l j eIbrary p 
 SJM¥€BSICYggjB|gHFgBIflH 
 
 JHR€ K.SH¥R€B 
 IiIBRHRY FttRD. 
 
JOHANNINE GRAMMAR 
 
BY THE SAME AUTHOR 
 
 CLUE : A Guide through Greek to Hebrew 
 Scripture (Diatessarica — Part I). 
 
 Demy Svo, Cloth, Price 75. 6d. net. 
 
 THE CORRECTIONS OF MARK (Diatessarica— Part II). 
 Demy Svo, Cloth, Price 1 5.J. net. 
 
 FROM LETTER TO SPIRIT (Diatessarica— Part III). 
 Demy Svo, Cloth, Price 20s. net. 
 
 PARADOSIS (Diatessarica— Part IV). 
 Demy Svo, Cloth, Price ■js. 61I. net. 
 
 JOHANNINE VOCABULARY (Diatessarica— Part V). 
 Demy Svo, Cloth, Price i$s. 6d. net. 
 
 See pp. 688 foil, of this volume. 
 
 AGENTS IN AMERICA 
 
 THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 
 66 In in A\ km 1 . New \'<>uk 
 
JOHANNINE GRAMMAR 
 
 BY 
 
 Edwin A. Abbott 
 
 " He settled HotFs business — let it be ! 
 Properly based Oun." 
 
 Browning, A Grammarians Funeral. 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UNIVER3 
 
 OF 
 
 LONDON 
 
 Adam and Charles Black 
 
 1906 
 

 .' 1 f . 
 
 •2 s I* 
 
 Cambntjgc : 
 
 PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 
TO 
 
 MY DAUGHTER 
 
 BY WHOM THE JOHANNINE MATERIALS FOR THIS WORK 
 
 WERE GATHERED AND ARRANGED 
 
 AND THE RESULTS CORRECTED AND REVISED 
 
 "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" IS DEDICATED 
 
 «3 
 
 156736 
 
PREFACE 
 
 IT was said in the first half of this work, Johannine 
 Vocabulary (1879), " There are more ambiguities in the 
 Fourth Gospel than in all the Three taken together, and it is 
 easy to put one's finger on the cause of many of them." One 
 object of Johannine Grammar is to classify, with the view of 
 ultimately explaining, these ambiguous passages 1 . For 
 example, what Browning calls Hoti on my title-page may 
 mean "that" or "because." Browning extols his Grammarian 
 : — alas ! an ideal — who " settled Hotts business." This work- 
 tries to help to " settle " it — unquestionably it has not yet 
 been " settled " — for passages in the Fourth Gospel, in some 
 of which our translators halt between "that" and "because." 
 
 Again, Johannine commentators of repute disagree as to 
 who is speaking in certain portions of the Gospel. Take, for 
 example, i. 16 — 18 "For he was before me. For of his fuhiess 
 
 we all received the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom, 
 
 of the Father, he hath declared [him]." Origen attributed the 
 italicised passage to the Baptist. So did Irenaeus. Heracleon, 
 and many critics in Origen's time, maintained that it pro- 
 ceeded partly from the Baptist, partly from the evangelist. 
 Alford and Westcott assert that the whole of it proceeds 
 from the evangelist. 
 
 Next take iii. 15 — 21 "...that whosoever believeth may 
 in him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he 
 
 1 See Index, "Ambiguity," pp. 666- 
 vii 
 
PREFACE 
 
 gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believelh in him 
 should not perisli, but have eternal life. For God sent not the 
 Son... that they have been wrought in God." Concerning the 
 italicised passage Westcott says " It contains the reflections 
 of the evangelist and is not a continuation of the words of 
 the Lord." Alford says that this view — although held by 
 many commentators— is " as inconceivable as the idea of 
 St Matthew having combined into one the insulated sayings 
 of his Master." Westcott maintains that his own conclusion 
 is consistent with the tenor of the passage and " appears to 
 be firmly established from details of expression. ' Some of 
 these details — such as " only begotten Son," " believe in the 
 name of," " do truth," which are characteristic of the evan- 
 gelist — belong to vocabulary rather than grammar. But in 
 favour of Westcott's view there is a small point of grammar 
 to which attention might have been called, as will be seen 
 from the two passages to be next quoted. 
 
 One of these, according to Westcott, follows — or, according 
 to Alford, is part of — the last words of the Baptist, thus : 
 hi. 30 — 36 "He must increase, but I must decrease. He that 
 cometh from above is above all... For he whom God hath sent 
 speaketh the words of God ; for he giveth not the Spirit by 
 measure... the wrath of God abideth on him!' Concerning 
 the whole of these six verses (" He that cometh... abideth on 
 him ") W T estcott says that the section " contains reflections 
 of the evangelist"; and he calls attention to the use of the 
 title " Son " absolutely, and to other details, as well as to the 
 tenor of the passage, as justifying his conclusion. Alford 
 calls this view (which is not peculiar to Westcott) an 
 " arbitrary proceeding " ; but he himself abstains from any 
 argument based on grammatical or verbal detail. 
 
 The next instance occurs in the Dialogue between our 
 Lord and the Samaritan woman, iv. 9 (R.V.) " How is it that 
 thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a Samaritan 
 woman? {For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans)." 
 
 viii 
 
PREFACE 
 
 Chrysostom takes the italicised words as uttered by the 
 woman. The meaning would then be, "Jews as a rule do 
 not condescend to have dealings with Samaritans : yet thou 
 askest a favour from me ! " But some authorities omit the 
 italicised words. Alford and Westcott (the latter, with the 
 caveat " if genuine ") say that they are an explanatory note 
 of the evangelist. 
 
