring to WHAT WAS IN PAST TIME A FUTURE CONTINGENCY 127, 128 327. Clauses introduced by ews (until), and refer- ring TO A PAST FACT 128 328,329. Clauses introduced by ews (while), and refer- ring TO A contemporaneous EVENT' 128 330. "Ews followed by ov or 6tov 128, 129 331, 332. Clauses introduced by dxPh °-XPi- o5, etc. . . . 129 333. Clauses introduced by irplv 129 Moods in Indirect Discourse. 334-340. Definition and Classification 130-132 341, 342. Classical Usage in Indirect Discourse 132 343-346. New Testament Usage in Indirect Discourse . . . 132-134 347. Single dependent Clauses in Indirect Discourse 134 348. Imperfect for Present, and Pluperfect for Per- fect in Indirect Discourse 134, 135 349, 350. Relative Pronouns in Indirect Discourse . . 135 351-356. Indirect Discourse in English and in Greek 135-142 Construction after Kal l-ye'vcTO. 357-360. Three Forms of the Idiom 142, 143 XVI CONTENTS. THE INFINITIVE. SECTION PAGE 361-363. Origin, and Classification of Uses 143-145 The Infinitive w^ithout the Article. 364,365. Imperative Infinitive 146 366, 367. Infinitive of Purpose 146 368. Infinitive as an Indirect Object 147 369-371. Infinitive of Result 147-150 372-374. Exceptional usages 150 375. Infinitive defining Content of a previous Verb OR Noun 150, 151 376,377. Infinitive loiiting Adjectives and Adverbs. . 151 378, 379. Infinitive limiting Nouns 151, 152 380-382. Infinitive after -n-piv or -rrplv q 152 383. Infinitive used absolutely 153 384, 385. Infinitive as Subject 153 386. Infinitive as Appositive 153 387-389. Infinitive as. Object 153, 154 390. Infinitive in Indirect Discourse 154, 155 391. Infinitive after verbs of hoping, promising, swear- ing^ commanding, etc 155 392. 393. 394. 395. 396. 397. 398. 399. 400. 401. 402, 403. 404, 405. 406-417. The Infinitive -with the Article. General Use of Infinitive with the Article . 155, 156 Infinitive with to as Subject 156 Infinitive with to as Object 156 Infinitive with the Article, in Apposition . . 156, 157 Infinitive with ti^ 157 Infinitive of Purpose with tov 157 Infinitive of Kesult with tov 157, 158 Infinitive with tov after Adjectives .... 158 Infinitive with tov after Nouns 158 Infinitive with tov after Verbs that take the Genitive 158, 159 Various constructions after Verbs of hindering 159 Infinitive with tov as Subject or Object . . . 159, 160 Infinitive with the Article governed by Prepo- sitions 160-163 CONTENTS. XVU THE PARTICIPLE. SECTION PAGE 418. General Nature of the Participle 1G3 419. Classification respecting logical force 163, 104 The Adjective Participle. 420, 421. Definition and Classification 164 422. Restrictive Attributive Participle 164, 165 423. ■ Restrictive Attributive Participle with Subject omitted 165 424. Noun without the article limited by a Participle with the article 165 425. Neuter Participle with the article equivalent to an abstract Noun 166 420. Explanatory Attributive Participle .... 166 427. Order of words with Attributive Participle limiting a Noun with the article 166, 167 428. Attributive Participle conveying a subsidiary idea of cause, purpose, etc 167 429, 430. Predicative Adjective Participle 167 431. Predicative Participle used to form periphrastic tenses 168 432, 433. Participles in Predicate in various construc- tions 168, 169 The Adverbial Participle. 434. Definition 169 435. Adverbial Participle of Time 169 436. Adverbial Participle of Condition 169 437, 438. Adverbial Participle of Concession .... 170 439. Adverbial Participle of Cause 170 410,441. Participle of Cause with cJs 170,171 442. Adverbial Participle of Purpose 171 443. Adverbial Participle of Means 171 444. Adverbial Participle of Manner 171 445, 446. 'fis with the Participle denoting Manner .... 172 447. Participle of Manner or Means denoting same action as that of the principal Verb .... 172, 173 448. Intensive Participle — Hebraistic 173 XVlll CONTENTSo sectiox page 449, 450. Adverbial Participle of Attendaxt Circuji- STANCE 173, 174 451. More than one adverbial relation implied by the same Participle 174 452-454. Genitive Absolute 174, 175 455. Position of Adverbial Participle 175 The Substantive Participle. 456. Definition 175 457. Substantive Participle as Subject 175 458, 459. Substantive Participle as Object 176 460. Substantive Participle in Indirect Discourse . . 176 461. Substantive Participle as a limiting Genitive 176 462. Position of Substantive Participle 177 463. Substantive Participle distinguished from Ad- jective Participle used substantively . . . 177 THE USE OF NEGATIVES WITH VERBS. 464. General Usage 178 NEGATIVES WITH THE INDICATIVE. 465. Negatives in Independent declaratory Sentences . . 178 466. Negatives w^ith a Prohibitory Future 179 467. Negatives in Questions 179 468. Mt) ov in Phetorical Questions 179 469, 470. Negatives in Conditional and Conditional Relative Clauses 179,180 471. El fxr) in the sense of except 180 472. Ov after /nq as a conjunction 181 473. Negatives in Indirect Discourse 181 474. Negatives in Causal Clauses and in simple Relative Clauses 181 NEGATIVES WITH THE SUBJUNCTIVE, OPTATIVE, AND IMPERATIVE. 475. Negatives with the Subjunctive 181, 182 476,477. Negatives with the Optative ... 182 478, 479. Negatives with the Imperative 182, 183 CONTENTS. XIX NEGATIVES WITH THE INFINITIVE AND PARTICIPLE. SECTION PAGE 480. General Usage of Negatives with tlie Infinitive . . 183 481. Negatives with a limitation of an Infinitive' or of its subject 183,184 482. Compound of ov with an Infinitive dependent on a principal verb limited by ou 184 483. Redundant [iri with Infinitive after verbs of hinder- ing^ denying^ etc 184 484. Negative with Infinitive dependent on a verb itself negatived by ou 184 485. General Usage of Negatives with the Participle . . 184, 185 SUCCESSIVE AND DOUBLE NEGATIVES. 480. Two simple Negatives, or a compound Negative fol- lowed by a simple Negative 185 487,488. Double Negative oi) ytiT^ 185,186 489. Negative followed by similar compound Negative or double Negative • 186 LIST OF WORKS AND AUTHORS REFERRED TO BY ABBREVIATION. A. J. P. .... American Journal of Philology. Alf. Henry Alford^ The Greek New Testament. 4 vols. Lon- don. A.V Authorized Version of the New Testament. B Alexander Buttmann., A Grammar of the New Testament Greek. Translated by J. H. Thayer. Andover, 1873. Bib. Sac. . . . Bibliotheca Sacra. Br Karl Brugmann^ Griechische Grammatik, in Iwan Mtil- ler's Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft, vol. II. Second Edition. Miinchen, 1890. CI. Bev Classical Review. Del B. Delbr'dck, Syntaktische Forschungen. Halle, 1871- 1888. Ev. Pet Apocryphal Gospel of Peter. (Verses according to the edition of Harnack, Leipzig, 1893.) G W. W. Goodwin, A Greek Grammar. Revised Edition. Boston, 1892. Gild Basil L. Gildersleeve, various papers in A. J. P. and T.A.P.A. G.MT W. W. Goodwin, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb. Revised and enlarged. Boston, 1889. Or TJiomas Sheldon Green, A Treatise on the Grammar of the New Testament. New Edition. London, 18G2. HA James Hadleij, A Greek Grammar for Schools and Col- leges. Revised by F, D. Allen. New York, 1884. Hr W. B. Harper, Elements of Hebrew Syntax. New York, 1888. ./. W. E. Jelf, A Grammar of the Greek Language. Third Edition. 2 vols. Oxford and London, 1861. J.B.L Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis. K. Baphael Kilhner, Grammatik der Griechischen Sprache. Hanover, 1869-1872. Ka E. Kautzsch, Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramaischen, Leipzig, 1884. xxi Xxii LIST OF TVORKS AND AUTHORS. L. and S. . . . Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, etc. Seventh Edition. New York, 1882. Ltft J. B. Lightfoot, Commentaries on Galatians, on Philip- pians, and on Colossians and Philemon. Mart. Polyc. . Martyrium Polycarpi. (See any edition of the Apostolic Fathers. ) 3Ieist K. Meisterhans, Grammatik der Attischen Inschriften. BerUn, 1885. Mey U. A. W. 3Iei/er, Kommentar iiber das Neue Testament. Gottingen, 1867-1876. English Translation, Edinburgh, 1873-1880. Ps. Sol The Psalms of Solomon. (Recent edition by Ryle and James, Cambridge, 1891.) R.V The New Testament in the Revised Version of 1881. iS. W. H. Simcox, The Language of the New Testament. London and New York, 1889. Th J. H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testa- menti, translated, revised, and enlarged. New York, 1886. Tisch Constantimis Tischendorf, Novum Testamentum Graece. Eighth Edition. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1869-72. Treg S. P. Tregelles, The Greek New Testament. London, 1857-79. T.A.P.A. . . . Transactions of the American Philological Association. W. G. B. Winer. See WM. and WT. WH Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek, the text revised by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort. 2 vols. Cambridge and New York, 1881. WM. G. B. Winer, A Treatise on the Grammar of New Testa- ment Greek. Translated by W. F. Moulton. Third Edition. Edinburgh, 1882. WT. G. B. Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Tes- tament. Seventh Edition, enlarged and improved by Gottlieb Liinemann. Revised and authorized Trans- lation by J. H. Thayer. Andover, 1869. For classical and Scrijjture writers the ordinary abbreviations are used. References to the Old Testament are to the Septuagint Version, unless otherwise indicated. Citations from the Septuagint, including the Apocry- pha, are based on the edition of Tischendorf, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1887. The edition of Swete, Caml)ridgo, 1887-, is at the time of going to press in- complete, but may be used for the passages contained in vols. 1 and 2. SYNTAX OF THE Moods and Tenses in New Testament Geeek. INTRODUCTORY. 1. Form and Function. The following pages deal with, the various functions of the various verb-forms of the Greek of the New Testament, so far as respects their mood and tense. It is important that the nature of the relation between form and function be clearly held in mind. It is by no means the case that each form has but one function, and that each function can be discharged by but one form. Forms of various origin may be associated together under one name and perform the same function, or group of functions. Compare, e.g., the Aorist Active Infinitives, XiSo-ac and dirtLv : these forms are of quite diverse origin ; in function they have become entirely assimilated. The same is true of the Aorist Active Indicatives, cSei^a and €(TTrjv. Forms also which still have different names, and usually perform different functions, may have certain functions in common. Compare the Aorist Subjunctive and the Future Indicative in clauses of purpose (197, 198). On the other hand, and to an even greater extent, we find that a given form, or a given group of forms bearing a common name, performs various distinct functions. Observe, e.g., the various functions of the Aorist Indicative (38-48). 1 J J , 3 J J J } >\ i i ) 1 J ) J } 2 INTRODUCTORY. The name of a given form, or group of forms, is usually derived from some prominent function of the form or group. Thus the term Aorist reflects the fact that the forms thus designated most frequently represent an action indefinitely without reference to its progress. The name Present suggests that the forms thus designated denote present time, which is true, however, of the smaller part only of those that bear the name, and of none of them invariably. The name Optative again reminds us that one function of the forms so named is to express a wish. While, therefore, the names of the forms were originally intended to designate their respective func- tions, they cannot now be regarded as descriptive of the actual functions, but must be taken as conventional, and to a con- siderable extent arbitrary, names of the forms. The functions must be learned, not from the names, but from observation of the actual usage. r 2. The Interpreter's Relation to Grammar. Both the grammarian as such and the interpreter deal with grammar, but from very different points of view. The distinction between these points of view should be clearly recognized by the in- terpreter. It may be conveniently represented by the terms historical grammar and exegetical grammar. Historical gram- mar deals with the development of both form and function through the various periods of the history of the language, and does this in purely objective fashion. Exegetical grammar, on the other hand, takes the forms as it finds them, and defines the functions which at a given period each form discharged, and does this from the point of view of the interpreter, for the purpose of enabling hhu to reproduce the thought con- veyed by the form. To investigate the process by which the several forms were built u)), to determine the earliest function of each such form, to show how out of this earliest function INTRODUCTORY. 3 others were developed, and liow forms of different origin, and presumably at first of different function, became associated, discharging the same function and eventually coming to bear the same name — all this belongs to historical grammar. To reproduce in the mind of the interpreter, and to express as nearly as may be in his own tongue, the exact thought which a given form was in the period in question capable of expressing — this is the task of exegetical grammar. Histori- cal grammar views its problem wholly from the point of view of the language under investigation, without reference to the language of the grammarian. Exegetical grammar is neces- sarily concerned both with the language under investigation and with that in which the interpreter thinks and speaks, since its problem is to aid in reproducing in the latter tongue thought expressed in the former. The results of historical grammar are of the greatest interest and value to exegetical grammar. Our interpretation of the phenomena of language in its later periods can hardly fail to be affected by a knowledge of the earlier history. Strictly speaking, however, it is with the results only of the processes of historical grammar that the interpreter is concerned. If the paradigm has been rightly constructed, so that forms of diverse origin perhaps, but completely assimilated in function, bear a common name, exegetical grammar is concerned only to know what are the functions which each group of forms bear- ing a common name is capable of discharging. Thus, the diversity of origin of the two Aorists, eXvaa and eAtTrov, does not immediately concern the interpreter, if it is an assured result of historical grammar that these two forms are com- pletely assimilated in function. iSTor does it concern him that the at at the end of the Infinitives, 8et^at and Uvai, is the mark of the Dative case, and that the earliest use of such infinitives was as a verbal noun in the Dative case, except as this fact 4 INTRODUCTORY. of historical grammar aids him in the interpretation of the phenomena of that period of tlie language with which he is dealing. The one question of exegetical grammar to which all other questions are subsidiary is, What function did this form, or group of forms, discharge at the period with which we are dealing ? What, e.g., in the New Testament, are the functions of the Present Indicative ? What are the uses of the Aorist Subjunctive ? For practical convenience forms are grouped together, and the significance of each of the distinctions made by inflection discussed by itself. The present work confines itself to the discussion of mood and tense, and discusses these as far as possible separately. Its question therefore is. What in the New Testament are the functions of each tense and of each mood ? These various functions must be defined first of all from the point of view of the Greek language itself. Since, however, the interpreter whom in the present instance it is sought to serve thinks in English, and seeks to express in English the thought of the Greek, reference must be had also to the functions of the English forms as related to those of the Greek forms. Since, moreover, distinctions of function in the two languages do not always correspond, that is, since what in Greek is one function of a given form may be in English subdivided into several functions per- formed by several forms, it becomes necessary not only to enumerate and define the functions of a given form purely from the point of view of Greek, but to subdivide the one Greek function into those several functions which in English are recognized and marked by the employment of different forms. An enumeration of the uses of a given Greek tense made for the use of an English interpreter may therefore properly include certain titles which would not occur in a list made for one to whom Greek was the language of INTPwODUCTORY. 5 ordinary speech and tliought. The Aorist for the English Perfect, and the Aorist for the English Plnperfect (46, 48) furnish a pertinent illustration. The interests of the English interpreter require that they be clearly recognized. Fidelity to Greek usage requires that they be recognized as, strictly speaking, true Historical Aorists. 