 In favour of this last conclusion (that "Jews... Samaritans " 
 is an evangelistic explanation) is the following grammatical 
 argument. There are two words, on and yap, used by John 1 
 to express the conjunction "for." For the most part, in 
 Christ's words, he uses the former ; in his own comments, 
 the latter (2066). The latter occurs not only in the Samaritan 
 Dialogue but also in the two previously quoted passages. 
 It is a matter of minute detail ; but, so far as it goes, it 
 confirms Westcott's view— favoured also by other gram- 
 matical considerations — that all three are evangelistic 
 comments (1936). 
 
 The labour has been much greater, and the book longer, 
 than I anticipated or desired. But the more fully I studied 
 the Gospel and its most ancient MSS., versions, and commen- 
 tators, the more necessary it seemed to give the evidence, 
 if at all, at full length. Conclusions stated confidently, and 
 with abundance of references, frequently assume an entirely 
 different complexion when the references are verified and 
 quoted accurately with their complete contexts. 
 
 As to the lines on which the book is constructed, they 
 are the same as those of my Shakespearian Grammar- 
 published nearly forty years ago but presumably still found 
 useful as it is still in demand. Besides many points of 
 
 1 By "John" is meant, throughout the whole of this volume, the writer of the 
 Fourth Gospel, of which the originator may have been (as the Gospel suggests) 
 John the son of Zebedee, but of which the writer, the exact nature of the 
 origination, and the exact extent to which the writer paraphrased, commented, 
 and blended allegory with fact, are (in my opinion) at present unknown. 
 
 ix 
 
PREFACE 
 
 similarity in detail, the two works have two broad assumptions 
 in common. 
 
 The Shakespearian Grammar assumed that Shakespeare 
 wrote, with a style of his own, in English that he read and 
 spoke. Hence North's Plutarch, Florio's Montaigne, the 
 Elizabethan dramatists — and especially his own works com- 
 pared with one another — were treated as safer guides to 
 his meaning than Milton, Dryden, and Pope. A similar 
 assumption is made in the Johannine Grammar. The 
 Johannine language in general has been carefully classified 
 with a view to the elucidation of particular passages ; and 
 the LXX, the Synoptists, the New Testament as a whole, 
 Epictetus, and the Papyri of 50 — 150 A. I), have been recog- 
 nised as safer guides than writers of the third century and 
 far safer than those of the fourth. This assumption is even 
 truer about John than about Shakespeare, to whom was 
 given, in some measure, the very rare privilege of anticipating, 
 or shaping, the language of posterity. 
 
 My Shakespearian Grammar also assumed that Shake- 
 speare was a great poet. About John, I have tried to 
 subordinate strictly to grammatical inferences my conviction 
 that he, too, is a master of style and phrase, as well as an 
 inspired prophet ; but I have felt bound to assume that 
 he did not at all events misuse words like the author of 
 " the Second Epistle _ of St Peter," or " use one word for 
 another" like a modern journalist describing a cricket-match 
 or a boat-race. For example, where John is represented 
 by our Revised Version as saying that Jesus " bowed his 
 head" upon the cross, I argued, in "Johannine Vocabulary," 
 that it must be rendered "laid his head to rest," and that, 
 if so, the expression mystically implied "rest on the bosom 
 of the Father." This rendering was based entirely on dry 
 hard grammatical evidence shewing that the phrase had no 
 other meaning in the Greek language. 1 have subsequently 
 
PREFACE 
 
 discovered that Origen thrice assumes this to be the meaning 
 (" inclinasse caput super gremium Patris "). 
 
 Besides these two assumptions, the Johannine Grammar 
 recognises one strong probability — namely, that the author 
 was an honest man (a fact that some commentators hardly 
 seem to recognise), writing indeed some seventy years or 
 more after the Crucifixion, but still with some knowledge 
 of what lie wrote about, and with some sense of responsibility 
 to those for whom he wrote. His Christian readers (I assume) 
 had read earlier Gospels, which, if authoritative, an honest 
 writer of a new Gospel was bound to take into account. For 
 example, the Synoptists express themselves differently and 
 somewhat obscurely as to the " authority " possessed by 
 Christ and imparted by Him to the disciples. The meaning 
 of true " authority " is of great moral importance, and much 
 discussed by Epictetus. It is assumed as probable that 
 John's teaching on this point was intended to elucidate that 
 of the Synoptists. 
 
 I venture to think that the Index to N.T. passages will 
 supply something like a continuous commentary on the 
 Fourth Gospel, and that the Index to Greek words will 
 help the reader to compare Johannine, Synoptic, literary, 
 and vernacular Greek. The English Index contains copious 
 references to Origen, Nonnus, Chrysostom, Philo, and 
 Epictetus, indicating lines of thought illustrative of the 
 circumstances amid which the Gospel issued from its 
 originator, was committed to writing by its author, and was 
 interpreted by the earliest extant commentaries. 
 
 Many of the grammatical details must of course be 
 abstruse and unsuitable for any but Greek scholars. But 
 an attempt has been made — by translating literally many 
 of the quotations, by comparing the Authorised with the 
 Revised Version, and by illustrating Greek from English 
 idiom — to make several interesting peculiarities of Johannine 
 
 xi 
 
PREFACE 
 
 style intelligible to readers unacquainted with Greek literature 
 except through translations. In order to give easy access to 
 all such oases in the classical desert, and a bird's-eye view 
 of some of them, the English Index has been made very 
 copious. It contains, for example, two columns on " Am- 
 biguity." The reader will also find references to " Allusiveness," 
 "Emphasis," "Mysticism," "Narrowing Down," "Parenthesis," 
 " Quotation," " Repetition," and " Self-correction." Many of 
 these subjects will — I sincerely believe — be better understood 
 by a student with little or no knowledge of Greek but much 
 knowledge of literature, than by one case-hardened against 
 intellectual interests by a long course of " the classical 
 languages " unintelligently and unwillingly studied. 
 
 For my "Notes on preceding Paragraphs" (2664 — 799) 
 I am under great obligations to Professor Blass's Grammar 
 of New Testament Greek, even where I have been led to 
 differ from its conclusions'. To Dr Joseph B. Mayor, in 
 whose works on the Epistle of St James and on Clement of 
 Alexandria I have found rich stores of Greek learning, and 
 to Dr \V. Rhys Roberts, Professor of Greek at the University 
 of Leeds, whose editions of Longinus, Dionysius, and 
 Demetrius, are full of interesting and stimulative information 
 on Greek style, I am indebted for correction of my proofs 
 and for very useful criticisms and suggestions ; nor must 
 I omit brief but hearty thanks to the Cambridge University 
 Press. 
 
 EDWIN A. ABBOTT. 
 
 Wells idf 
 
 Hampstead 
 
 20 Dec. 1 905 
 
 See Huh' on p. xxvii. 
 xii 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 References and Abbreviations . . xxv— xxvii 
 Introduction 
 
 § i The scope of the proposed work (1886 — 7) 
 
 § 2 The arrangement and proportions of the work (1888 — 93) 
 
 BOOK I 
 FORMS AND COMBINATIONS OF WORDS 
 
 General warning as to use of Index (1894*) 
 
 Adjectives 
 
 (i) Used predicatively (1894) 
 (ii) Special 
 
 (a) Movos (1895, 2664) 
 
 (j8) npwros (1896—1901, 2665—7) 
 
 Adverbs 
 
 (i) Intensive (1902) 
 
 (ii) Special 
 
 (a) "Ava6ev (1903—8) 
 
 (0) "Apn, see vvv (1915 (i)) 
 
 (y) 'Eyyis (1909) 
 
 (8) EM«ur and ev6Cs (1910—15) 
 
 (e) Nvv and apn (1915 (i)— (vi)) 
 
 (0 Ourcos (1916—7) 
 
 (17) Happrjaia (1917 (i) — (vi)) 
 
 (6) Td X eiov (1918) 
 
 A. vi. xiii b 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Anacoluthon 
 
 (i) Generally (1919) 
 
 (ii) The Subject suspended (1920—2) 
 
 (iii) Digression (1923—4) 
 
 (iv) Impressionism (1925 — 7) 
 
 AoRlST, see Index 
 
 APODOSIS, see Index 
 Apposition 
 
 (i) With proper names (1928) 
 
 (ii) In subdivisions (1929—30) 
 
 (iii) Explaining, or defining (not with Participle) (1931 — 6) 
 
 (iv) With Participle T937— 45) 
 
 (v) Noun repeated in Apposition (1946) 
 
 (vi) Of Pronoun with preceding Subject (1947) 
 
 Article (see also 2669—74) 
 
 (i) Before Nouns in general (1948) 
 (ii) Inserted, or omitted, before special Nouns 
 (a) Fathers (1949—50) 
 (0) Feast (1951) 
 (y) Heaven (1952—8) 
 (S) Man (1959—61) 
 (e) Mountain (1962—3) 
 (0 Only begotten (1964) 
 (17) Prophet (1965) 
 (8) " Teacher [of I srael] !! (1966) 
 
 (iii) Before Names (1967—70) 
 
 (iv) With Participle and " is " or " are " (1971—81) 
 
 (v) With Non-Possessive Adjectives (1982—6) 
 
 (vi) With Possessive Adjectives (1987—9) 
 
 (vii) Omitted, or misplaced (1990 — 4) 
 
 (viii) With Infinitive (1995) 
 
 Asyndeton 
 
 (i) Johannine use of (1996—9) 
 
 (ii) Classification of references (2000 — 8) 
 
 xiv 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CASES 
 
 I Accusative 
 
 (i) Adverbial (2009—11) 
 
 (ii) Absolute, or suspensive (2012) 
 
 (iii) Denoting time, but not duration (2013) 
 
 (iv) Cognate (2014) 
 
 (v) With special verbs 
 
 (a) 'Aicouo) (2015) 
 
 (j8) Teiofiai (2016—8) 
 
 (y) UpoaKVi>(u> (2019) 
 
 II Dative 
 
 (i) Of instrument (2020) 
 
 (ii) Of time (completion) (2021—4) 
 
 (iii) Of point of time (2025-6) 
 
 (iv) With -napa (2027) 
 
 III Genitive 
 
 (i) Absolute (2028—31) 
 
 (ii) Objective or subjective (2032 — 40) 
 
 (iii) Partitive (2041—2) 
 
 (iv) Before Nouns (2043) 
 
 (v) Special passages 
 
 (a) With npaiTos and Trpcorov (2044) 
 
 (£) Tifcpidbos (2045) 
 
 (y) 'H 8ia(nropa tS>v 'EAAi/i'coi' (2046) 
 