3. The Greek verb has four moods, — the Indicative, the Subjunctive, the Optative, and the Imperative. With these are associated in the study of Syntax the Infinitive, which is, strictly speaking, a verbal noun, and the Participle, which is a verbal adjective. The Subjunctive, Optative, Imperative, and Infinitive are often called dependent moods. Rem. The term dependent is not strictly applicable to these moods, and least of all to the Imperative, which almost always stands as a prin- cipal verb. It has, however, become an established term, and is retained as a matter of convenience. 4. There are seven tenses in the Greek, — the Present, Imperfect, Aorist, Future, Perfect, Pluperfect, and Future Perfect. Those tenses which denote present or future time are called Primary tenses. Those tenses which denote past time are called Secondary tenses. Since the time denoted by a tense varies with the particular use of the tense, no fixed line of division can be drawn between the two classes of tenses. In the Indicative the Present and Perfect are usually, and the Future and Future Perfect are always. Primary tenses; the Imperfect, Aorist, and Pluperfect are usually Secondary tenses. THE TENSES. 5. The action denoted by a verb may be defined by the tense of the verb (a) As respects its progress. Thus it may be represented as in progress, or as completed, or indejinitely , i.e. as a simple event without reference to progress or completion. {b) As respects its time, Oi^ past, present, oi future. The tenses of the Indicative mood in general define the action of the verb in both these respects. The tenses of the other moods in general define the action of the verb only as respects its progress. HA. 821 ; G. 1249. Rem. The chief function of a Greek tense is thus not to denote time, but progress. This latter function belongs to the tense-forms of all the moods, the former to those of the Indicative only. TEXSES OF THE IXDICATIVE MOOD. 6. The significance of the tenses of the Indicative mood may be stated in genercd as follows : — As respects progress : The Present and Imperfect denote action in progress ; the Perfect, Pluperfect, and Future Perfect denote completed action ; the Aorist represents the action indefinitely as an event or single fact ; the Future is used either of action in progress like the Present, or indefinitely like the Aorist. As respects time : The Present and Perfect denote present time ; the Imperfect, Aorist, and Pluperfect denote past time ; the Future and Future Perfect denote future time. 6 THE PRESENT INDICATIVE. 7 7. The tenses of the Indicative in general denote time rela- tive to that of speaking. Most exceptions to this rule are apparent or rhetorical rather than real and grammatical. In indirect discourse the point of view, as respects time, of the original speaking or thinking is retained. Cf. 351. Of two verbs of past time, one may refer to an action antecedent to the other, but this fact of antecedence is implied in the con- text, not expressed in the tense. Cf. 29 and 48. By prolepsis also a verb of past time may refer to or include events to take place after the time of speaking, but before a point of future time spoken of in the context. Cf. 50. In conditional sen- tences of the second form, the tenses are properly timeless. Cf. 248. See Br. 154 (p. 180). THE PKESENT INDIOATIYE. 8. The Progressive Present. The Present Indicative is used of action in progress in present time. HA. 824 ; a. 1250, 1. Matt. 25:8; at Aa/XTraSe? i^/xcoj/ crfiiwvvTai, our lamps are going out. Gal. 1:6; Oav/xd^d) 6tl ovt(i)<; ra^j^eo)? ixeraTcOeaOe aTro tov KaXiaav- TOUvTaL; Acts 9 : 34, I'arat ; 26 : 1, eVirpeTreTat ; Gal. 1:11, yvwpt'^w, and the numer- ous instances of Aeyw in the gospels. RexM. This usage is a distinct departure from the prevailing use of the Present tense to denote action in progress (cf. 9). There being in the Indicative no tense which represents an event as a simple fact without at the same time assigning it either to the past or the future, the Present is used for those instances (rare as compared witli the cases of the Pro- gressive Present), in whicli an action of present time is conceived of without reference to its progress. 14. The Historical Present. The Present Indicative is used to describe vividly a past event in the presence of which the speaker conceives himself to be. ITA. 828; a. 1252. Mark 11 : 27 ; koI tpxovTai ttolXlv et? lepoaoXv/jia, and they come again to Jerusalem. See also Luke 8 : 49, ep)(^e.Tai; John 18 : 28, ayovaiv. This use is very frequent in the gospels. 15. The Present for the Future. In a similar way the Present Indicative may be used to describe vividly a future event. Mark 9 : 31 ; 6 vto? tov dvOpiOTrov TrapaSt'Sorat ei? ^^ctpa? dvOpwiroiv, the Son of man is delivered into the hands of men. See also Matt. 26 : 18, TTOLu) ; 27 : 63, cyetpo/xat ; Luke 3 : 9, iKKOwTerat. 10 THE TENSES. Kem. The term "Present for Future" is sometimes objected to, but without good reason. The arguments of Buttmann, pp. 203 f ., and Winer, WT. pp. 265 ff. ; W3I. pp. 331 ff., are valid only against the theory of an arbitrary interchange of tenses. It is indeed not to be supposed tliat Greek writers confused the Present and the Future tenses, or used them indiscriminately. But that the form which customarily denoted an act in progress at the time of speaking w^as sometimes, for the sake of vivid- ness, used with reference to a fact still in the future, is recognized by all grammarians. See, e.g., J. 397 ; K. 382, 5 ; G.WT. 32. The whole force of the idiom is derived from the unusualness of the tense employed. 16. The Present form rJKo) means I have come (John 2:4; 4 : 47; etc.). Similarly TrdpeLfxi (I am present) sometimes means I have arrived (Acts 17:6; etc.). This, however, is not a Present for the Perfect of the same verb, but a Present equivalent to the Perfect of another verb. The use of aKovm meaning / am informed (cf. similar use of English hear, see, learn) is more nearly a proper Present for Perfect (1 Cor. 11:18; 2 Thess. 3:11). Such use of the Present belongs to a very few verbs. HA. S27 ; G. 1256. 17. The Present of past Action still in Progress. The Present Indicative, accompanied by an adverbial expression denoting duration and referring to past time, is sometimes used in Greek, as in German, to describe an action which, beginning in past time, is still in prog- ress at the time of speaking. English idiom requires the use of the Perfect in such cases. HA. 826 ; G. 1258. Acts 15:21; M.o)varj<; yap €k yeveCjv ap^aioiv KaTo. ttoXlv tov<; Krjpvcr- aoi/ras avrov €;)(et, for Moses from generations of old has had in every city them that preached him. See also Luke 13:7, (.py(pp.aL\ 15:29, SouAeuo) ; John 5 : G, txtL\ 2 Tiin. 3:15, otSas. Tills Present is almost always mcorrectly rendered in R. V. Rkm. Cf. Br. 150, " Das Priisens in Verbindung mlt irdpos, irdXai, TTOTi wurde seit Homer f^ebraucht, nm eine llandlunf:^ auszudriicken, die sich (lurch die Vergan^enlieit bis zur Zeit des S])rechens liinzieht." In the New Testament examples definite expressions of past time occur in place of the adverbs rrd/jos, etc. THE PRESENT INDICATIVE. 11 18. The Aorist Indicative, limited by an expression mean- ing up to this time, may also be used of acts beginning in past time and continuing to the time of speaking. Matt. 27 : 8 ; 28 : 15. Cf. 4G, and 52. 19. Verbs in indirect discourse retain the point of view, as respects time, of the original statement ; a Progressive Present in indirect discourse accordingly denotes action going on at the time, not of the quotation of the words, but of the original utterance of them. English usage in indirect discourse is different, and from this difference it results that a Greek Present Indicative standing in indirect discourse after a verb of past time must often be rendered by a verb of past time. These cases, however, involve no special use of the Greek tense, and should not be confused with those of the Historical Present. Cf. 351-356. 20. Periphrastic Form of the Present. One of the clearly marked peculiarities of the Greek of the New Testa- ment is the frequency with which periphrastic forms composed of a Present or Perfect Participle (Luke 23 : 19 is quite excep- tional in its use of the ^om^ Participle; cf. Ev. Pet. 23), and the Present, Imperfect, or Future Indicative, or the Present Subjunctive, Imperative, Infinitive, and even parti- ciple, of the verb d^l (rarely also v-n-dpxo)), are used instead of the usual simple forms. Cf. 431, and see the full dis- cussion with examples in B. pp. 308-313, and the list (not quite complete) in S. pp. 131 ff. Instances of the periphrastic Present Indicative are, how- ever, few. The clear instances belong under the head of the General Present. Matt. 27 : 33 ; ct? tottov Aeyo/xei/ov ToXyoOd, o iariv Kpavcov Tottos A.€yo/xei/os, U7}to a place called Golgotha, which is called Place of a Skull. See also Matt. 1 : 23 ; Mark 5 : 41 ; 2 Cor. 2 : 17 ; 9 : 12. 12 THE TENSES. THE IMPEEPECT INDICATIVE. 21. The Progressive Imperfect. The Imperfect is used of action in progress in past time. HA. 829 ; G. 1250, 2. Mark 12 : 41 ; kol ttoXKoI irXovdioL IfSaWov ttoXXo., and many that loere rich were casting in much. Luke 1 : 66 ; kol yap X^'-P xvpLOv rjv /xer' avrov, for the hand of the Lord was with him. John 11 : 36 ; t'Se, ttco? ec^t'Aet avroV, behold how he loved him. 22. The statement respecting the translation of the Pro- gressive Present (of. 10), applies to the Imperfect also. Notice the third example above, and see also Lnke 2 : 51, his mother kept [SterT^pet] all these things in her heart; in Lnke 24 : 32, A. v., did not our heart hum ivithin us, is better than E..V., was not our heart burning ivithin us. Though the verb is a periphrastic Imperfect, KaLo/xevrj yv, the English form did burn sufficiently suggests action in progress to render it adequately. 23. The Coxative Imperfect. The Progressive Imperfect is sometimes used of action attempted, but not accomplished. Cf. 11. HA. 832 ; G. 1255. Matt. 3 : 14 ; 6 8e huKtjiXvev avrov, but he woidd have hindered him. See also Luke 1 : 59, tKoAouv; 35 : 16, eStSou; Acts 7 : 26, crwrjX- Xa(TCTf.v\ 26 : 11, TjudyKa^ov- 24. The Imperfect of Repeated Action. The Imper- fect is used of customary or repeated action in past time. HA. 830; G. 1253, 2. Acts 3:2; ov ItlOow kuB rj/jitpav Trpo? ttjv dvpav Tov Itpov, lohom they used to lay daily at the gate of the temple. THE IMPERFECT I^IDICATIVE. 13 25. For the use of the Imperfect, Aorist, or Pluperfect in a condition contrary to fact, or its apodosis, see 248, 249. 26. The Imperfect and Aorist with av are used in classical Greek to denote a customary past action taking place under certain circumstances. In the New Testament this usage never occurs in principal clauses. The use of the Imperfect and Aorist \vith av in conditional relative clauses is possibly a remnant of the usage. Cf. 315. 27. The Imperfect and Aorist are used in a clause express- ing an unattained wish having reference to the present or past. The Imperfect denotes action in progress. The Aorist repre- sents the action indefinitely as a simple event. Either tense may refer to either present or past time. All the New Testa- ment instances seem to refer to present time. Rev. 3 : 15; o<^eAov ij/vxpo'i ^s 17 ^ecrros, / icould that thou loert cold or hot. See also 1 Cor. 4 : 8 (Aor.) ; 2 Cor. 11 : 1 (Imperf.). Rem. 1. In classical Greek unattainable wishes are expressed by etde or el yap with the Indicative (HA. 871 ; G. 1511) or wcpeXop with the Infinitive. In Callimachus, 260 b.c, Jj(p€\ov is found with the Indicative (L. & S., dcpeiXo) II. 3. fin.). In the New Testament el yap (in this sense) and eWe do not occur, but 6(pe\ov, shortened form of wcpeXov, is used (as an uninflected particle) with the Imperfect and Aorist Indica- tive. WM. p. 377 ; WT. p. 301, n. 2. Rem. 2. In Gal. 5 : 12 6(pe\ov is followed by the Future, but the wish is probably not conceived of as unattainable. 28. AYhen an Imperfect refers to an action not separated from the time of speaking by a recognized interval, it is best translated into English by the Perfect, using preferably the progressive form, unless the verb itself suggests action in progress. 14 THE TENSES. 1 John 2:7; -^v etx^Te aTr' dpx^?? wJiich ye have had from the beginning. See also Luke 2 : 49 ; Rom. 15 : 22 ; Rev. 3 : 2 (cited by Weymouth in Theological Monthly, iv. 42, who also quotes examples from clas- sical authors). Cf. 52. 29. When an action denoted by an Imperfect evidently pre- ceded an event already mentioned, such Imperfect is sometimes best translated into English by the Pluperfect. From the point of view of Greek, however, this, like the preceding usage, is an ordinary Progressive Imperfect or Imperfect of Kepeated Action. Cf. 52. Matt. 14:4; eXeyev yap 6 looav?;? avT(Z, Ovk t^ecTTLV (tol e)(€Lv avrrjv, for John had been saying to him. It is not lawful for you to have her. See also Luke 8 : 27 ; Acts 9 : 39. 30. The Imperfect of verbs denoting obligation or possi- bility, when used to affirm that a certain thing should or could have been done, i.e. was required or possible under the circumstances related, is a true affirmative Imperfect. It is incorrect in this case to speak of an omitted dv, since though it is frequently the case that the necessary or possible deed did not take place, the past necessity or possibility was actual, not hypothetical or " contrary to fact." Here belong Matt. 18:33; 23:23; 25:27; Acts 24:19; 26:32; 27:21; 2 Cor. 2 : 3, etc. The Imperfect is also used of a past necessity or obligation when the necessary deed did take place. Here also, of course, the Imperfect has its usual force. Luke 13 : 16 ; 24 : 26 ; John 4:4; Acts 1:16; 17:3. 31. Buttmann, pp. 210 f., 225 f., describes correctly the class of cases in which the past obligation or possibility was actual, but in which the required or possible deed did not take place, but wrongly includes in his list several passages in which not only the fact but the obligation or ability is hypothetical. Such are John 9 : 3.3 ; 1 Cor. 5:10; Ileb. : 26, which are to be explained in accordance with 249. The distinction THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE. 15 between these two classes of cases is not always easily marked in English translation, since' the English forms could., should, etc., are used both for actual and for hypothetical obligation or ability. Cf. He could have gone, if he had been well, and lie could have gone, but did not ivish to go. 32. Through a dimming of the distinction between the ideas of present and past obligation (which has occurred also in English in the case of the word ought), the Imperfect with- out av is sometimes used to express a present obligation. The Infinitive after such an Imperfect is always in the Present tense. In accordance with this usage we are probably to ex- plain Acts 22:22; Eph. 5:4; CoL 3:18; cf. Lfft. on CoL loc. cit. and ^MT. 416. On these several uses of the Imperfect of verbs of obliga- tion, etc., see G.MT. 413-423. 33. The Imperfect of verbs of wishing, without av, is best explained as a true Progressive Imperfect, describing a desire which the speaker for a time felt, without affirming that he actually cherishes it at the time of his present utterance. ^ This is especially clear in Philem. 13, 14, where the apostle states in one clause what his desire — his personal prefer- ence — was (i/SovXofxrjv), and in the next his actual decision {rjOeXrjaa), as over against his preference. The reason for describing the desire as past is not always, however, that it has been put aside. Failure to realize the desire, or the perception that it cannot be realized, or reluctance to express a positive and deliberate choice ma}^ lead the speaker to use the Imperfect rather than the Present. Similarly we some- times say in colloquial English, I ivas ivishing that such a thing might happen, or even more commonly, / have sometimes wished. Nearly the same meaning may be conveyed in Eng- lish by the more usual potential form, I should like, I ivould 16 THE TENSES. that, or I could wish. In Acts 25 : 22 the use of the Imperfect ifSovXofxrjv rather than a Present softens the request for polite- ness' sake, and may well be rendered / should like. In Gal. 4 : 20 it is probably the impossibility of realizing the ^yish that leads to the use of the Imperfect, and yOeXov Trapdvat may be rendered, / would that I ivere i^resent. In Rom. 9 : 3 rjvx'^lj.Tjv may have been chosen because the apostle shrank from expressing a deliberate choice in regard to so solemn a matter, or because he thought of it as beyond the control or influence of his wish. / could 2)^'(^y expresses the meaning with approximate accuracy. In all these cases, however, what is strictly stated in the Greek is merely the past existence of a state of desire; the context alone implies what the present state of mind is. Cf. G^.MT. 425. 34. Periphrastic Form of the Imperfect. Periphras- tic Imperfects, formed by adding a Present Participle to the Imperfect of the verb dfxt, are frequent in the New Testament, especially in the historical books. The large majority of these forms denote continued action. Mark 10 : 32 ; kcu rjv irpoayuiv avTov<; 6 'Ir^croi;?, a7id Jesus was going before them. So also Luke 1 : 10, 22 ; John 13 : 23 ; and probably Mark 2 : 18. In a few instances repeated action isl'eferred to, as Luke 5:10; 19 : 47 ; Gal. 1 : 23. Cf. 431. THE AORIST IMIOATIVE. 