 (8) Ta j3aia tcov (poiviKcov (2047) 
 
 (e) UapaaKevr] tov Tvacr\a (2048) 
 
 IV Nominative 
 
 (i) Special passage 
 
 (a) 'O Kvpuk pov (2049—51) 
 
 V Vocative (see also 2679—82) 
 (i) Special passages 
 
 (a) Uar^p (2052—3) 
 
 Conjunctions (1894*) : for a.v, lav, orav, '6t€, see Index 
 
 (i) Johannine use of (2054) 
 
 (ii) 'AXXd 
 
 (a) 'AXXd = contrariety, "not this but that, or, something 
 more" (2055—7) 
 
 xv b 2 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 03) 'AXXfl = difference, " nevertheless " (2058—9) 
 (y) Special passages (2060—2) 
 (8) 'AXX' in (2063—4) 
 
 (iii) Tip 
 
 (a) Synoptic and Johannine use (2065 — 6 
 (/3) Special passages (2067 — 8) 
 
 (iv) A€ 
 
 (a) Consecutive or adversative f2069 — 73) 
 
 (/3) Third word, or later, in its clause (2074—6 
 
 (y) Mo/...8e(2077) 
 
 (v) El 
 
 (a) Ei, corresponding to av, in Words of the Lord (2078 — 9, 
 (j8) Et 8e m (2080—6) 
 
 (vi) 'Eirei 
 
 (a) 'E7T6i Trapaa-Ktvi) rji> (2087 — 8) 
 
 (vii) "Ecus 
 
 (a) Not confused with cos- (2089) 
 
 (viii) "H and r\-ntp 
 
 (a) "H (2090-1) 
 (0) "H7T6P (2092) 
 
 (ix) "Iva (see also 2686—90) 
 
 (a) In John, expresses, or implies, purpose (2093) 
 
 (0) In John, never merely appositional (2094 — 6) 
 
 (y) Special passages (2097—2103) 
 
 (8) "iva and Subjunctive, compared with Infinitive (2104 1 
 
 («) Omission of principal verb before Iva (2105 — 12) 
 
 (f) Dependent on verb implied in question (2113; 
 
 (77) With Indicative (2114) 
 
 (6) Connexion of (2115) 
 
 (0 "lva...iva (2116— 21) 
 
 (x) KaOois 
 
 (a) Suspensive (2122) 
 
 (0) Followed by Kai or K«yd> in Apodosis (2123 — 7) 
 
 (y) Supplementary (2128—32 1 
 
 (xi) KaC 
 
 (a) Km in narrative (Hebraic) (2133—4) 
 
 (0) Km connecting affirmation and negation (2135) 
 
 (y) Km = " and yet " (2136—40) 
 
 xvi 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 (8) Special instances of kcii = u and yet " (2141 — 5) 
 
 («) Km introducing an exclamation (2146) 
 
 (f ) Km meaning " also " (2147) 
 
 (77) Km' in Apodosis, after a, el, icadws etc. in Protasis (2148) 
 
 (6) Km fyi«s (2149) 
 
 (t) Km in Crasis (2150) 
 
 ((C) KllKt'lVOS (2151) 
 
 (X) Km " also," connexion of (2152—3) 
 
 (/*) Km " also " in viii. 25 (2154—6) 
 
 (0 Km meaning " [indeed] and " (2157) 
 
 (|) Kai iav (2158—9) 
 
 (o) K&v (2160) 
 
 (*■) Km... Km, "both... and" (2161—6) 
 
 (p) Kal yap (2167) 
 
 (a-) Km' omitted between two adjectives (2168) 
 
 (xii) M«v, |x«vToi (2169—70) 
 
 (xiii) "Ottov (2171—2) 
 
 (xiv) "Oirws (2173) 
 
 (xv) "On (see also 2694-5) 
 
 (a) "On (1) suspensive, (2) explanatory (2174—7) 
 
 (0) "On introducing (1) cause of action, (2) ground of 
 
 statement (2178—80) 
 
 (y) "On (?) " that " or " because " (2181—6) 
 
 (8) "On p ) (2187) 
 
 (e) Ov X on (2188) 
 
 (0 "Or< recitativum (2189—90) 
 
 (xvi) Ovv 
 
 (a) In Christ's words (2191—7) 
 
 (0) Applied to Christ's acts (2198—2200) 
 
 (xvii) 'fis 
 
 (a) '<fc(?) for eas (2201) 
 
 (/3) 'fly "as it were" (2202) 
 
 (xviii) "ft™ (2203, 2697) 
 
 Ellipsis 
 
 (i) Of two kinds (2204) 
 (ii) Contextual (2205—9) 
 
 (a) 'E«i> oui* 6((x>prjT( (2210 — 2) 
 
 xvii 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 (iii) Idiomatic 
 
 (a) Ellipsis of " some " (2213—5) 
 
 (fl) Ellipsis (?) of " gate " (2216) 
 
 (y) Ellipsis of " daughter " (or " wife " ?) (2217; 
 
 (8) 'AAA' Iva, see 2063—4 and 2105—12 
 
 («) Oi x Sti (2218—9) 
 
 (0 Ellipsis after " I am " (2220—8) 
 
 (i?) Ellipsis of cWt (2229—30) 
 
 Imperative, see Index 
 
 Infinitive, see Index 
 
 Interrogative Sentences 
 
 (i) Interrogative particles (2231) 
 
 (a) Or rf (2232) 
 
 (j8) ObKoiv (2233—4) 
 
 (y) Mij (2235) 
 (ii) Interrogative tone (2236—47) 
 (iii) Questions without interrogative particle (2248) 
 (iv) Indirect interrogative (2249 — 51) 
 
 Mood 
 
 (i) Imperative, Indicative, Infinitive, and Subjunctive, see Index 
 (ii) Optative (2252) 
 
 Negative Particles 
 
 (i) M^j (2253—4) 
 
 (ii) Ov (i-q with Future and Subjunctive (2255) 
 
 (iii) El ov (2256) 
 
 (iv) Ov...ov8ek (2257) 
 
 (v) Ovt«..W (2258—9) 
 
 (vi) Ov (or |xt() combined with was (2260 — 3) 
 
 (vii) Ov v.r. oWa) (2264—5) 
 
 (viii) Ov X <(2265(i)) 
 
 Number 
 
 (i) Plural referring to preceding Singular (2266) 
 (ii) Plural Neuter with Plural Verb (2267) 
 (iii) Special words 
 (a) Ae/tara f2268 -9) 
 (j8) 'i/xaVta (2270) 
 
 xviii 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Participle (1894*) 
 
 (i) Causal (2271—3) 
 
 (ii) Tenses of (see also Tense 2499—2510) 
 
 (a) Tv(pUs &v (2274) 
 
 (/3) 'O u>v iv tg> ovpava (2275) 
 
 (y) 'H tKfidtjacra (2276) 
 
 (iii) Present with r> (2277) 
 
 (iv) Agreement of (2278) 
 
 (v) Prefatory use of (2279) 
 
 Prepositions (for o-vv see 2799 (ii)) 
 Introductory Note (2280) 
 
 (i) 'Avci (2281—3) 
 
 (ii) 'Avri (2284—7) 
 
 (iii) 'Am5 
 
 (a) 'Afl-o and e< meaning "[some] of," see 2213 — 5 
 
 (0) 'Atto, transposition of (2288) 
 
 (y) 'Atto and e\ describing domicile or birthplace (2289 — 93) 
 
 (8) 'A7ro, in, and napd, with e£(pxop.ai, see 2326 — 8 
 
 (iv) Aid (see also 2705, 2715) 
 
 (i) Aiti with Accusative of Person (2294—2300) 
 (2) Aui with Genitive of Person (2301—4) 
 
 (v) Els (see also 2706 foil.) 
 
 (a) For TTia-rcuew eir, see 1480 foil. 
 
 (|3) Eis without verb of motion (2305 — 9) 
 
 (y) Ei's, " to " or " into " (2310—11) 
 
 (8) Eis fatjv almviov (2312 — 6) 
 
 (e) "O^ovrm els (2317—8) 
 
 (f) Eis reAos (2319—23) 
 
 (vi) 'Ek 
 
 (a) 'Ek meaning " some of," see 2213 — 5 
 
 (0) 'Ek meaning " native of," as distinguished from drro 
 
 "coming from," or "resident in," see 2289 — 93 
 
 (y) 'Ek fiirpov (2324) 
 
 (8) 'Ek with (rco^o) and rr/pe'co (2325) 
 
 (e) 'Ek, dno, and irapd, with etjtpxopai (2326 — 8) 
 
 (£) 'Ek with irXrjpooi and ye/xi£ co (2329) 
 
 (vii) "E^-irpoo-ecv (2330) 
 
 xix 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 (viii) 'Ev 
 
 (a) 'Ev used metaphorically, e.g. " abide in," see 1881 
 
 03) 'Ev used temporally (2331) 
 
 (y) 'Ev quasi-instrumental (2332) 
 
 (8) 'Ev used locally, iv tu ya£o<f)v\aKia> (2333 — 4) 
 (ix) 'Evwiriov (2335) 
 (x) 'Eiri 
 
 (i) 'Eni with Accusative (2336) 
 
 (2) 'Eiri with Dative (2337—9) 
 
 (3) 'Errl with Genitive 
 
 (a) 'Eirl t?is e a \a(T(rr,s (2340—6) 
 (/3) 'Ent tov araupov (2347) 
 
 (xi) Kara (2348) 
 
 (xii) MtTd 
 
 (a) Mera 'lovBalov (2349—50) 
 ((3) Ot /xer' avrov ovra (2351) 
 (y) Mera compared with rrapd (2352 — 3) 
 
 (xiii) Ilapa 
 
 (1) Ilapa with Accusative (2354) 
 
 (2) Ilapa with Dative 
 
 (a) Ilapa with Dative and perd with Genitive, see 2352 — 3 
 O) Synoptic and Johannine use (2355) 
 
 (3) Ilapa with Genitive (2356) 
 
 (4) Ilapa with Genitive and with Dative interchanged 
 
 (2357—9) 
 
 (xiv) n« P C (2360) 
 
 (xv) n P 6 
 
 (a) npo e'poG (2361—2) 
 
 (0) npo transposed, see 2288 
 
 (xvi) IIpos 
 
 (1) npdy with Accusative, with verb of rest (2363 — 6) 
 
 (2) Ilpdy repeated after verb of motion (2367) 
 
 (3) npo? with Dative (2368) 
 
 (xvii) 'Yir^p (2369—71, see also 2718—22) 
 (xviii) 'Yir6 and (htokcL™ (2372) 
 
 (1) 'Ytto with Accusative (2372) 
 
 (2) 'Ytto with Genitive (2373) 
 