35. The constant characteristic of the Aorist tense in all of its moods, including the participle, is tliat it represents the action denoted by it indefinitely ; i.e. simply as an event, neither on the one hand picturing it in progress, nor on the otlier affirming the existence of its result. The name indeji- nite as tlius understood is therefore applicable to the tense in all of its uses. THE AOKIST INDICATIVE. 17 As respects the point of view from which the action is looked at, however, we may distinguish three functions of the tense common to all of its moods. Mrst, it may be used to describe an action or event in its entirety. This use of the tense, since it is by far the most frequent, may be called by pre-eminence the Indefinite Aorist. In the Indicative it may be called the Historical Aorist. The Aorist of any verb may be used in this sense ; thus etVai/, to say ; SiaKovrjaat, to serve. Secondly, it may be used to denote the inception of a state. The Aorist thus used may be called the Inceptive Aorist. It belongs to verbs which in the Present and Imper- fect denote the continuance of a state ; thus atyav, to be silent; cnyrjcraL, to become silent. Thirdly, it may be used to denote the success of an effort. The Aorist thus used may be called the Resultative Aorist. It belongs to verbs which in the Present and Imperfect denote effort or attempt ; thus KwAvetv, to hinder, obstruct; KoyXvaat, to prevent. The genetic relation of these three functions of the Aorist tense has not been satisfactorily defined. In the Greek, both of the classical and the New Testament periods, however, they ap- pear side by side as co-ordinate uses. Br. 159; Del. iv., pp. 100 f. Rem. Respecting the force of the Indefinite Aorist, compare Briig- mann's statement concerning the Aorist forms : " Am haufigsten warden diese Formen so gebrancht, dass man sich die Handlung in einen unge- teilten Denlvakt ganz und volistandig, in sich abgesclilossen, absolut vor- stellen sollte. Das Factum wurde einfach constatiert ohne RUcksicht auf Zeitdauer." Br. 159. 36. In addition to these uses which belong to the Aorist in all its moods, the Aorist Indicative has three uses, instances of which are comparatively infrequent. These are the Gnomic Aorist, the Epistolary Aorist, and the Dramatic Aorist. 18 THE TEXSES. The Aorist for the Perfect and the Aorist for the Pluper- fect are, as explained below (52), not distinct functions of the Aorist, but merely special cases of the Historical, Inceptive, or Eesultative Aorist. 37. The distinction between the Indefinite, the Inceptive, and the Resultative functions of the Aorist is often ignored, or its legitimacy denied. It is true that there are cases in which it is not possible to decide certainly whether a given verb refers to the inception of an action only, or to its entire extent, and others in which there is a similar difficulty in deciding whether the reference is to the action as a whole or to its result only. It is true also that the genetic relation of these three uses of the tense is not a matter of entire cer- tainty, and that it is possible that, historically speaking, they are but varying types of one usage. Especially must it be regarded as doubtful whether the Resultative Aorist is any- thing else than the Indefinite Aorist of verbs denoting effort. The matter of importance to the interpreter, however, is that, whatever the genesis of the fact, of the Aorists of the New Testament some denote a past act in its undivided entirety, others denote merely or chiefly the inception of an action, and others still affirm as a past fact the accomplish- ment of an act attempted. These distinctions, which from the exegetical point of view it is often important to mark, are conveniently indicated by the terms indejinite, inceptive, and resultative. With reference to the validity of this distinction, see Br. 159. The Inceptive Aorist is illustrated in Acts 15 : 13, and after they had become silent [/xcra to o-ty^o-at] Jaines answered. It is evident tliat tlie Infinitive must refer to the becoming silent, not to the whole period of silence, since in the latter case James must have been silent while the others were silent, THE AOEIST INDICATIVE. 19 and have begun to speak when their silence had ended. In 2 Cor. 8 : 9, we must read not being rich lie icas jjoor, but bei7ig rich he became poor ; i-n-Tuyx^vaev is manifestly inceptive. So also in Luke 2 : 44, su2:>posi)ig him to be in the company, they went a day^s journey, it was not the holding of the opinion that he was in the company that preceded the day's journey, but the forming of it, and the participle vo/xtVavre? is inceptive. Contrast Acts 16 : 27. See other examples under 41. Illustrations of the resultative sense are less numerous and less clear. In Acts 7 : 36, however, this man led them forth, having ivronght luonders and signs in Egypt and in the Red Sea, and in the icilderness forty years, the verb iiyjyaycv seems to refer only to the result, since the signs wrought in the Red Sea and the wilderness would otherwise have been represented as accompanying the bringing out, and instead of Trotrjcras we should have had ttolCjv. See also 42.^ 38. The Historical Aorist. The Aorist Indicative is most frequently used to express a past event viewed in its entirety, simply as an event or a single fact. It has no reference to the progress of the event, or to any existing result of it. HA. 836 ; G. 1250, 5. John 1:11; eis ra tSta i]X6cv, koL ol lSlol avTov ov TrapeXafSov, he came unto his own and they that ivere his own received him not. 39. Since any past event without reference to its duration or complexity may be conceived of as a single fact, the His- torical Aorist may be used to describe (a) A momentary action. Acts 5:5; e^e'i/zu^ei/, he gave up the ghost. Matt. 8:3; kol cKretVa? Trjv X^^P^ rjif/aro avTov, and having stretched forth his hand he touched him. ^ Cf. Mart. Polyc. 8 : 2, 3, where both eireidov^ tcere persuading, and diroTvx^fTes tov irdaai, failing to persuade, refer to the same event. 20 THE TENSES. (6) An extended act or state, however prolonged in time, if viewed as constituting a single fact without reference to its progress. Acts 28 : 30 ; ivifxetvev SI Stertav oXrjv iv iSt'o) fxLa6u)ixaTi, and he abode two whole years in his own hired dwelling. Eph. 2:4; Sta tyjv ttoXXtjv aya.Tvqv avrov yjv rj-yaTrrjcrev ly/xa?, because of his great love wherewith he loved us. (c) A series or aggregate of acts viewed as constituting a single fact. Matt. 22 : 28 ; Travre? yap ta-)(ov avTrjv, for they all had her. 2 Cor. 11 : 25 ; rpts Ivavy-qcra, thrice I suffered shipwreck. 40. These three uses of the Historical Aorist may for con- venience be designated as the Momentary Aorist, the Compre- hensive Aorist, and the Collective Aorist. But it should be clearly observed that these terms do not mark distinctions in the functions of the tense. An Historical Aorist, whatever the nature of the fact affirmed, affirms it simply as a past fact. The writer may or may not have in mind that the act was single and momentary, or extended, or a series of acts, but the tense does not express or suggest the distinction. The pur- pose of the subdivision into momentary, comprehensive, and collective is not to define the force of the tense-form, but to discriminate more precisely the nature of the facts to which it is applied as shown by the context or the circumstances. Cf. G.WH. 56. liicM. The term Historical Aorist is applied to the use of the Aorist here described only by pre-eminence. In strictness the Inceptive and Resultative Aorists are also Historical. Compare what is said concerning the term Indefinite under 35. 41. The Inceptive Aorist. The Aorist of a verb whose Present denotes a state or condition, connnoiily denotes the beginning of that state. UA. 841 ; Cr. 1260. THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 21 2 Cor. 8:9; 8t' vfxa0jL\ixov, ice shall not all sleep [indefinite com- prehensive] ; or, we shall not all fall asleep [inceptive], but we shall all he changed^ in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye [indefinite momentary]. John 14 : 26 ; cKeti/os v/xa? hiha^^t Trdvra kol VTro/ivrjcreL vfxd^ iravra a etTTOv viJuv e'yw, he ivill teach you all things and bring to your remem- brance all things that I said unto you [indefinite collective]. Luke 1 : 33 ; koX /SaaiXeva-eL iirl rov oIkov 'laKto/? eis rov'^ atcova?, and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever [indefinite comprehensive]. Luke 16 : 31 ; ovS^ idv tl<; ck veKpiov dvacrTg TreiaOyjaovraL, neither will they be persuaded if one rise from the dead [resultative]. 32 THE TENSES. 60. The Progressive Future affirms that an action will be in progress in future time. HA. 843 ; G. 1250, 6. Phil. 1 : 18; koX iv rovrio \aipo>' aXKa. kol -^^aprjarofxai, and therein I rejoice, yea, and will [continue to'\ rejoice. See also Rom. 6:2; Phil. 1:6; Rev. 9 : 6. 61. It may be doubted whether any of the distinctions indi- cated by the subdivisions of the Predictive Future are justi- fied from the point of view of pure grammar. It is probable, rather, that the tense in all these cases makes precisely the same affirmation respecting the event, viz. that it icill take Ijlace ; and that it is the context only that conveys the dis- tinctions referred to. These distinctions, however, are real distinctions either of fact or of thought, and such, moreover, that the writer must in most cases have had them in mind when speaking of the facts. From the exegetical point of view, therefore, the distinctions are both justified and neces- sary, since they represent differences of thought in the mind of the writer to be interpreted. The terms employed above are convenient terms to represent. these distinctions of thought, and it is to the interpreter a matter of secondary importance whether the distinction in question is by his writer immedi- ately connected with the tense of the verb. 62. Since the Aoristic Future is less definite respecting progress than the Progressive Future, the latter predicting the act as continuing, the former making no assertion, it is evident that any instance of the Predictive Future not clearly progressive must be accounted as aoristic. If the writer did not conceive the act or event as continuing, ho left it in his own mind and for the reader undefined as respects progress, hence aoristic. Wlietlier he left it thus undefined in his mind must of course be determined, if at all, from the context, there being no difference of form between a i'rogressive and an THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 33 Aoristic Future. It should be noticed that it is not enough to show that an act will be in fact continued, in order to count the verb which predicts it a Progressive Future ; it must ap- pear that the writer thought of it as continuing. Every Future form is therefore by presumption aoristic. It can be accounted progressive only on evidence that the writer thought of the act as continued. Rem. There is one exception to this principle. In verbs of effort a Progressive Future is naturally like other Progressive forms, a conative tense. An Aoristic Future of such a verb is like the Aorist, a resultative tense. Since the latter is the larger meaning, the context must give the evidence of this larger meaning, and such evidence failing, it cannot be considered established that the verb is resultative. The verb in John 12 : 32 furnishes an interesting and important illustration. Since the verb denotes effort, the Future will naturally be accounted conative if it is judged to be progressive, and resultative if it is taken as aoristic. In the latter case the naeaning will be, 1 will by my attrartion bring all men to me. In the former case the words will mean, / icill exert on all men an attractive influence. 63. To decide whether a given Aoristic Future merely pre- dicts the fact, or refers to the inception of the action, or has reference to it as a thing accomplished, must again be deter- mined by the context or the meaning of the w^ord. The dis- tinction between the indefinite and the resultative senses will often be very difficult to make, and indeed the difference of thought will be but slight. Here also it results from the nature of the distinction between the indefinite use. and the other two, inceptive and resultative, that any instance of the Aoristic Future not clearly inceptive or resultative must be accounted indefinite. In other words, if the writer did not define the action to his own mind as inceptive or resultative, he left it indefinite, a mere fact. 64. The distinction between momentary, confprehensive, and collective is in respect to the Future tense, as in respect 34 THE TENSES. to the Aorist, a distinction which primarily has reference to the facts referred to and only secondarily to the writer's con- ception of the facts. There may easily occur instances which will defy classification at this point. A writer may predict an event not only without at the moment thinking whether it is to be a single deed or a series of deeds, a momentary or an extended action, but even without knowing. Thus the sentence. He ivill destroy Ms enemies, may be uttered by one who has confidence that the person referred to will in some way destroy his enemies, without at all knowing whether he will destroy them one by one, or all at once, and whether by some long-continued process, or by one exterminating blow. In such cases the verb can only be accounted as an Aoristic Future, incapable of further classification. 65. From a different point of view from that of the above classification, the instances of the Predictive Future might be classified as {a) assertive, and (b) promissory. The distinc- tion between the assertion that an event Avill take place and the promise that it shall take place is difficult to make, requiring delicate discrimination, but is often important for purposes of interpretation. It is in general not indicated in Greek, and its representation in English is complicated by the varied.uses of the auxiliary verbs shall and ivill. In general it may be said that in principal clauses shall is in the first person simply assertive, ivill is promissory ; in the second and third person will is assertive, shall is promissory, imperative, or solemnly predictive. R.V. employs shall almost constantly in the second and third person, in most cases probably intending it as solemnly predictive. ^latt. 10 : '\'2 ; dixrjv Aeyo> u/xti/, ov jxr] aTroXc'cr/y t6v fXLcrOov avTOv, verily I say unto you, he shall by no means lose his reward. THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 35 Mark 11 : 31 ; iav etTrw/xev E^ ovpavov, ipel, if we say, From heaven, he will say. Luke 22 : 01 ; ITptv aXeKTopa (fxDvrjaaL aT^/xepov aTrapvyjar] /xe rptq, before the cock crow this day, thou shall deny me thrice. See also Matt. 11 : 28, 29 ; 12 : 31 ; John 16 : 7, 13. 66. A Predictive Future is sometimes made emphatically negative by the use of the negative ov fx-^, Matt. 16 : 22 ; 26 : 35; Mark 14: 31 {TiscJi. Subjunctive); cf. 172. 67. The Imperative Future. The second person of the Future Indicative is often used as an Imperative. ITA. 844 ; a. 1215. James 2:8; dyaTrr/crets tov TrXrycrtW crov to? (xeavTov, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself Rem. 1. This idiom as it occurs in the New Testament shows clearly the influence of the Septuagint. It occurs most frequently in prohibi- tions, its negative being, not fxri as commonly in classical Greek, but ov. G.M.T. 69, 70 ; B. p. 257 ; WJI. pp. 396 f. ; WT. pp. 315 f. Rem. 2. In Matt. 15 : 6 the verb TLii-qcrei has the negative ov liA], Some interpreters take this as a Predictive Future, but the thought requires the Imperative sense, and in view of the frequent use of ov yA) with the Future in an imperative sense in the Septuagint, and its occasional use in classi- cal Greek, the possibility of it can hardly be denied. WM. p. 636 f . , n. 4 ; G.WY. 297. 68. One or two probable instances of the Imperative Future in the third person occur, though perhaps no entirely certain case. Matt. 4 : 4, ovk iir apTco fxovo) ^rjaeraL 6 avOp(ji)7TO<;, IS prob- ably to be SO regarded, though the Hebrew of the passage quoted (Deut. 8:3) is apparently Gnomic rather than Imper- ative. On Matt. 15:6, see 67, Rem. 2. See also Matt. 20: 26, 27. 36 THE TENSES. 69. The Gnomic Future. The Future Indicative may be used to state what will customarily happen when occa- sion offers. Rom. 5:7; /aoAi? yap vnlp Slkulov ri? aTroOavcLTat, for scarcely for a righteous man wiil one die. See also Gen. 44 : 15 ; Rom. 7 : 3, ^prjfxa- TtacL. Observe the Gnomic Presents both before and after. 70. The Deliherative Future. The Future Indicative is sometimes used in questions of deliberation, asking not what will happen, but what can or ought to be done. Such questions may be real questions asking information, or rhetorical questions taking the place of a direct asser- tion. Cf. 169. Luke 22 : 49 ; el TraTa^ofxev iv fxaxoitpr), shall we smite with the stvord? John 6 : 68 ; Kvpce, vrpos rtVa aTrcAevcro/xe^a, Lord, to whom shcdl we go f 71. Periphrastic Form of the Future. A Future tense composed of a Present Participle and the Future of the verb ci/xt is found occasionally in the New Testament. The force is that of a Progressive Future, with the thought of continu- ance or customariness somewhat emphasized. Luke 5 : 10 ; avOpu)7rov<; eo-y] ^wypCjv, thou shalt catch men, i.e. shall be a catcher of men. Luke 21: 24; 'IcpoDcraXr//x earaL TraTov/xivy], Jerusalem shall [continue }s StSa;)(^s v/xcuv, ye have filled Jerusalem icith your teaching. Romans 5:5; 6tl rj dydTrrj tov 6eov iKK€-)(yTai iv rats Kap8ai6s ly/xtov, because the love of God has been poured forth in our hearts. 2 Tim. 4:7; tov Kokov aytova y-yMVio-jxai, tov Bpo/xov rereAe/ca, tyjv TTLCTTiv TeT7]p7]Ka, I httvc fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith. Rem, On the use of the term complete as a grammatical term, see 85. On the distinction between the Perfect and the Aorist, see 86. 75. The Perfect of Existing State. The Perfect is sometimes used when the attention is directed wholly to the present resulting state, the past action of which it is the result being left out of thought. This usage occurs most frequently in a few verbs which use the Perfect in this sense only. RA. 849 ; G. 1263. Matt. 27 : 43 ; TreVot^ev iirl tov Oeov, he trusteth on God. 1 Cor. 11 : 2 ; irraLvui 8e vfxa0€VTO Participle to the Present of the verb ei/xt, are frequent in the New Testament, about forty instances occurring. In function these forms more frequently denote existing state, though clear instances of the Perfect denoting completed action occur. The former use is illustrated in Luke 20 : 6 ; John 2 : 17 ; Acts 2 : 13 ; 25 : 10 ; 2 Cor. 4 : 3, etc. ; the latter in Luke 23 : 15 ; Acts 26 : 26 ; Hel). 4 : 2, etc. Cf. 431. 85. It is important to observe that the term "complete" or "completed" as a grammatical term does not mean ended, but accomplished, i.e. hroiKjht to its appropriate result, which result remains at the time denoted by the verb. "The Perfect, although it implies the performance of the action in past time, yet states only that it stands completed at the present time." THE PERFECT INDICATIVE. 41 G.MT. 44. "Das Perf. liatte zwei altiiberkommene Fiinktio- nen. Einerseits liatte es iiitensiven, bezielientlich iterativen Sinn. . . . Anderseits bezeichnete es die Handluiig ini Zustand des Vollendet- und Fertigseins." Br. 162. An action which has ceased may be expressed in Greek by the Aorist or the Imperfect quite as well as by the Perfect, provided only the action is thought of apart from any existing result of it. These tenses are indeed more frequently used of actions which are complete in the sense of having come to an end than is the Perfect. See, e.g., Gal. 4:8; rore jxlv . . . cSoi^AeT'O-are rots (fivacL fxr) ovctl OeoL<;, at that time . . . ye icere in bondage to them ivhich by nature are no gods; and 2 Cor. 7, 8; ov fxcTafxeXofxaL ' et Kal fxcTCfjicXofXTjv, I do not regret it, although I did regret \^ivas regretting^ it. The Perfect, on the other hand, affirms the existence of the normal result of the action, and this even though the action itself is still in progress. See, e.g., the Perfect Ter-^prjKa, in 2 Tim. 4 : 7, quoted under 74. 86. Since the Aorist and the Perfect both involve reference to a past event, the Perfect affirming the existence of the result of the event, and the Aorist affirming the event itself, without either affirming or denying the existence of the result, it is evident that whenever the result of the past action does still exist, either tense may be used, according as the writer wishes either to affirm the result or merely the event. In many cases the reason of the choice of one tense rather than the other is very evident and the distinction clearly marked, even when in accordance with the principle of 82 both tenses must be translated by an English Past. See, e.g., 1 Cor. 15:4; on irdcfyrj, Kal on iyi]yepTaL rfj rifJiepa rfj rptTrj, that he icas buried, and that he ivas raised on the third day. The burial is simply a past event. Of the resurrection there is an existing result, prominently before the mind. 42 THE TENSES. But there are naturally other cases in which, though each tense retains its own proper force, the two approximate very closely, and are used side by side of what seem to be quite coordinate facts. Instances of this approximation of the two tenses are especially frequent in the writings of John. See John 5 : 36, 38 ; 1 John 1:1; 4:9, 10 ; cf. also Acts 6 : 11 and 15 : 21. 87. It might be supposed that the Resultative Aorist would be especially near in force to the Perfect. The distinction is, however, clearly marked. The Resultative Aorist affirms that an action attempted in past time was accomplished, saying nothing about the present result. The Perfect, on the other hand, belongs to all classes of verbs, not merely to those that imply attempt, and affirms the existence of the result of the past action, the occurrence of which it implies. 88. It should be observed that the aoristic use of the Per- fect (80) is a distinct departure from the strict and proper sense of the tense in Greek. The beginnings of this departure are to be seen in classical Greek ((r.MT. 46), and in Greek writers of a time later than the New Testament the tendency was still further developed, until the sense of difference betw^een the tenses was lost. Meantime there grew up a new form of the Perfect, made as is the English Perfect, of an auxiliary denoting possession (in Greek c^*^, as in English have) and a participle. This periphrastic Perfect, traces of Avhich appear even in classical times (G'.MT. 47), at length entirely displaced tlie simple Perfect for the expression of completed action, and the process by whif'li the Perfect had become an Aorist in meaning and been succeeded in office as a Perfect tense by another form was complete. See Jebh in Vincent and Dickso7i, i\rodern Greek, pp. 326-330. In the New Testament we see the earlier stages THE PERFECT INDICATIVE. 43 of this process. The Perfect is still, with very few exceptions, a true Perfect, but it has begun to be an Aorist. In Latin this process was already complete so far as the assimilation of the Perfect and the Aorist was concerned; the new Perfect had not yet appeared. In modern English we see the process at a point midway between that represented by the Greek of the New Testament and that which appears in the Latin of about the same time. Modern German represents about the same stage as modern English, but a little further advanced. It should be borne in mind that in determining whether a given Perfect form is a true Perfect in sense or not, the proper English translation is no certain criterion, since the functions of the Perfect tense in the two languages differ so widely. Cf. 52. The Perfect ireTroLrjKa in 2 Cor. 11 : 25 seems evidently aoristic ; that it '^ goes quite naturally into Eng- lish" {S. p. 101) does not at all show that it has the usual force of a Greek Perfect. Many Aorists even go quite natu- rally and correctly into English Perfects. Cf. 46. The Per- fects in Luke 9 : 36 ; 2 Cor. 12 : 17 ; Heb. 7 : 13 (Trpoa-icrxrjKev) ; 9 : 18 : 11 : 28 ; Kev. 3:3; 5:7 are probably also Aoristic Perfects, though it is possible that in all these cases the thought of an existing result is more or less clearly in mind and gives occasion to the use of the Perfect tense. The Perfect iriirpaKtv in Matt. 13 : 46 must be either aoristic or historical, probably the former (see Sophocles, Glossary, etc., 82, 4). The evidence seems to show clearly that INIatthew regularly used yiyova in the sense of an Aorist ; some of the instances cannot, without violence, be otherwise explained, and all are naturally so explained. Mark's use of the word is pos- sibly the same, but the evidence is not decisive. All other writers of the New Testament use the form as a true Perfect. Still other cases should perhaps be explained as Aoristic Perfects, but for the reasons mentioned in 86 it is impossible 44 THE TENSES. to decide with certaintv. "While there is clear evidence that the Perfect tense was in the New Testament sometimes an Aorist in force, yet it is to be observed that the New Testa- ment writers had perfect command of the distinction between the Aorist and the Perfect. The instances of the Perfect in the sense of the Aorist are confined almost entirely to a few forms, i(T)(riKa, ei-'Ary^a, ccopaKa, elprjKa, and yeyova, and the USe of each of these forms in tlie sense of an Aorist mainly to one or more writers whose use of it is apparently almost a per- sonal idiosyncrasy. Thus the aoristic use of yeyova belongs to Matt. ; of d\r)a to John in Kev. ; of eaxrjKa to Paul ; but see also Heb. 7 : 13. The idiom is therefore confined within narrow limits in the Ne^v Testament. Cf. Ev. Pet. 23, 31. 2 Cor. 12 : 9 and 1 John 1 : 10 are probably true Perfects of Completed Action, the latter case being explained by v. 8. John 1 : 18 ; 5 : 37 ; 8 : 33 ; and Heb. 10 : 9 also probably con- vey the thought of existing result, though the use of an adverb of past time serves to give more prominence to the past action than is usually given by a Perfect tense. THE PLUPERFEOT. 89. Tlie Pluperfect of Completed Action. The Plu- perfect is used of an action which was complete at a point of past time implied in the context. HA. 847 ; Cr. 1250, 4. Acts 9 :21 ; Kal JSe cU tovto iXr]\vOa, and he had come hither for this intent. John :22; rfSrj yap avveTeOetvro ol *lovS:uoi, for the Jeios had agreed already. See also Luke 8:2; Acts 7 : 44 ; 19 : 32. 90. The l»lnperfect of Kxistiiij? State. Verbs which in the Perfect denote a present state, in the Pluperfect denote a past state. HA. 849, c ; G. 12G3. THE PLUPERFECT. 45 Luke 4 : 41 ; rjSaa-av rbv Xpio-rov avrov etvai, ihe7j knew that he was the Christ, See also John 18 : IG, 18 ; Acts 1 : 10. 91. Periphrastic Form of the Pluperfect. A peri- phrastic Pluperfect formed by adding the Perfect Participle to the Imperfect of the verb ei/xt is somewhat frequent in the New Testament. In classical Greek this was already the only form in the third person plural of liquid and mute verbs, and an occasional form elsewhere. In the New Testament these periphrastic forms are frequently, but not at all uniformly, Pluperfects of existing state ; about one-third of the whole number of instances belong to the class of Pluperfects denot- ing completed action, referring to the past act as well as the existing result. Cf. G^.MT. 45. Matt. 26 : 43 ; ycrav yap avroiv ol oc^^aX/zot ^efSaprjfxivoL, for their eyes were heavy, lit. iceighed down. Luke 2 : 26 ; Kat qv aurcu KexprffxaTLafxivov vno tov 7rvei;/xaTos rov ayiov, and it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit. 92. The ambiguity of the English sometimes renders it impossible to distinguish in translation between a Pluperfect of Existing State and an Historical Aorist. Thus in Acts 4 : 27 and 31 we must in both cases read icere gathered, though the verb in the former case is an Aorist and refers to an act, and in the latter a Perfect and refers to a state. Cf. also the two verbs in Luke 15 : 24. 93. The simple Future Perfect does not occur in the New Testament. Eespecting Luke 19 : 40, see B. p. 61 ; and the lexicons s.v. 94. A periphrastic Future Perfect, expressing a future state, occurs in Matt. 16 : 19 ; 18 : 18 ; Luke 12:52', Heb. 2:13. 46 THE TENSES. TEXSES OF THE DEPE:N^DEXT MOODS. 95. The tenses of the dependent moods have in general no reference to time, but characterize the action of the verb in respect to its progress only, representing it as in progress, or completed, or indefinitely, simply as an event. HA. 851 ; G. 1272, 1273 ; 6?.MT. 85. 96. The Present of the Dependent Moods is used to represent an action as in progress or as repeated. It may be altogether timeless, the action being thought of without reference to the time of its occurrence ; or its time, as past, present, or future, may be involved in the function of the mood, or may be indicated by the context. Phil. 3:1; ra avTo. ypd(f>civ vfuv i/xol jxlv ovk oKvrjpov, to be writing tlie same things to you, to me indeed is not irksome. Matt. 5 : 23 ; lav ovv 7rpo(7(fiipy]^9 /capStas . . . TreptaaroTepov ccrrtv TrdvTwv tC)v 6X.oKavT0)fxdT(i)v Koi Ovaiiov, and to love him tvith all the heart . , . is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrijices. 97. Periphrastic Form of the Present. A periphras- tic Present Infinitive, formed by adding a Present Participle to the Present Infinitive of el/xt, and a periphrastic Present Imperative, formed by adding a Present Participle to the Present Imperative of elfxi, occur rarely in the New Testament. Luke 9 : 18 ; 11:1; Matt. 5 : 25 ; Luke 19 : 17. Of. 20, and 431. 98. The Aorist of the Dependent Moods represents the action expressed by the verb as a simple event or fact. OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. 47 without reference either to its progress or to the existence of its result. It may be used with reference to an action or event in its entirety (indefinite), or with reference to the inception of a state (inceptive), or with reference to the accomplishment of an attempt (resultative). When indefinite, it may be used of momentary or extended ac- tions or of a series of events. Cf. 35, and 39. As in the case of the Present tense, the time of the action, if indicated at all, is shown, not by the tense, but by some fact outside of the tense. Luke 9 : 54 ; eiTrw/xev Trvp KaTafSrjvaL, shall we hid Jire to come down ? John 15 : 9 ; fxelvare iv Trj ayairrf rfj i/xrj, abide ye in my love. Luke 17 : 4 ; Kai iav tTrraKts ttj^ iy/xe'pa? dfiapTyjarj eis ce . . . dLfM(j}ao, peace, be still. 102. An Intensive Perfect may occur in the dependent moods as in the Indicative. 1 Tim. 0:17; rots 7r\ovaioLeople u*ere being baptized, nor in view of the preposition ev, after all the people had been baptised, but must be understood as affirming that the baptism of Jesus occurred at the time (in general) of the baptism of all the people. Luke 9 : 36 can only mean, when the voice came, a meaning entirely appropriate to the context. Cf. 415. 110. The Texses of the Dependent Moods iist Indi- rect Discourse. The Optative and Infinitive in indirect discourse preserve the conception of tlie action as respects progress which belonged to the direct discourse. The Present Optative and Infinitive represent tense forms which in the direct discourse denoted action in progress. Similarly the Aorist of these moods represents forms which expressed action indefinitely, and the Perfect stands for forms denoting com- pleted action. The Future represents a Future Indicative of the direct discourse. In the majority of cases each tense of the Optative or Infinitive in indirect discourse stands for the same tense of the Indicative or Subjunctive of the direct form. Yet it is doubtful whether, strictly speaking, the dependent moods in indirect discourse express time-relations. The cor- respondence of tenses probably rather results from the neces- sity of preserving the original conception of the action as respects its progress, and the time-relation is conveyed by the context rather than by the tense of the verb. Rem. Cf. Br. 161. " Der opt. und inf. aor. von vergangenen Hand- lungen als Vertreter des ind. aor. in der or. obi. entbehrten ebenso wie opt. und inf. praes. (§ 158) des Ausdrucks der Zeitbeziehung, die nur aus der 52 THE TENSES. Natur der in der Rede in Verbindung gebrachten Verbalbegriffe oder aus der ganzen in Rede stehenden Situation erkannt wurde." Cf. G^.MT. 85, contra. 111. The Present Optative in indirect discourse in the New Testament usually represents the Present Indicative of the direct form. Luke 1 : 29 ; 3 : 15 ; Acts 17 : 11 ; etc. In Acts 2o : 16, it stands for a Present Subjunctive of the direct form. The Optative with av is taken unchanged from the direct dis- course. Luke 1 : 62 ; 6 : 11 ; etc. The Aorist Optative occurs in indirect discourse only in Acts 25 : 16, where it represents a Subjunctive of the direct form referring to the future. Neither the Perfect Optative nor the Future Optative occurs in the New Testament. 112. The Present Infinitive in indirect discourse in the New Testament stands for the Present Indicative of the direct form. Matt. 22 : 23 ; Luke 11 : 18 ; 20 : 41 ; Acts 4 : 32 ; 1 Cor. 7 : 36 ; 1 John 2 : 9. Similarly the Perfect Infinitive rep- resents the Perfect Indicative of the direct discourse. Luke 22 : 34 ; John 12 : 29 ; Acts 14 : 19 ; 2 Tim. 2 : 18. The Pres- ent Infinitive as the representative of the Imperfect, and the Perfect Infinitive as the representative of the Pluperfect ((t.MT. 119, 123) apparently do not occur in the New Testa- ment. The Future Infinitive is, as stated above (99), an exception to the general rule of the timelessness of the de- pendent moods. It represents a Future Indicative of the direct form. John 21 : 25; Acts 23 : 30 ; Heb. 3 : 18. 