 XX 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PRONOUNS 
 
 I Demonstrative 
 
 (i) Avros (2374—80, see also 2723—7) 
 (ii) 'EKtivos (2381—5, see also 2729—32) 
 (iii) Ovtos(2386) 
 
 (a) Am tovto (2387—91) 
 
 (j8) 'Ev roirco (2392—3) 
 
 (■y) Mera tovto or tcivtci (2394) 
 
 (8) Avroi) omitted and raCra repeated (2395 — 7) 
 (iv) Toiovtos (2398) 
 
 II Personal 
 
 (i) Insertion for emphasis (2399—2400) 
 (ii) 'EyA (2401) 
 (iii) 2{, (2402—4) 
 
 III Relative 
 (i) "Os 
 
 (a) Attraction of the Relative (2405—7) 
 
 (j8) 'Ev rw ovo^iaTi aov w 8(8a>Kcis /xoi (2408 — 11) 
 (y) '~Evto\i]v Kaivr)v...o (2412) 
 
 (ii) "Oo-ns (2413) 
 
 (a) "Oo-tls av, or iav (2414—6) 
 
 Subject 
 
 (i) Collective or noun group (2417 — 8) 
 (ii) Neuter plural (2419—20) 
 (iii) Suspended (2421) 
 
 (a) Tlav 6 Se'Sw/caf (2422, 2740—4) 
 (iv) Omitted in partitive clauses (2423) 
 (v) "They" non-pronominal (2424—6) 
 (vi) " We " non-pronominal (2427—8) 
 
 (a) " We know (ot8a/xn/) " (2429—35) 
 
 TENSE 
 
 Tense-rules and word-rules (2436) 
 
 I In the Imperative Mood 
 Aorist (first) and Present (2437—9 (v)) 
 
 xxi 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 II In the Indicative Mood 
 
 (i) Aorist (see also 2747—55 and 2785—90) 
 (i) Aorist compared with Perfect (2440 — 9) 
 
 (2) Aorist of special verbs 
 (a) 'Akovw (2450—2) 
 (0) 'AjtootAXgi (2453) 
 (y) At'Sw/xi (2454—5) 
 
 (8) Elrrov (2456) 
 
 (e) "Ep^o/iai and i^ip^ofiai (2457) 
 
 (0 Mevco (2458) 
 
 (3) Aorist for English Pluperfect (2459—62) 
 
 (ii) Future, see 2484 foil, and 2255 
 
 (iii) Imperfect 
 
 (1) The Imperfect in general (2463 — 6 (i)) 
 (a) "EXeyoy (2467—70) 
 (/3) "HdeXov (2471—2) 
 
 (iv) Perfect 
 
 (1) As the result of Johannine style (2473—5) 
 
 (2) As the result of Johannine thought (2476 — 7) 
 
 (3) Second Perfects (2478—9) 
 (v) Pluperfect (2480—1) 
 
 (vi) Present (see also 2760—6 (i)) 
 
 (1) Historic Present (2482—3) 
 
 (2) Present of Prophecy and Present of Law (2484 — 94) 
 
 III In the Infinitive Mood 
 
 (i) Infinitive compared with Iva and Subjunctive (2495 1 
 (ii) Aorist and Present (2496—8, 2767) 
 
 IV In Participles 
 
 (i) Aorist (2499—2505) 
 (ii) Perfect (2506) 
 (iii) Present (2507—10) 
 
 V In the Subjunctive Mood 
 (i) Aorist and Present (2511) 
 
 (o) In Deliberative Subjunctive (2512) 
 (j8) With tdv (or &v) " if" (2513—5 (i)) 
 (y) With Sv and Relative (2516) 
 
 xxii 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 (5) "Av Tivav KpcniJTe (2517—20) 
 (e) With ihp m (2521—3) 
 
 (0 With Iva (2524—9) 
 
 (77) "Iva fiij awoBvi-ja-Ki] (vi. 50, in Codex B) (2530) 
 
 (6) With orai. (2531-5) 
 
 Voice 
 
 (i) Middle 
 
 (a) Alrovpai (2536) 
 
 03) 'ArroKpivaaBai (2537) 
 
 (ii) Passive 
 
 (a) 'Efcpv/37; (2538—43) 
 
 BOOK II 
 
 ARRANGEMENT, VARIATION, AND REPETITION 
 
 OF WORDS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 § 1 Variation in repetition or quotation (2544 — 53) 
 
 § 2 Chiasmus (2554 — 7) 
 
 § 3 The Possessive Genitive (2558—69, see also 2776—84) 
 
 § 4 Miscellaneous (2570—86) 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 REPETITION 
 
 § 1 The nature of Johannine repetition (2587) 
 
 § 2 Jewish canons of repetition (2588 — 90) 
 
 § 3 Repetition through negation (2591) 
 
 § 4 Repetition in the Synoptists (2592—3) 
 
 § 5 The Johannine Prologue (2594 — 7) 
 
 § 6 Johannine repetition through negation (2598 — 2600) 
 
 § 7 Twofold repetition in the Baptist's teaching (2601—2) 
 
 xxiii 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 § 8 Twofold repetition in Christ's words (2603—6) 
 
 § 9 Twofold repetition in narrative (2607) 
 
 § io Twofold or threefold repetition (2608 — 11) 
 
 § 1 1 Threefold repetition (2612—23) 
 
 § 12 Sevenfold repetition (2624 — 7) 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 CONNEXION OF SENTENCES 
 
 § i Self-corrections (2628—30) 
 
 § 2 Parentheses (2631—5 (ii)) 
 
 § 3 Instances of doubtful connexion (2636 — 40) 
 
 APPENDIX I 
 
 TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS 
 
 § i Our Lord's Sayings (2641 — 2), § 2 The Sayings of the Disciples 
 and of the Evangelist (2643 — 4), § 3 The Sayings of others 
 (2645), § 4 Events (2646—9) 
 
 APPENDIX II 
 
 READINGS OF CODEX VATICANUS NOT ADOPTED BY 
 WESTCOTT AND HORT 
 
 § 1—2 Introductory Remarks ; Tischendorf and the Photograph 
 (2650—3), § 3 List of Readings (2654—62), Pause-spaces 
 (2663) 
 
 NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS (2664-2799) 
 For summary of Contents, see pp. 506 — 7 
 
 INDICES 
 
 To Johannine Vocabulary, (i) N.T. Passages, (ii) English, (iii) Greek, 
 
 pp. 625— 51 
 To Johannine Grammar, (i) N.T. Passages, (ii) English, (iii) Greek, 
 
 pp. 652—87 
 
 xxiv 
 
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS 
 
 REFERENCES 
 
 (i) Black Arabic numbers refer to paragraphs in this volume (1886 — 
 2799) or in preceding volumes of Diatessarica : — 
 
 1— 272 =Clue. 
 
 273 — 552 = Corrections. 
 553— 1149= From Letter to Spirit. 
 1150— 1435 = Paradosis. 
 
 1436 — 1885 —Johannine Vocabulary. 
 
 (ii) The Books of Scripture are referred to by the ordinary ab- 
 breviations, except where specified below. But when it is 
 said that Samuel, Isaiah, Matthew, or any other writer, wrote 
 this or that, it is to be understood as meaning the writer, 
 whoever he may be, of the words in question, and not as 
 meaning that the actual writer was Samuel, Isaiah, or Matthew. 
 
 (iii) The principal Greek MSS. are denoted by N, A, B, etc. ; the Latin 
 versions by a, b, etc., as usual. The Syriac version discovered by 
 Mrs Lewis on Mount Sinai is referred to as SS, i.e. " Sinaitic 
 Syrian." It is always quoted from Mr Burkitt's translation. I 
 regret that in the first three vols, of Diatessarica Mrs Lewis's 
 name was omitted in connexion with this version. 
 
 (iv) The text of the Greek Old Testament adopted is that of B, edited 
 by Professor Swete 1 ; of the New, that of Westcott and Hort. 
 
 (v) Modern works are referred to by the name of the work, or author, 
 vol., and page, e.g. Levy iii. 343 a, i.e. vol. iii. p. 343, col. 1. 
 
 ABBREVIATIONS 
 
 Aq. = Aquila's version of O.T. 
 Apol. = Justin Martyr's First Apology. 
 Blass, see Addendum on p. xxvii. 
 Buhl = BuhPs edition of Gesenius, Leipzig, 1899. 
 
 Burk. = Mr F. C. Burkitt's Evangelion Da-meftharreshe, Cambridge 
 University Press, 1904. 
 
 1 Codex B, though more ancient than Codex A, is often less close to the 
 Hebrew than the latter {Clue 33)- 
 
 XXV 
 
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS 
 
 C. before numbers = circa, "about" {e.g. c. 10). 
 
 Canon. LXX = lhe canonical books of LXX. 
 
 Chr. = Chronicles. 
 
 Chri. = ///*' words of Christ, as distinct from narrative, see 1672*. 
 
 Clem. Alex. 42 = Clement of Alexandria in Potter's page 42. 
 
 Dalman, Words= Words of Jesus, Eng. Transl. 1902; Aram. G.= 
 Grammatik Aramaisch, 1894. 
 
 Demosth. 433 = Teubner's marginal page 433 of Demosthenes; but 
 Demosth. (Preuss) xxvii. 3 = p. 3 of Orat. xxvii. in Teubner, as in Preuss's 
 Concordance. 
 
 Diatess. = the Arabic Diatessaron, sometimes called Tatian's, trans- 
 lated by Rev. H. W. Hogg, B.D., in the Ante-Nicene Christian Library. 
 
 Ency. = Encyclopaedia Biblica. 
 
 Ephrem = Ephraemus Syrus, ed. Moesinger. 
 
 Epistle, the = the First Epistle of St John. 
 
 Euseb. = the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius. 
 
 Field = Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt, Oxford, 1875, a l so 
 Otium Norvicense, 1881. 
 
 Gesen. = the Oxford edition of Gesenius. 
 
 Heb. LXX = that part of LXX of which the Hebrew is extant. 
 
 Hor. Heb. = Horae Hebraicae, by John Lightfoot, 1658 — 74, ed. 
 Gandell, Oxf. 1859. 
 
 Iren. = the treatise of Irenaeus against Heresies. 
 
 Jer. Targ. (or Jer.) I and II = severally the Targum of "Jonathan Ben 
 Uzziel" and the fragments of the Jerusalem Targum on the Pentateuch. 
 
 K. = Kings. 
 
 Levy = Levy's Neuhebriiischcs und Chalddisches Worterbuch, 4 vols., 
 Leipzig, 1889; Levy Ch. =Chalddisches Worterbuch, 1 vols., 1881. 
 
 L.S. = Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon. 
 
 Narr. = in narrative, as distinct from {a) speech of Christ, (b) speech 
 generally (1672*). 
 