113. The Aorist Infinitive occurs in the New Testament, as in classical Greek, as a regular construc^tion after verbs signifying to hope, to promise, to sivear, to command, etc. In this case the action denoted by the Aorist Infinitive is, by the nature of the case, future with reference to that of the princi- OF THE PARTICIPLE. 53 pal verb, but this time-relation is not expressed by the tense. The Aorist Infinitive is here as elsewhere timeless. These instances, though closely akin in force to those of indirect discourse, are not usually included under that head. Cf. G^.MT. 684. 114. The Aorist Infinitive referring to what is future w4th reference to the principal verb also occurs in a few instances after verbs of assertion. These must be accounted cases in which the Aorist Infinitive in indirect discourse is timeless. Luke 21 : 4G ; on ourcus yiypairTai iraOelv tov ^ptorov koI avacrrrivai Ik veKpoiv rrj rpLTrj rjfxepa, thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer^ and rise again from the dead the third day. See also Luke 2 : 26 ; Acts 3 : 18. Cf. Hom. Od. 2. 171, -qfu TeXevTrjOrjvai airavra, the accomplishment being still future {Carter in CI. Rev. Feb. 1891, p. 5). Plat. Euthyd. 278, C. idTY)V iirtheL^aaOaL tyjv TrpoTpeTrriKrjv cro<^tav, they said that they icould give a sample of the hortatory ivisdom. Protag. 316, C. tovto 8e oUrai ol pLoXicrra yeveaOat, el aol ^vyyevoLTo, and he supposes that he would be most likely to attain this if he should associate ivith you; and other examples in Riddell, Digest of Platonic Idioms, § 81 ; also in G.MT. 127. There is apparently no instance in the New Testament of the Aorist Infinitive in indirect discourse representing the Aorist Indicative of the direct form. Cf . 390. TENSES OF THE PAPvTICIPLE. 115. The participle is a verbal adjective, sharing in part the characteristics of both the verb and the adjective ; it de- scribes its subject as a doer of the action denoted by the verb. For the proper understanding of a participle three things must be observed : (a) The grammatical agreement. (6) The use of the tense. (c) The modal significance, or logical force. 54 THE TENSES. 116. In grammatical agreement, a participle follows the rule for adjectives, agreeing with its noun or pronoun in gen- der, number, and case. 117. The logical force of the participle, usually the most important consideration from the point of view of interpreta- tion, will be treated at a later point. See 419 ff. The matter now under consideration is the significance of the tense of a participle. 118. The tenses of the participle, like those of the other dependent moods, do not, in general, in themselves denote time. To this general rule the Future Participle is the leading ex- ception, its functions being such as necessarily to express time- relations. The fundamental distinguishing mark of each of the other tenses is the same for the participle as for the dependent moods in general. The Present denotes action in progress ; the Aorist, action conceived of indefinitely ; the Perfect, completed action. These distinctions, however, im- pose certain limitations upon the classes of events which may be expressed by the participle of each tense, and thus indirectly and to a limited extent, the tense of the participle is an indica- tion of the time-relation of the event denoted by it. Since for purposes of interpretation it is often needful to define the time-relation of an event expressed by the participle, it becomes expedient to treat the tenses of the participle apart from those of the dependent moods in general. THE PRESENT PAETIOIPLE. 119. The Present Participle of Siimiltaiieous Action. The Present Participle most frequently denotes an action in j)rof;^ress, simultaneous with the action of the principal verb. HA. 85G ; Q. 1288. THE PHESENT PARTICIPLE. 55 Mark 16 : 20 ; iKclvoL SI i$eX06vTC<: iK'qpv$av iravTaxov, tov Kvptov avvepyovvTo6^ Aot^apo? rjaOevcL, and it was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and tciped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick. Cf. John 12 : 3. Acts 25 : 13 ; AyptTTTra? 6 /^acrtAei;? kol BepvLKr) KaTt^vrrjcrav cis Kawra- ptav acnraa-dfjievoi tov ^arov, Agrippa the king and Bernice arrived at CcEsarea and saluted Festus. See also examples cited under 144, 145. 143. It is a question of interpretation to be determined in each case whether the fact of antecedence to the time of speak- ing, or of subsequence to the time of the principal verb, is most prominent in the mind of the writer. That which requires most clearly to be observed is that neither relation is expressed by the participle ; this only designates the action as a sim- ple event ; other considerations must come in to determine the time-relation. 66 THE TENSES. 144. The Aorist Participle referring to a subsequent action is sometimes used attributively as the equivalent of a relative clause ; in this case it usually has the article, and its position is determined by the same considerations that govern the position of any other noun or adjective in similar construc- tions. Instances of this use occur not infrequently in classical Greek. See G^.MT. 152; Carter and Humphreys in CI. Rev. Feb. 1891. For New Testament instances, see John 11 : 2 (142) ; also Matt. 10 : 4 ; 11 : 21 ; Acts 1 : 16 ; Col. 1 : 8. 145. No certain instance of an Aorist Participle used adverbially as the equivalent of an adverbial or coordinate clause, and referring to a subsequent action, has been observed in classical Greek, though one or two possible ones occur. See Dem. XIX. (F.L.) 255 (423), cited by Carter, and Thuc. II. 49. 2, cited by Humphreys, in CI. Rev. Feb. 1891. For New Testament instances, see Acts 2^ : 13 (142) ; also Acts 16 : 23 ; 22 : 24 ; 23 : 35 ; 24 : 23. In all these cases it is scarcely possible to doubt that the participle (which is with- out the article and follows the verb) is equivalent to Kai with a coordinate verb and refers to an action subsequent in fact and in thought to that of the verb which it follows. These in- stances are perhaps due to Aramaic influence. See Ka. § 76, d; and cf. Dan. 2 : 26, 27 ; 3 : 13, 24, 26, 27, etc. In Rom. 4 : 10, Kal /jltj daOevrjaas ry iriffTei Karevirjaev rb eavroO crufxa [^577] peveKpco/xivov, the participle dadevrjaas, though preceding the verb, is most naturally interpreted as referring to a (conceived) result of the action denoted by KaTevSrjaeu. It is in that case an inceptive Aorist Participle of Subsequent Action. Its position is doubtless due to the emphasis laid upon it. In lleb. 0: 12 the symmetry of the figure is best preserved if evpafxevos is thought of as referring to an action subsequent to that of fiaijXdeu. JJut it is possible that elaijXdev is used to describe the whole highpriestly act, including both the entrance into the holy place and the subsequent offering of the blood, and that evpa/j-euos is thus a participle of identical action. In either case it should be translated not having THE AORIST TARTICIPLE. 67 • obtained as in li.V., but obtaining or and obtained. In Phil. 2 : 7 yevdfxevos is related to Xa^dbv as a participle of identical action ; the relation of \a^(hv to iK^vioaev is less certain. It may denote the same action as eK^vuaev viewed from the opposite point of view (identical action), or may be thought of as an additional fact (subsequent action) to cK^vojaev. In Kom, 4:21 the participles 5ovs and Tr\r]po(popr]deis may be understood as together defining ivedwafxdjdTj ry TriVret, though 8ov9 is strictly subsequent to iueSwa- ixijdr]. Somewhat similar is 1 Pet. o : 18, where '^ojoiroLrideis is clearly subse- quent to cLTT^daveu [or eVa^ei'], but is probably to be taken together with davarwdei'; as defining the whole of the preceding clause Xpiarbs drra^ irepl dfj.apTiQi' diridavev^ diKaioi virep dSt'/cwf, Itva vfids Trpoaaydyrj tc^ de(^. 146. The Aorist Participle used as an integral part of the object of a verb of perception represents the action which it denotes as a simple event without defining its time. The ac- tion may be one which is directly perceived and hence coinci- dent in time with that of the principal verb, or it may be one which is ascertained or learned, and hence antecedent to the action of the principal verb. In the latter case it takes the place of a clause of indirect discourse having its verb in the Aorist Indicative. Acts 9:12; koI etSev avSpa . . . Avavt'av ovofiaTL elacXOovTa kol Ittl- Oevra avTw )(eLpa^, and he has seen a man named Ananias come in and lay hands upon him. See also Luke 10 : 18 ; Acts 10 : 3 ; 11 : 3 ; 26 : 13 ; 2 Pet. 1 : 18. Luke 4:23; oaa rjKovaafxev yevo/xeva, ichatever things ice have heard to have been done. 147. The Aorist Participle with XavOdvoi denotes the same time as the principal verb. It occurs but once in the New Testament (Heb. 13:2), the similar construction with ^Bdvoi and Ti;yxavw, not at all. HA. 856, b ; G. 1290. 148. The categories named above, Aorist Participle of An- tecedent Action, of Identical Action, etc., which, it must be remembered, represent, not diverse functions of the tense, but only classes of cases for which the Aorist Participle may be 68 THE TENSES. used, do not include absolutely all the instances. There are, for example, cases in which the time-relation of the action of the participle to that of the verb is left undefined. John 16:2, 6 aTroKTCtVas [v/xa?] 80^17 Xarpeiav irpocrcj)ipuv ty? yvwcreo)'^, filled with all knowledge. Luke 8:46; eyvwv 8wa/ziv iieXrjXvOvlav oltt' ipiov, I perceived that power had gone forth from me. 72 THE TENSES. 155. The Perfect Participle stands in two passages of the New Testa- ment as the predicate of tlie participle wv. The effect is of a Perfect Participle clearly marked as one of existing state. See Eph. 4 : 18 ; Col. 1:21. 156. The Perfect Participle is occasionally used as a Plu- perfect to denote a state existing antecedent to the time of the principal verb. The action of which it is the result is, of course, still earlier. John 11 : 44 ; i$rj\9ev 6 TeOvr]K(j)<; SeSe/xeVos tovs ttoSu? kol tols )(eLpa<; Kctptat?, he that was [or had been'] dead came forth hound hand and foot with grave-clothes. See also Mark 5 : 15, iaxrjKora, noting the Present Participle in the same verse and the Aorist Participle in V. 18 ; also 1 Cor. 2 : 7, aTroKeKpvfXfx^vrjv, comparing v. 10. THE MOODS. -•c*- MOODS IN PRINCIPAL CLAUSES. THE INDICATIVE MOOD. 157. The Indicative is primarily the mood of the un- qualified assertion or simple question of fact. HA, 865 ; a. 1317. John 1:1; Iv dpxj] V^ o Xoyo?, iii the beginning ivas the Woi'd. Mark 4:7; kol Kapirov ovk eSooKev, and it yielded no fruit. Matt. 2:2; ttov iarlv 6 Te)(6d<; /3aaLXev<; tCjv 'Ioi;8atW, where is he that is born King of the Jews? John 1 : 38 ; tl ^rjrelTe, what are ye seeking? 158. The Indicative has substantially the same assertive force in many principal clauses containing qualified assertions. The action is conceived of as a fact, though the assertion of the fact is qualified. John 13 : 8 ; lav fxr] vLipoi ere, ovk €xet9 /J-epo'; fier ifxov, if I ivash thee not, thou hast no part with me. 159. (a) W4ien qualified by particles such as av, eWe, etc., the Indicative expresses various shades of desirability, improb- ability, etc. Respecting these secondary uses of the Indicative in principal clauses, see 26, 27, 248. (5) Respecting the uses of the Future Indicative in other than a purely assertive sense, see 67, 69, 70. 73 74 THE MOODS. (c) Kespecting the uses of the Indicative in subordinate clauses, see 185-360, j^assim. Rem. The uses of the Indicative described in 157 and 158 are substan- tially the same in English and in Greek and occasion no special difficulty to the English interpreter of Greek. The uses referred to in 159 exhibit more difference between Greek and English, and each particular usage requires separate consideration. THE SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD. The uses of the Subjunctive in principal clauses are as follows : 160. The Hortatory Subjunctive. The Subjunctive is used in the first person plural in exhortations, the speaker thus exhorting others to join him in the doing of an action. HA, 866, 1 ; (7. 1344 ; B, p. 209 ; WM. p. 355 ; (7.MT. 255, 256. Heb. 12 : 1 ; 8t' {itto/xov^? Tpi^oiix€.v tov TrpoKUfxevov rjfuv dywva, let us run with patience the race that is set before us. 1 John 4:7; ayairrjTOL, dya7rw/xev a\\rj\ov<;, beloved, let us love one another. 161. Occasionally the first person singular is used with d(^€s or Sevpo prefixed, the exhortation in that case becoming a request of the speaker to the person addressed to permit him to do something. Matt. 7:4; dt^eg iKf30a\ixov crov, let me cast out the mote out ofthitie eye. See also Luke G : 42 ; Acts 7 : 34. The sense of fi^es in Matt. 27 : 40 and of di^ere in Mark 15 : 3G is doubt- ful (see U.V. ad loc. and 77<., acpi-qnL, 2, E.). In Matt. 21 : .38 (Mark 12 : 7) SeOre is prefixed to a hortatory first per- son plural without affecting the meaning of the Su1*)junctive. THE SUBJUNCTIVE. 75 In none of these cases is a conjunction to be supplied before the Sub- junctive. Cf. the use of di-ye, (p^pe, etc., in classical Greek. G^.MT. 257 ; B. p. 210; WM. p. 356. 162. The Prohibitory Subjunctive. The Aorist Sub- junctive is used in the second person with fi7] to express a prohibition or a negative entreaty. HA. 866, 2 ; G, 1346 ; 6^.MT. 259. Matt. 6 : 34 ; fxrj ovv fxepLfxvrjcrrjTe ei5 rrjv avptov, be not therefore anxious for the morrow. Heb. 3:8; fxq (XKXrjpvvrjTe ra? KapSt'as v/xiov, harden not your hearts. Matt. 6 : 13 ; kol p-rj d(T€.viyKriBaXp.ov/cro> avTov<; Iva TJgovacv Koi TrpoaKvvrjcrovaLv ivwinov Tijiv TToSoji/ cov, Kttt yvwo'tv oTL iyui rjydTrrj(jd cc, behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. See also 1 Cor. 16 : 10 ; Col. 4 : 16, 17 ; Rev. 13 : 12, 16. 206. When the object clause after a verb meaning to care for, to take heed, is negative, classical Greek sometimes uses fx-^ (instead of otto)? /xr/) with the Subjunctive, or less fre- quently with the Future Indicative. G. 1375; G^.MT. 354. This is the common New Testament usage. • See Matt. 24 : 4; Acts 13 : 40 ; 1 Cor. 8 : 9 ; 10 : 12 ; Gal. G : 1 ; Col. 2 : 8 ; 1 Thess. 5:15; Heb. 3:12. "Ottws fx-q with the Future in classical Greek, and Tm firj with the Subjunctive in New Testament Greek, also occur. John 11:37; 2 John 8. CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 89 207. "Ottws occurs in the New Testament in such clauses (205) only in j\Iatt. 12 : 14 ; 22 : 15 ; Mark 3 : G, and in all these cases after a phrase meaning to plan. The clause thus closely approximates an indirect de- liberative question. Cf. Mark 11 : 18. See Th. ottws, II. 2. 208. The Optative sometimes occurs in classical Greek after a secondary tense of verbs of striving, etc., but is not found in the New Testament. 209. It is sometimes difiBcult to say with certainty whether fx-ifi with the Subjunctive after 8pa or opare is an objective clause or an independent Prohibitory Subjunctive. In classical Greek the dependent construction was already fully developed (cf. G.WT. 354, 307) ; and though in the New Testament opa is sometimes prefixed to the Imperative (Matt. 9: 30; 24:6), showing that the paratactic construction is still possible, ^t?? with the Subjunctive in such passages as Matt. 18 : 10 ; 1 Thess. 5 : 15 is best regarded as constituting an object clause. M77 with the Subjunctive after ^\iirw is also probably to be regarded as dependent. It is true that ^X^iru does not take an objective clause in classical Greek, that in the New Testament only the Imperative of this verb is followed by a clause defining the action to be done or avoided, and that in a few instances the second verb is an Aorist Subjunctive in the second person with /x??, and might therefore be regarded as a Prohib- itory Subjunctive (Luke 21:8; Gal. 5:15; Heb. 12:25). Yet in a larger number of cases the verb is in the third person (Matt. 24 : 4 ; Mark 13 : 5 ; Acts 13 : 40 ; 1 Cor. 8 : 9, etc.), and in at least one instance is in- troduced by 'iva (1 Cor. 16 : 10). This indicates that we have not a coor- dinate imperative expression, but a dependent clause. In Col. 4 : 17 /3Xe7re, and in 2 John 8 ^XeTrere, is followed by iva with the Subjunctive ; the clause in such case being probably objective, but possibly pure final. In Heb. 3 : 12 the Future Indicative with fxri is evidently an objective clause. Rem. Concerning Luke 11 : 35, see B. p. 243 ; TF3/. p. 374, foot-note, and p. 631 ; WT. p. 503 ; Th. m, III. 2 ; R.V. ad loc. 210. Verbs of striving, etc., may also take the Infinitive as object. With Matt. 26 : 4, and John 11 : 53, cf. Acts 9 : 23; with Eev. 13 : 12 cf. 13 : 13. The verbs ^rjrew and dcfiirj/xL, which are usually followed by 90 THE MOODS. an Infinitive, are each followed in one instance by tva with the Subjunctive. See Mark 11 : 16 ; 1 Cor. 14 : 12 ; cf. also 1 Cor. 4:2. 211. Subject, Predicate, and Appositive Clauses intro- duced by 7i>a. Clauses introduced by Iva are frequently used in the New Testament as subject, predicate, or appos- itive, with a force closely akin to that of an Infinitive. The verb is usually in the Subjunctive, less frequently in the Future Indicative. These clauses may be further classified as follows : 212. (a) Subject of the passive of verbs of exhorting, striving, etc., which in the active take sifch a clause as object, and of other verbs of somewhat similar force. Cf. 200, 205. 1 Cor. 4:2; l^rjTUTai iv rots oIkovo/jloc^ ti/a TTLaro^ rts evpcOtj, it is required in stewards that a man be found faithful. Rev. 9:4; kol ippeOrj airats tva firj aOLKiijaovaLv tov )(opTov rrj\b? yevvrjOr], icho did sin, this man or his parents, (hat he should he horn hlind ? 1 Thess. 5:4; v/xets 8e, dSeA^ot, ovk €crT€ h (tkotci, Iva ^ -rffxipa ii/jtas (05 KAeVras KaTaXdfSrj, hut ye, hrethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as thieves. See also 1 John 1 : 9 (cf. Heb. 6 : 10 — Infinitive in similar construction) ; 2 Cor. 1 : 17 ; Rev. 9 : 20 (cf. Matt. 21 : 32) ; 14 : 13; 22 : 14. 219. The relation of thought between the fact expressed in the principal clause and that expressed in the clause of con- ceived result introduced by tva is that of cause and effect, but it is recognized by the speaker that this relation is one of theory or inference rather than of observed fact. In some cases the effect is actual and observed, the cause is inferred. So, e.g., John 9:2. In other cases the cause is observed, the effect is inferred. So, e.g., 1 Thess. 5:4. In all the cases the action of the principal clause is regarded as the necessary con- dition of that of the subordinate clause, the action of the sub- ordinate clause as the result which is to be expected to follow from tlijit of the principal clause. It is wortliy of notice that in English the form of expres- sion which ordinarily expresses pure purpose most distinctly may also be used to express this relation of conceived result. We say. He mvst have suffered very severe losses in order to be so reduced in circumstances. Such forms of expression are CLAUSES INTKODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 93 probably the product of false analogy, arising from imitation of a construction which really expresses purpose. Thus in the sentence, He labored diligently in order to accumulate 2woperty, the subordinate clause expresses pure purpose. In the sen- tence, He must have labored diligently in order to accumidate such a property, the sentence may be so conceived that the sub- ordinate clause would express purpose, but it would usually mean rather that if he accumulated such a property he must have labored diligently ; that is, the property is conceived of as a result the existence of which proves diligent labor. This becomes still more evident if we say, He must have labored diligently to have accumulated such a property. But when we say, He must have suffered severe losses to have become so re- duced in circumstances, it is evident that the idea of purpose has entirely disappeared, and only that of inferred result remains. Actual result observed to be the effect of observed causes is not, however, thus expressed except by a rhetorical figure. With these illustrations from the English, compare the following from the Greek. Jas. 1:4; rj Sk vttoixovt] epyov reXaov ix^rcD, Iva rjre riXcLoi koI oXoKXrjpoi, and let patience have its perfect work, that ye 7nay be p)erfect and entire. Heb. 10 : 36; VTropLOvrjTo . . . \a6v may- be taken as parenthetical, and firi XidaadQa-Lv made to limit ^yev avrovs, ov fjiera^ias; SO Tisch. and WH. Rem. 2. Some MSS. and editors read a Future Indicative in 2 Cor. 12:21. 225. The verb of feariyig is sometimes unexpressed, the idea of fear being suggested by the context ; so, it may be, in Acts 5 : 39, and Matt. 25 : 9. 2 Tim. 2 : 25, ya>^ ttotc hw-q [or Sc^iT?] avroi? 6 ^eos fierdvoiav, is perha^^s best explained in the same way. In the preceding context the apostle enjoins gentleness andmeeki;ess in dealing with those that oppose themselves. The opposite course of harslmess, he seems to feel, could pro- ceed only from the thought that these opposers were past repentance. He accordingly adds as an argument for the course enjoined, [fearing~\ lest God may perchance grant them repentance, i.e. lest you he found to he dealing in harshness with those to ichom God ivill grant repentance. 226. It is evident that object clauses after verbs of fear are closely- akin to negative object clauses after verbs signifying to care for. 6r.MT. 354. Some of the instances cited under 206 might not inappropriately be placed under 224. On the probable common origin of both, and their development from the original parataxis, see (r.MT. 307, 352. 227. When the ol)ject of apprehension is conceived of as already present or past, i.e. as a thing already decided, al- though the issue is at the time of speaking unknown, the In- dicative is used both in classical and New Testament Greek. UA. 888 ; G. 1 380. Gal. 4:11; ^oftovfuii vfiarj rjixlv to,? a/xaprta?. //' we shall confess our sins, \_he will foryive us, f()r~\ he is faithful and riyhteous to forgive us our sins. See^also Mark 1 : 40 ; John 19 : 12 ; Acts 20 : 5. 264. The difference in force between the fifth class of su]ipositions and the chiss described under 24^) sliould be clearly marked. Tliere the issue raised by the protasis is as to the truth or falsity of the principle as a gen- MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 109 eral principle, while the apodosis affirms some other general or particular statement to be true if the general principle is true. Here the protasis raises no question of tlie truth or falsity of the general principle, but suggests as an hypothesis, that a general statement is in any single case realized, and the apodosis states what is wont to take place when the supposition of the protasis is thus realized. Thus in Matt. 19 : 10 (243) the disciples say that if the principle stated by Jesus I'.s true^ it follows as a general x)rinciple that it is not expedient to marry. On the other hand, eav oxjTO)^ €xv (Tv/xtpipei ov yafxijaai would mean, Jf in any instance the case supposed is realized, then it is loont to happen that it is not expedient to marry. Cf . examples under 260. 265. F. Past General Supposition. The supposition refers to any past occurrence of an act of a certain class, and the apodosis states what was wont to take place in any instance of an act of the class referred to in the protasis. The protasis is expressed by el with the Optative, the apodosis by the Imperfect Indicative. HA. 894, 2 ; G. 1393, 2. There is apparently no instance of this form in the New Testament. 266. Peculiarities of Conditional Sentences. Nearly all the peculiar variations of conditional sentences men- tioned in the classical grammars are illustrated in the New Testament. See RA. 901-907 ; G. 1413-1424. 267. (a) A protasis of one form is sometimes joined with an apodosis of another form. Acts 8 : 31 ; ttoj? yap av Swat fxrjv iav fxy rt? oSrjyijaeL fxe, how can /, unless some one shall guide me '? 268. (5) An apodosis may be accompanied by more than one protasis ; these protases may be of different form, each retaining its own proper force. 110 THE MOODS. John 13 : 17 ; el ravra ol'Sarc, fxaKapLOi iaTC iav Troirjre avTa, if ye know these things, blessed are ye if ye do them. See also 1 Cor. 9 : 11. 269. (c) The place of the protasis with el or idv is some- times supplied by a participle, an Imperative, or other form of expression suggesting a supposition. Matt. 26 : 15 ; Tt OeXere fxoi Sovvai Kayo) vfxiv TrapaSuxroi avTov, what are ye willing to give me, and I will deliver him unto you. Mark 11:21 : iravra ocra 'iTpo(Tev)(€o-Oe kol alTelaOe, TncrreveTe on eXdr /Sere, koI earat vfxlv, all things ivhatsoever ye pray and ask for, believe that ye have received them, and ye shall have them. See also Matt. 7 : 10 ; Mark 1 : 17 ; and exx. under 436. Kem. In Jas. 1 : 5, ahelTw is the apodosis of d 8i tls vjxCjv XdireTat a-otpia^, and at the same time fills the place of protasis to bod-qatTai. See also Matt. 19 : 21. 270. ((?) The protasis is sometimes omitted. Luke 1 : 62; Acts 17 : 18. 271. (e) The apodosis is sometimes omitted. Luke 13 : 9 ; kolv fxev TroLrjarj Kapirov ets to fieXXov — el he p-rfye, eKKOxf/et'; avT-^v, and if it bear fruit thenceforth, — but if not, thou shalt cut it doivn. See also Luke 19 : 42 ; Acts 23 : 9. 272. El with the Future Indicative is used by Hebraism without an apodosis, with the force of an emphatic negative assertion or oath. Cf. //?'. 48, 9, a. Mark 8 : 12; afxrjv Ae'yw, el SoO-qaeTaL, rrj yci/ea ravrr] arj/JLe^ov, verily I say unto you, there shall no sign be given unto this generation. See also Ileb. 3 : 11 ; 4 : 3, 5. On Heb. 6 : 14 see Th. el, in. 11. 273. (/) The verb of the protasis or apodosis may be omitted. Rom. 4:14; ci yap ot eK vo/xov KXrjpovofxoL, KeKevwrat rj ttlo-tl^ kul KO-T-qpy-qrai r] cVayycAtu, for if they which are of the law are heirSy MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. Ill faith is made void, and the promise is made of none effect. See also Rom. 8 : 17 ; 11 : 16 ; 1 Cor. 7 : 5, 8 ; 12 : 19 ; 1 Pet. 3 : 14. In 2 Cor. 11 : 16 Kav stands for koI iav Se^rjaOe. 274. (r/) Et fxrj without a dependent verb occurs very fre- quently in the sense of except. It may be followed by any form of expression which could have stood as subject or as limitation of the principal predicate. The origin of this usage was of course in a conditional clause the verb of which was omitted because it was identical with the verb of the apodosis. Both in classical and New Testament Greek the ellipsis is un- conscious, and the limitation is not strictly conditional, but ex- ceptive. Like the English except it states not a condition on fulfilment of w^hich the apodosis is true or its action takes place, but a limitation of the principal statement. It is, how- ever, never in the New Testament purely adversative. Cf. Ltft. on Gal. 1 : 7, 19. 275. {li) Et 8e fx-q and et 8e fxrjye are used elliptically in the sense of otherimse, i.e. if so, or if 7iot, to introduce an alterna- tive statement or command. Having become fixed phrases, they are used even when the preceding sentence is negative ; also when the nature of the condition would naturally call for idv rather than et. Matt. 9 : 17 ; Luke 10 : 6; 13 : 9; Eev. 2 : 5. G.MT. 478 ; B. p. 393. 276. (/) An omitted apodosis is sometimes virtually con- tained in the protasis, and the latter expresses a possibility which is an object of l;ope or desire, and hence has nearly the force of a final clause. In some instances it approaches the force of an indirect question. G.MT. 486-493. In classical Greek such protases are introduced by et or idv. In the New Testament they occur with ct only, and take the Subjunctive, Optative, or Future Indicative. 112 THE MOODS, Phil. 3 : 12 ; StuiKoi 8e el koi KaTaXd/So), but I press on, if so be that J may appreheyul. Acts 27 : 12 ; ol TrAet'ove? eOevro l3ovX7]v dva)(OrjvaL iKCtdev, €t 7ro>? BvvaLVTO KaravTrjaavTa ets ^OLVtKa 7rapa;)(£t/xacrai, the more part advised to put to sea from thence, if by any means they coidd reach Phoenix. See also Mark 11 : 13 ; Acts 8 : 22 ; 17 : 27 ; Rom. 1 : 10 ; 11:14; PhU. 3:11. 277. (J) After expressions of wonder, etc., a clause intro- duced by d lias nearly the force of a clause introduced by on. Mark 15 : 44 ; Acts 26 : 8; cf. 1 John 3 : 13. MOODS IN CONCESSIVE SENTENCES. 278. A concessive clause is a protasis that states a sup- position the fulfilment of which is thought of or represented as unfavorable to the fulfilment of the apodosis. The force of a concessive sentence is thus very different from that of a conditional sentence. The latter represents the fulfilment of the apodosis as conditioned on the fulfilment of the protasis ; the former represents the apodosis as fulfilled in spite of the fulfilment of the protasis. Yet there are cases in which by the weakening of the characteristic force of each construction, or by the complexity of the elements expressed by the protasis, the two usages approach so near to each other as to make distinction between them difficult. In Gal. 1 : 8, e.g., the fulfilment of the element of the protasis expressed in rrap 6 ev-rjyyeXLadfxcOa is favorable to the fulfilment of the apodosis dvdOefxa earo), and the clause is so far forth conditional. But the element expressed in rjfxcLs y ayyeXos i$ ovpavov, which is emphasized by the Kai, is unfavor- able to the fulfilment of the apodosis, and the clause is so far forth concessive. It might be resolved into two clauses, thus. MOODS IN CONCESSIVE SENTENCES. 113 If any one shall preach unto you any gospel other than that we preached unto you \let him he anathema'] ; yea, though we or an angel from heaven so preach, let him he anathema. 279. A concessive clause is commonly introduced by d (eav) fcat' or KoX el {idv). But a clause introduced by et or idv alone may also be in thought concessive, though the concessive element is not emphasized in the form. Matt. 26 : 33 (cf. Mark 14 : 29) ; Mark 14 : 31 (cf. Matt. 26 : 35). 280. Et (idv) Kttt concessive in the New Testament generally introduces a supposition conceived of as actually fulfilled or likely to be fulfilled. See examples under 284, 285. Yet, in concessive as well as in conditional clauses (cf. 282), KUL may belong not to the whole clause but to the word next after it, having an intensive force, and suggesting that the supposition is in some sense or respect an extreme one, e.g., especially improbable or especially unfavorable to the fulfil- ment of the apodosis. So probably Mark 14 : 29. 281. Kat ci (eai/) concessive occurs somewhat rarely in the New Testament. See Matt. 26 : 35 ; John 8 : 16 ; 1 Cor. 8:5; Gal. 1 : 8; 1 Pet. 3 : 1 (but cf. WH.). The force of the KaC is apparently intensive, representing the supposition as actually or from a rhetorical point of view an extreme case, improbable in itself, or specially unfavorable to the fulfilment of the apodosis. Rem. Palejj, Greek Particles, p. 31, thus distinguishes the force of el /cat and /cat et, "generally with this difference, that ei kuI implies an ad- mitted fact 'even though,' /cat et a somewhat improbable supposition; 'even if.'" See other statements and references in Th. et III. 7; and especially J. 861. It should be observed that a concessive supposition may be probable or improbable ; it is not this or that that makes it con- cessive, but the fact that its fulfilment is unfavorable to the f alfilment of the apodosis. 114 THE MOODS. 282. Carefully to be distinguished from the cases of Kal el (idv) and el (edu) Kal concessive are those in which et {idv) is conditional and Kal means and (Matt. 11 : 14 ; Luke 6 : 32, 33, 34 ; John 8 : 55, etc.), or also (Luke 11 : 18 ; 2 Cor. 11 : 15), or is simply intensive, emphasizing the following word and suggesting a supposition in some sense extreme (1 Cor. 4:7; 7 : 11) . Such a supposition is not necessarily unfavorable to the fulfilment of the apodosis, and hence may be conditional however extreme. Cf . 280. 283. Moods and Tenses in Concessive Clauses. In their use of moods and tenses concessive clauses follow in general the rules for conditional clauses. The variety of usage is in the New Testament, however, much less in the case of concessive clauses than of conditional clauses. 284. Concessive clauses of the class corresponding to the first class of conditional sentences are most frequent in the New Testament. The event referred to in the concessive clause is in general not contingent, but conceived of as actual. 2 Cor. 7:8; ort ct koX iXvirrja-a vixaj^€L, though he will not rise find gire him because he is his friend, yet because of his importunity he will arise and give him as many as he needeth. See also Matt. 2(i : :]:3 ; ISlark 11 : 20. MOODS IN CONCESSIVE SENTENCES. 115 (6) They take iav kul, Kal idv, or idv, with the Subjunctive referring to a future possibility, or what is rhetorically con- ceived to be possible. Kat idv introduces an extreme case, usually one which is represented as highly improbable. Gal. 6:1; iav Kal irpoXr]ix(jiBfj dvOpo)7ro<; ev tlvl TrapaTrrwfxaTL, v/xeis ol TTVcvfJiaTLKOi KaTapTL^CTC Tov TOiovTov iv TTvevfxaTt 7rpavTr]T0<;, even if a man be overtaken in any trespass, ye which are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of meekness. Gal. 1:8; dWa Kal idv ly/xet? rj ayyeAo? e^ ovpavov evayyeXca-rjTai [tf/xcv] Trap' o cvrjyycXLadjxcOa v/xlv, dvdOefxa ecrroj, but even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach unto you any gospel other than that luhich we preached unto you, let him be anathema. See also Luke 22 : 67, 68; John 8 : 16 ; 10 : 38 ; Rom. 9 : 27. Rem. The apodosis after a concessive protasis referring to the future, sometimes has a Present Indicative, aftirming wliat is true and will still be true though the supposition of the protasis be fulfilled. See John 8 : 14 ; 1 Cor. 9 : 16. Cf. 263. 286. The Nev7 Testament furnishes no clear instance of a concessive clause corresponding to the fourth class of conditional clauses. In 1 Pet. 3 : 14, el Kal irdaxoiTe 8ia diKaioavvrjv, /xaKapioL, the USe of /cat before irdaxoire suggests that the writer has in mind that suffering is apparently opposed to blessedness. Yet it is probable that he intends to affirm that blessed- ness comes, not in spite of, but through, suffering for righteousness' sake. (On the thought cf. Matt. 5 : 10 f.) Thus the protasis suggests, even intentionally, a concession, but is, strictly speaking, a true causal con- ditional clause. Cf. 282. 287. The New Testament instances of concessive clauses correspond- ing to the fifth class of conditional clauses are few, and the concessive force is not strongly marked. See 2 Tim. 2 : 5 (first clause) under 260 ; 2 Tim. 2 : 13. 288. Concessive clauses in English are introduced by though, although, and even if, occasionally by if alone. Even if introduces an improbable supposition or one especially unfavorable to the fulfilment of the apodosis. Though and 116 THE MOODS. although with the Indicative usually imply an admitted fact. AVith the Subjunctive and Potential, with the Present Indica- tive in the sense of a Future, and with a Past tense of the Indicative in conditions contrary to fact, though and although have substantially the same force as even if. Even if thus corresponds in force very nearly to koI d ; though and although to €1 KOiL. MOODS IN EELATIVE CLAUSES. 289. Relative Clauses are introduced by relative pronouns and by relative adverbs of time, place, and manner. They may be divided into two classes : I. Definite Relative Clauses, i.e. clauses which refer to a definite and actual event or fact. The antecedent may be ex- pressed or understood. If not in itself definite, it is made so by the definiteness of the relative clause. II. Indefinite or Conditional Relative Clauses, i.e. clauses which refer not to a definite and actual event, but to a sup- posed event or instance, and hence imply a condition. The antecedent may be expressed or understood ; if expressed, it is usually some indefinite or generic word. 290. It should be observed that the distinction between the definite and the indefinite relative clause cannot be drawn simply by reference to the relative pronoun employed, or to the word which stands as the antecedent of the relative. A definite relative clause may be introduced by an indefinite relative pronoun or may have an indefinite pronoun as its antecedent. On the other hand, an indefinite relative clause may have as its antecedent a definite term, e.r/., a demonstrative pronoun, and may be introduced by the simple relative. A clause and its antecedent are made definite by the reference of the clause to a definite and actual event ; they are made indefinite by the reference of the clause to a sup- posed event or instance. Thus if one say, He received lohatevcr pi'oflt was made, meaninf:c, In a certain transaction, or in certain transactio7is, profit wjas made, and he received it, the relative clause is definite, because MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 117 it refers to an actual event or series of events. But if one use the same words meaning, If any profit was made, he received it, the relative clause is indefinite, because it imi^lies a condition, referring to an event — the making of profit — which is only supposed. In John 1 : 12, hut as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, we are doubtless to understand the relative clause as definite, not because of the expressed antecedent, them, but because the clause refers to a certain class who actually received him. In Rom. 8 : 24, on the other hand, loho hopeth for that which he seeth ? the relative clause apparently does not refer to a definite thing seen and an actual act of seeing, but is equivalent to a conditional clause, if he seeth anything. In Mark 3:11, whensoever they beheld him, they fell down before him, the form of the Greek sentence shows that the meaning is, If at any time they saw him, they were icont to fall down before him. That is, while the class of events is actual, the relative clause presents the successive instances distribu- tively as suppositions. These examples serve to show how slight may be the difference at times between a definite and an indefinite relative clause, and that it must often be a matter of choice for the writer whether he will refer to an event as actual, or present it as a supposition. 291. Kelative clauses denoting purpose, and relative clauses introduced by eco? and other words meaning until, show special peculiarities of usage and require separate discussion. For purposes of treatment therefore we must recognize four classes of relative clauses. I. Definite relative clauses, excluding those which express purpose, and those introduced by words meaning until. II. Indefinite or Conditional relative clauses, excluding those which express purpose, and those introduced by words meaning until. III. Eelative clauses expressing purpose. IV. Eelative clauses introduced by words meaning until. I. Definite Relative Clauses. 292. Under the head of definite relative clauses are included not only adjective clauses introduced by relative pronouns, o?, 118 THE MOODS. oo-n?, 0L0LOS, but days will come tvhen the bridegroom shall be taken away from them. See also Luke 5 : 35 ; 13 : 28 ; Rev. 8:1. III. Relative Clauses expressing Purpose. 317. Relative Clauses of Pure Purpose. Relative clauses expressing purpose take the Future Indicative both in classical and New Testament Greek. HA. 911 ; a. 1442 ; B. p. 229 ; WM. p. 386, f. n. INIatt. 21 : 41 ; tov d/XTreAwj/a eKSwcreTat aAAots yewpyoi?, oirive? aTro- h{ji(Tovcnv avTcp toijs KapTrov^, he will let out the vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits. See also Acts 6 : 3. 318. Complementary relative clauses expressing the purpose which the person or thing referred to serves, take the Sub- junctive both in classical and New Testament Greek. In the New Testament, the Future Indicative also occurs. G^.MT. 572. 126 THE MOODS. Heb. 8:3; oOev dvayKoiov ^X^''^ ''"' '^^^ tovtov o Trpoa-ev^yKrj, tvherefore it is necessary that this high priest also have somewhat to offer. See also Mark 14 : 14 ; Luke 11 : 6 ; 22 : 11. In Luke 7:4a complementary relative clause limiting the adjective a^tos has the Future Indicative. 319. The clauses referred to in 318 are to be distinguished from true relative clauses of purpose in that they do not express the purpose with which the action denoted by the principal clause is done, but constitute a complementary limitation of the principal clause. Cf. the clause with iva (215-217) and the Infinitive (3G8) expressing a similar relation. The Subjunctive in such clauses is probably in origin a Deliberative Subjunctive. Thus in Mark 14 : 14, ttoO cctIv to KaraXv/xd fx.ov oirov t6 irdaxo- p-^to, tQ)v /xad-qrCju fiov (f>dys rjfxcpa iaTLV, we must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day. 329. When the ^ws clause refers to the future or to what was at the time of the principal verb the future (322-32(5), it frequently has the force of a conditional relative clause. See Matt. 18:30; Luke 15:4. When it refers to an actual event (327, 328), it is an ordinary temporal clause (203), requiring special mention here only to distinguish these usages from those described above. 330. In the New Testament ^ws is sometimes followed by oZ or 6tov. "Ews is then a preposition governing the genitive of the relative pronoun, MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 129 but the phrase ^'ws ov or ^'ws 6'tou is in effect a compound conjunction hav- ing the same force as the simple ews. The construction following it is also the same, except that &v never occurs after ^ws ov or ews otov. See Matt. 5 : 25 ; 13 : 33 ; John 9 : 18 ; Acts 23 : 12. 331. Clauses introduced by a;(pt, axpi ov, a)(pL ^s ■rjfxipa^, f^^XP'- and /u,e;)(pts ov have in general the same construction and force as clauses introduced by coos, ew? ov, and ews otov. Mark 13 : 30 ; ov fxrj irapiXBrj r) yevea avrrj /xe'xP^^ ®^ ravra iravra yevr]Tai. Acts 7:18; rjvirjcrev 6 Aao? kol lirX-qOvvO-q iv AlyvrrTO), dxp'- ov dvearr) /3a(nX€vtev tov^ SovXov<; Tov Oeov. 332. Gal. 3: 19 [WH. text] furnishes one instance of axpt's &v with a word meaning until after a verb of past time \^WH. margin, Tisch., and Treg. read axp's o£] ; cf . 324. Rev. 2 : 25 contains the combination dxpt ov &v with the Future Indicative ; cf. 3:30. Rev. 17 : 17 contains a Future Indicative with dxpt after a past tense. 333. Clauses introduced by -rrpiv and employing a finite mood have in general the same construction as clauses intro- duced by eoj9. The New Testament, however, contains but two instances of a finite verb after wpip, Luke 2 : 26 ; Acts 25 : 16. In both cases the clause is in indirect discourse, and expresses what was from the point of view of the original statement a future contingency. In Luke 2 : 26 the Subjunctive with &v is retained from the direct discourse. In Acts 25 : 16 the Optative represents a Subjunctive with or without dp of the direct discourse. Cf. 341-344. Rem. 1. The employment of a finite mood rather than an Infinitive in these instances is in accordance with classical usage. Cf. 382, and G. 1470. Rem. 2. In Acts 25 : 16 rj occurs after -n-piv, and in Luke 2 : 26 it appears as a strongly attested variant reading. Attic writers used the simple irpiv with the finite moods. Cf. 381. 130 THE MOODS. MOODS IN INDIEEOT DISOOUESR 334. AVhen words once uttered or thought are afterward quoted, the quotation may be either direct or indirect. In a direct quotation the original statement is repeated without incorporation into the structure of the sentence in the midst of which it now stands. In an indirect quotation the original sentence is incorporated into a new sentence as a subordinate element dependent upon a verb of saying, thinking, or the like, and suffers such modification as this incorporation requires. The following example will illustrate : Original sentence (direct discourse), / tuill come. Direct quotation, He said, "/ will come." Indirect quotation, He said that he would come. Eem. The distinction between direct discourse and indirect is not one of the exactness of the quotation. Direct quotation may be inexact. In- direct quotation may be exact. Suppose, for example, that the original statement was, There are good reasons v:hy I should act thus. If one say, He said ^ ^'- 1 have good reasons for acting thus,'''' the quotation is direct but inexact. If one say, He said that there were good reasons lohy he should act thus, the quotation is exact though indirect. 335. Direct quotation manifestly requires no special discus- sion, since the original statement is simply transferred to the new sentence without incorporation into its structure. 336. Indirect quotation, on the other hand, involving a re- adjustment of the original sentence to a new point of view, calls for a determination of the principles on Avliieh this re- adjustment is made. Its problem is most simply stated in the form of the question, What change does the original form of a sentence undergo wlien incorporated into a new sentence as an indirect quotation ? All consideration of the principles MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 131 of indirect discourse must take as its starting point the origi- nal form of the words quoted. For the student of Greek that expresses his own thought in another language, it will also be necessary to compare the idiom of the two languages. See 351 ff. 337. The term indirect discourse is commonly applied only to indirect assertions and indirect questions. Commands, promises, and hopes indirectly quoted might without imjDro- priety be included under the term, but are, in general, ex- cluded because of the difficulty of drawing the line between them and certain similar usages, in which, however, no direct form can be thought of. Thus the Infinitive after a verb of commanding might be considered the representative in indi- rect discourse of an Imperative in the direct discourse ; some- what less probably the Infinitive after a verb of wishiug might be Supposed to represent an Optative of the direct ; while for the Infinitive after verbs of striving, which in itself can scarcely be regarded as of different force from those after verbs of commanding and wishing, no direct form can be thought of. 338. Concerning commands indirectly quoted, see 204. Con- cerning the Infinitive after verbs of promising, see 391. 339. Indirect assertions in Greek take three forms : (a) A clause introduced by on or o5?. In the New Testa- ment, however, ok is not so used. (&) An Infinitive with its subject expressed or understood. See 390. (c) A Participle agreeing with the object of a verb of j^er- ceiving, and the like. See 460. 132 THE MOODS. 340. Indirect Questions are introduced by el or other inter- rogative word J the verb is in a finite mood. HA. 930; G. 1605. 341. Classical Usage in Indirect Discourse. In indi- rect assertions after on and in indirect questions, classical usage is as follows : (a) When the leading verb on which the quotation de- pends denotes present or future time, the mood and tense of the direct discourse are retained in the indirect. (^) When the leading verb on which the quotation de- pends denotes past time, the mood and tense of the direct discourse may be retained in the indirect, or the tense may be retained and an Indicative or Subjunctive of the direct discourse may be changed to an Optative. HA. 932 ; G. 1497. 342. The above rule applies to all indirect quotations in which the quotation is expressed by a finite verb, and includes indirect quotations of simple sentences and both principal and subordinate clauses of complex sentences indirectly quoted. The classical grammars enumerate certain constructions in which an Indicative of the original sentence is uniformly retained in the indirect discourse. These cases do not, however, require treatment here, the gen- eral rule being sufficient as a basis for the consideration of New Testament usage. 343. New Testament Usage in Indirect Discourse. In indirect assertions after on and in indirect questions. New Testament usage is in general the same as classical usage. Such peculiaiities as exist pertain chiefly to the relative frequency of different usages. See 344-349. MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 133 John 11 : 27 ; cyco TreTTLarevKa on av et 6 ;)^piaTo? 6 t;tos tov 6eov, I have believed that thou art the Christ, the Son of God. Gal. 2:14; elhov ort ovk opOoiTohovcnv, I saw that they were not walking itpri(jh(hj. Matt. 20 : 10; eA^wres ol Trpwroi ivo/jLtaav on nXelov Xrjjxif/ovTai, when the Jirst came, they supposed that they would receive more. INlark 9 : G ; ov yap rjSei tc aTvoKpiOtj, for he wist not what to ansiver. Luke 8:9; €7rr]po)T(i)V 8e avTov ol /xaOrjTai avrov tls avT-q etrj rj Trapa- /SoXrj, and his disciples asked him what this parable teas. Luke 2-1 : 23 ; yjXOav Xeyovaat kol oTrracriav dyyeAwv ecupaKcVat, ot Xiyova-Lv avrov ^tjv, they came saying that they had also seen a vision of angels, ivhich said that he loas alive. In this example the principal clause of the direct discourse is expressed in the indirect discourse after a verb of past time by an Infinitive, while the subordinate clause retains the tense and mood of the original. Acts 5 : 24 ; hLt^TTopovv irepl avrCjv tl av yeVoiTo tovto, they were per- plexed concerning them ichereunto this icould groiv. But for av in this sentence, it might be thought that the direct form was a deliberative question having the Subjunctive or Future Indicative. But in the absence of evidence that av was ever added to an Optative arising under the law of indirect discourse, it must be supposed that the indirect discourse has preserved the form of the direct unchanged, and that this was therefore a Potential Optative with protasis omitted. See also Luke 6:11; 15:26; Acts 10 : 17. 344. The Optative occurs in indirect discourse much less frequently in the New Testament than in classical Greek. It is found only in Luke's writings, and there almost exclusive- ly in indirect questions. Rem. 1. Acts 25 : 16 contains the only New Testament instance of an Optative in the indirect quotation of a declarative sentence. (But cf. 347 and 258.) It here stands in a subordinate clause which in the direct discourse would have had a Subjunctive with or without du. If the &v be supposed to have been in the original sentence (cf . Luke 2 : 26) , it has been dropped in accordance with regular usage in such cases. HA. 934; G. 1497, 2. 134 THE MOODS. Rem. 2. 2 Tim. 2 : 25 affords a possible instance of an Optative in an indirect question after a verb of present time. Both text and intei-preta- tion are, however, somewhat uncertain. See B. p. 256 ; WM. pp. 374, 631, foot notes. 345. In quoting declarative sentences tlie indirect form is comparatively infrequent in the New Testament, the direct form either with or wdthout on being much more frequentr The presence of on before a quotation is in the New Testament therefore not even presumptive evidence that the quotation is indirect. The on is of course redundant. Luke 7:48; ctTrei/ 8c axrrrj 'Ac^ewi/rat aov at a/xapriat, and he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven. John 9:9; CKeii/os eAeyei/ otl r]yoo ei/xt, he said, I am he. Rem. The redundant otl sometimes occurs even before a direct ques- tion. Mark 4 : 21, et al. 346. Indirect deliberative questions are sometimes found after e;(w and other similar verbs ^vhich do not properly take a question as object. The interrogative clause in this case serves the purpose of a relative clause and its antecedent, wdiile retain- ing the form which shows its origin in a deliberative question. Mark 6 : 36 ; Iva . . . ayopdcrcDcnv iavTo7) Kat Iyivero, or Iyivero Si, and the phrase of time are followed by an Indicative withont Kat. Mark 1:9; Kat iyivero iv CKeiVats rats T^/xepat? -^XOev Ir/croGs aTro Na^apcr Trj<; FaAtAata?, arid it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee. 360. (c) Kat iyivero, or iyivero Si, and the phrase of time are followed by an Infinitive, the narrative being continued either by an Infinitive or an Indicative. Acts 9 : 32 ; iyivero Se ILirpov Siep-^^ofxevov 8ta iravroyv KareXOelv, and it came to pass, as Peter loent throughout all parts, he came down. See also Mark 2 : 23 ; Luke 6 : 12. B. pp. 276-278. THE INFINITIVE. 361. That the Infinitive in Greek had its origin as respects both form and function in a verbal noun, and chiefly at least in the dative case of such a noun, is now regarded as an assured result of comparative grammar. At the time of the earliest Greek literature, however, the other cases of this verbal noun'^ had passed out of use, and the dative function of the form that remained had become so far obscured that, while it still re- tained the functions appropriate to the dative, it was also used as an accusative and as a nominative. Beginning with Pindar it appears with the article, at first- as a subject-nominative. Later it developed also the other cases, accusative, genitive, and dative. By this process its distinctively dative force was obscured while the scope of its use was enlarged. In Post- 144 THE MOODS. Aristotelian Greek, notably in the Septiiagint and the New Testament, another step was taken. The Infinitive with the article in the genitive began to assume some such prominence as at a much earlier time the dative had acquired, and as before, the sense of its case being in some degree lost, this genitive Infinitive came to be used as a nominative or accusa- tive. AVe mark therefore four stages of development. First, that for which we must go back of the historic period of the Greek language itself, when the Infinitive was distinctly a dative case. Second, that which is found in Homer : the Infin- itive begins to be used as subject or object, though the strictly dative functions still have a certain prominence, and the arti- cle is not yet used. Third, that of which the beginnings are seen in Pindar and which is more fully developed in classical authors of a later time : the Infinitive without the article, sometimes with 'dative functions, sometimes with the force of other cases, is used side by side with the articular Infinitive in the nominative, genitive, dative, and accusative singular. Fourth, that which appears in the Septuagint and the jSTew Testament : all the usages found in the third stage still con- tinuing, the Infinitive with the article in the genitive begins to lose the sense of its genitive function and to be employed as a nominative or accusative. From the earliest historic period of the Greek language the Infinitive partakes of the characteristics both of the verb and the noun. As a verb it has a subject more or less definite, and expressed or implied, and takes the adverbial and objective limitations appropriate to a verb. As a noun it fills the office in the sentence appropriate to its case. Many of these case- functions are identical with those which belong to other sub- stantives ; some are peculiar to the Infinitive. Rem. Concerning the history of the Infinitive, see (r.MT. 742, 788 ; Gild, in T.A.F.A. 1878, and in A. J. P. III. pp. 193 ff. ; IV. pp. 241 ff., THE INFINITIVE. 145 pp. 418 ff. ; VIII. p. 329 ; BirJdein, Entwickelimgsgeschichte des sub- stantivierten Infiiiitivs, in Schanz, Beitrage zur historischen Syntax der griechisclien Spraclie, Heft 7. 362. In the Greek of the classical and later periods, the functions of the Intinitive as an element of the sentence are very various. They may be classified logically as follows : I. As A Principal Verb (364, 365). II. As A Substantive Element. (1) As subject (384, 385, 390, 393, 404). (2) As object in indirect discourse (390). (3) As object after verbs of exhorting^ striving ^ promising j hoping, etc. (387-389, 391, 394, 404). (4) As object after verbs that take a genitive (401-403). III. As AN Adjective Element. (1) As appositive (386, 395). (2) Expressing other adnominal limitations (378, 379, 400). IV. As AN Adverbial Element, denoting, (1) Purpose (366, 367, 370 (d), 371 (d), 372, 397). (2) Indirect object (368). (3) llesult (369-371, 398). (4) Measure or degree (after adjectives and adverbs) (376, 399). (5) Manner, means, cause, or respect (375, 377, 396). (6) A modal modification of an assertion (383). The articular Infinitive governed by a preposition (406-417) expresses various adverbial relations, the precise nature of which is determined by the meaning of the preposition employed. Similarly irpiv or wplv tj with the Infinitive (380-382) constitutes an adverbial phrase of time, the temporal idea lying in irplv rather than in the Infinitive. 363. To arrange the treatment of the Infinitive on the basis of such a logical classification as that given above (362) would, however, disregard the historical order of development and to some extent obscure the point of view from which the Greek language looked at the Infinitive. It seems better, therefore, to begin with those uses of the Infinitive which are most evidently connected with the original dative function, and proceed to those in which the dative force is vanishing or lost. This is the general plan pursued in the following sections, though it is by no means affirmed that in details the precise order of historical development has been followed. 146 THE MOODS. THE IITFIITITIYE WITHOUT THE AETIOLE. 364. The Imperative Infinitive. The Infinitive with- out the article is occasionally used to express a command or exhortation. This is the only use of the Infinitive as a principal verb. It is of ancient origin, being especially frequent in Homer. HA. 957 ; Gi. 1536. The New Testament furnishes but one certain instance of this usage. Phil. 3:16; ttA^v ei? o e(^^acra/xev, rw avTio (ttoixuv, only loliereunto we have attained, hy the same rule walk. 365. Kom. 12 : 15 affords another probable instance of the imperative use of the Infinitive. Buttmann supposes an ellipsis of \iyo3, and Winer a change of construction by which the writer returns from the independ- ent Imperatives used in v. 14 to the construction of an Infinitive dependent on X^7a> employed in v. 3. This explanation of change of construction probably applies in INI ark 6 : 9 (cf. the even more abrupt change in Mark 5 : 23) ; but in Rom. ch. 12 the remoteness of the verb Xeyu) (in v. 3) from the Infinitive (in v. 15) makes the dependence of the latter upon the former improbable. B. pp. 271 f . ; WM. pp. 397 f. ; WT. 316. 366. The Infinitive of Purpose. The Infinitive is used to express the purpose of the action or state denoted by the principal verb. HA. 951 ; G. 1532. Matt. 5:17; ^y] vojXLcr-qTe otl rjXOov KaraXvaaL tov vofxov y roi^s Trpo- s. See 370 (d), 371 (d), 372. THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 147 368. The Infinitive as an Indirect Object. Closely akin to the Infinitive of Pnrpose is the Infinitive of the indi- rect object. The former is a supplementary addition to a statement in itself complete, and expresses the purpose had in view in the doing of the action or the maintenance of the state. The Infinitive of the indirect object on the other hand is a complementary limitation of a verb, expressing the direct ten- dency of the action denoted by the principal verb, or other similar dative relation. Some of the instances of this usage are scarcely to be distinguished from the Infinitive of Purpose, while in others the distinction is clearly marked. Luke 10 : 40 ; Kupte, ov /xe'Aet aoc ort r} aSeXfjit] fxov /jlovyjv fjce KareAeiTrcv SiaKOveiv, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister has left me to serve alone f Acts 17 : 21 ; ^AOrjvaloc 8e Travre? /cat ot iTnSrjfiovvTe^ $ivoL ct? ovBlv €Tepov rjvKatpovv rj Ae'yetv rt y aKoveiv n Kaivorepov, now all the Athenians and the strangers sojourning there spent their time in nothing else than either to tell or to hear some new thing. See also Mark 4 : 23 ; 6 : 31 ; 10 : 40 ; Luke 7 : 40 ; 12 : 4 ; Acts 4 : 14 ; 7 : 42 ; 23 : 17, 18, 19 ; 25 : 26 ; Tit. 2 : 8. 369. The Infinitive of Result. The Infinitive may be used to denote the result of the action expressed by the principal verb. When so used it is usually introduced by ^are. HA. 953 ; (7. 1449. Mark 4 : 37 ; kol to. KVfxara evre/JaAAev eU to ttAoiov, tocrre rjSrj y^p-i- ^eaOai to ttAoiov, and the waves beat into the boat, insomuch that the boat was noio filling. 1 Thess. 1:8; Iv Travrt totto) rj Trtort? vp.iiiv 7} irpo's tov Oebv i^eX-^- XvOev, wcrre p.r] XP^^^^ ^X^^^ ly/^tas AaActv tl, in every place your faith to God-ward is gone forth, so that we need not to speak anything. 370. Under the general head of expressions of result it is necessary to distinguish three different conceptions : (a) Actual result, conceived of and affirmed as actual; in this case classical Greek uses cSo-re with the Indicative. See 236. 148 THE MOODS. (&) Tendency or conceived result which it is implied is an actual result. In this case the result is thought of as that which the action of the principal verb is adapted or sufficient to produce, and it is the context or the nature of the case only which shows that this result is actually produced. In this case classical Greek uses ^a-re with the Infinitive. (c) Tendency or conceived result thought of and affirmed simply as such. In this case the result is one which the action of the principal verb is adapted or sufficient to produce, though the actual production is either left in doubt, or is indicated by the context not to have taken place. Clas- sical Greek employs ojotc with the Infinitive (in Homer the Infinitive without ^dTt). To these three may be added as a closely related conception which the Greek also expressed by ^are with the Infinitive : (cZ) Purpose, i.e. intended result. The constructions by which these several shades of meaning are expressed are substantially the same in the New Testament as in classical Greek, except that the construction appropriate to the second meaning has apparently encroached upon the realm of the first meaning, and the line of distinction between them has become correspondingly indistinct. "Qa-Te with the Indicative occurs very rarely except with the meaning there- fore, introducing a principal clause ; and this fact, together with the large number of instances in which wcrre with the Infinitive is used of a result evidently actual, makes it probable that the use of u}(tt(. with the Infinitive is no longer restricted, as in classical Greek, to instances in which the result is thought of as theoretical, l)ut is used also of result in fact and in thought actual. Cf. GMT. 582-584. There remain, however, instances entirely similar to those found in classical Greek, in which a result shown by the context to be actual is apparently THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 149 presented simply as one which the event previously expressed tends to produce. Between these two classes it is evidently impossible to draw a sharp line of distinction. Cases of the third class are expressed in the New Testament by the Infini- tive with or without ^are. Cf. also 218 and 398. 371. The following examples illustrate New Testament usage : (a) Actual result conceived and affirmed as such. Indicative after ajo-re. John 3:10; outoj? yap rjydTrrja-ev 6 6eb<; rov Koafxov ware tov vlov Tov fxovoyevrj eScoKtv, for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son. Infinitive after wo-re. Mark 9 : 26 ; iyivero wcrel v€Kpb<; wore rov? ttoAAov? A.eyeiv on aTre- Oavev, he became as one dead; insomuch that the more part said that he ivas dead. , (b) Tendency, by implication realized in actual result. In- finitive, usually after tocrre. Luke 12 : 1 ; iv ol^atpetv, Claudius Lysias unto the most excellent governor Felix, greeting. Jas. 1:1; 'laKo^^os . . . rat? 8oj8e/^A.to?, kKaTovrdp- •}(rj<; €K cTTretpry? r^? Ka\ovfxevr]s jU.^ ipXofJi^vov 8i fxov 7rpb cV \pL(TTio, ov ipevSo/xai, avv/xapTvpovcrr}^ fjiOL Trj'i avv(.tSri(7(.u); applies in general also to their respective compounds when standing alone. NEGATIVES WITH THE INDICATIVE. 465. The Indicative in an independent declaratory sentence regularly takes ov as its negative. Ilxi. 1 020 ; G. 1608. .Jolin 1:11; ci? to, i'Sta r]X9(.Vy Koi ol i'Siot avTov ov TrapiXa/Sov, he came unto his own, and they that were his own received him not. Rem. C)n the use of nof:j,itives in later Greek, see Gild., Encroach- ments of /iT7 on oi) ill later Greek, in A.J. P. I. j^p. 45 ff. 178 NEGATIVES WITH THE INDICATIVE. 179 466. In classical Greek, the Future Indicative used to ex- press a prohibition sometimes has ov, sometimes ixrj. HA. 844; G.Wr. 69, 70. In the New Testament a Prohibitory Future takes ov. Matt. 6:5; koI orav npoaev'^^rjcrOe, ovk eaeaOe cos ot vTroKpiTai, and when ye pray^ ye shall not he as the hypocrites. 467. In questions that can be answered affirmatively or negatively, ov is used with the Indicative to imply that an affirmative answer is expected; /xrj to imply that a negative answer is expected. HA. 1015 ; G. 1603. Matt. 13 : 55 ; ov^ ovro'^ icmv 6 rov reKTOvo's vtos, is not this the car- penter's son ? John 7 : 51 ; /xr] 6 v6fjL0<; r]fx(i)v Kptvec tov dvOpoiirov iav fxrj aKovcrr) Trpcorov Trap' avTov, doth our law judge a man, except itjirst hear from himself? 468. In Eom. 10 : 18, 19 ; 1 Cor. 9 : 4, 5 ; 11 : 22, /x^ oi is used in rhetorical questions equivalent to affirmative state- ments. Each negative has, however, its own proper force, ov making the verb negative, and /arj implying that a negative answer is expected to the question thus made negative. 469. In classical Gr'eek, the Indicative in conditional and conditional relative clauses is regularly negatived by /xtJ. But ov sometimes occurs in conditions of the first class. In this case ov negatives the verb of the clause or other single element rather than the supposition as such. HA. 1021 ; G. 1610, 1383. In the New Testament, conditional clauses of the second class (248) are regularly negatived by /x>j. In other conditional clauses and in conditional relative clauses, the Indicative usually takes ov as its negative, occasionally fxrj. In con- cessive clauses the Indicative takes ov. 180 THE US^ OF NEGATIVES WITH VERBS. John 9 : 33 ; el /xt] rjv outos Trapo, Oeovy ovk rjSvvaro Troieiv ovBiv, if this man were not from God, he could do nothing. See also Matt. 24 : 22. Rom. 8:9; el Se ris irvevfjui Xpicrrov ovk ^X^h ovto<; ovk €(ttlv avrov, but if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. See also Luke 14 : 26. Matt. 10 : 38 ; Kac os ov Xafi/Sdvci tov crravpov avrov koI aKoXovOel owLauo fiov, OVK eoTtv /xov a$iool3ovixaL ouSe avOpuiirov ivrpiTro/Juii, Sid ye TO Trape^etv fxoL kottov Tr]v XVP^^ TavTrjv iKSiKTijao) avTjjv, though I fear not God nor regard man, yet because this widow troubleth me, I icill avenge her. 2 Cor. 13 : 5 ; r; ovk eTrtytvcocrKere cavrovs ort Irycrovs Xptcrros Iv vfuv ; et fx-qTL d^oKLfxoL iarc, or know ye not as to your own selves that Jesus Christ is in you ? unless indeed ye are reprobate. See also 1 Tim. 6:3; Tit. 1 : 6. Rem, In Matt. 26:24; Mark 14:21, oi occurs in the protasis of a conditional sentence of the second class. 470. It is possible that oO in conditional and conditional relative sentences in the New Testament is usually to be explained as negativing the predicate directly (cf. G. 1383. 2 ; Th. el, III. 11.), fx-q on the other hand as negativing the supposition as such. Yet the evidence does not clearly establish this distinction ; to press it in every case is certainly an over-refinement. Cf., e.g., 1 John 4: 3, irdv irvevixa o fxr] ofxoXoyei rbv 'lr)(Todv iK TOV 0eov ovk ^anv, and 1 John 4 : 6, os ovk ecTLv e/c tov deov ovk &Kovei r)fxu>v. See also 1 Tim. 6 : 3 and Tit. 1 : 6, where fir) is used after el, yet quite evidently belongs to the verb rather than to the supposition as such. 471. Et fx-^ ill the sense of except is used as a fixed phrase, without reference to the mood which would follow it if the ellipsis were supplied. Cf. 274. Matt. 17:8; ovSeVa eiSoj/ et ixxj ovtov 'Ir;o-ovv ^ovov, they saw no one save .Tesus only. Mark 9:0; dtea-retAaTo au'rots Ivci fxrjSevl a. elSov SLrjyrjawvTaL, ei fxrj orav o vio? tov dvOfn'oTrov ck veKpCjv dniaTrj, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, save when the Son of man should have arisen from the dead. SUBJUNCTIVE, OPTATIVE, AND IMPERATIVE. 181 472. In clauses introduced by ^irj as a conjunction, the Indicative takes ov as its negative. After other final particles its negative is /xr;. HA. 1021, 1033 ; G. IGIO. Rev. 9:4; kox ippiOrj avroL't Iva fxy) aSLKrjaovcnv rov y^opTOv Trj