 Origen, Huet, or Lomm., ii. 340 = vol. ii. p. 340 of Huet or Lommatzsch 
 severally. The reader is also sometimes guided by reference to the text, 
 e.g. Numb. xiv. 23 in O.'s commentary on Numbers. 
 
 Oxf. Cone. = The Oxford Concordance to the Septuagint. 
 
 Papyri are indicated by Pap. [from the] Berlin [Museum] ; and Pap. 
 [of the] Egypt [Exploration Society], vols, i — vi, viz. 6>.vy[rynchus] i — iv, 
 Fayum v, 71V;/[unis] vi. 
 
 Pec, affixed to Mt., Lk., etc., means peculiar to Matthew, Luke, etc. 
 
 I'hilo is referred to by Mangey's volume and page, e.g. Philo ii. 234, 
 or, as to the Latin treatises, by Auchers pages (P. A.) (see 1608). 
 
 Resell = Resch's Parol leltcxtc (4 vols.). 
 
 S. = Samuel ; s. = "see." 
 
 Schottg. - Schottgen's Horae Hebraicae, Dresden and Leipzig, 1733. 
 
 xxvi 
 
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS 
 
 Sir. = the work of Ben Sira, i.e. the son of Sira. It is commonly called 
 Ecclesiasticus (see 20a). The original Hebrew has been edited, in part, 
 by Cowley and Neubauer, Oxf. 1897 ; in part, by Schechter and Taylor, 
 Camb. 1899. 
 
 SS, see (iii) above. 
 
 Steph. or Steph. Thes. = Stephani Thesaurus (Didot). 
 
 Sym. = Symmachus's version of O.T. 
 
 Theod. = Theodotion's version of O.T. 
 
 Tromm. = Trommius' Concordance to the Septnagint. 
 
 Tryph. = the Dialogue between Justin Martyr and Trypho the Jew. 
 
 Wetst. = Wetstein's Comm. on the New Testament, Amsterdam, 1 75 1. 
 
 W.H. = Westcott and Hort's New Testament. 
 
 (a) A bracketed Arabic number, following Mk, Mt., etc., indicates 
 the number of instances in which a word occurs in Mark, Matthew, etc., 
 e.g. dydnrj Mk (o), Mt. (1), Lk. (1), Jn (7). 
 
 (6) Where verses in Hebrew, Greek, and Revised Version, are 
 numbered differently, the number of R.V. is given alone. 
 
 ADDENDUM 
 
 Blass = Second English Edition of Professor Blass's Grammar of 
 New Testament Greek, Macmillan and Co., 1905. It did not come into 
 my hands till this volume was in the press. But I have made copious 
 use of it in foot-notes, and still more in the " Notes on Preceding 
 Paragraphs" (2664—799). Dr Blass regards as interpolations some 
 passages that I should treat as evangelistic comment ; and he appears 
 to me to attach too much importance to the testimony of Chrysostom 
 (concerning whom Field, Chrys. Comm. Matth. vol. iii. p. 153 uses the 
 weighty words, " Chrysostomo, Scriptori in libris citandis incuriosissimo," 
 of which the reader will find ample proof in the following pages) and 
 too little to that of Origen. But even where, as is frequently the case, 
 my conclusions differ from his, I gladly acknowledge my obligation 
 for his succinct statement of the evidence favouring his views, and for 
 calling attention to points that had escaped my notice. 
 
 xxvn 
 
INTRODUCTION 1 
 
 § i. The scope of the proposed work 
 
 [1886] Obscurity of style in an inflected language is caused 
 by ambiguity (i) in words 2 , (2) in inflexions of words 3 , (3) in 
 combinations of words 4 . The First Part of this work, Johannine 
 Vocabulary, dealt with characteristic, or characteristically used, 
 Johannine words, such as " believe," and " authority," with the 
 principal Johannine synonyms, and with the relation between 
 the Johannine and the Synoptic Vocabularies. But the words 
 were almost exclusively verbs, nouns, adjectives, and adverbs. 
 The article could not be represented statistically in the Vo- 
 cabularies, nor could many of the pronouns and conjunctions; 
 and only a general view could be given of the difference 
 between the Johannine and the Synoptic use of prepositions. 
 These words must therefore now be added to the two subjects 
 above mentioned as remaining to be discussed — namely, 
 inflexions, and combinations of words. 
 
 1 See references on pp. xxv foil. This is the sixth part of the series 
 entitled Diatessarica. The fifth part of the series ("Johannine Vocabu- 
 lary") terminated with subsection 1885. 
 
 2 E.g. "apprehend" (1443, 17356' — g) may mean "understand" or 
 " take prisoner." 
 
 3 " Inflexions" include those of all parts of speech. 
 
 4 "Combinations" include those in phrases, in clauses, in sentences, 
 and in paragraphs (or sections). 
 
 A. VI. I I 
 
INTRODUCTION 1 
 
 | I. The scope of the proposed ivork 
 
 [1886] Obscurity of style in an inflected language is caused 
 by ambiguity (i) in words 2 , (2) in inflexions of words 3 , (3) in 
 combinations of words 4 . The First Part of this work, Johannine 
 Vocabulary, dealt with characteristic, or characteristically used, 
 Johannine words, such as "believe," and "authority," with the 
 principal Johannine synonyms, and with the relation between 
 the Johannine and the Synoptic Vocabularies. But the words 
 were almost exclusively verbs, nouns, adjectives, and adverbs. 
 The article could not be represented statistically in the Vo- 
 cabularies, nor could many of the pronouns and conjunctions; 
 and only a general view could be given of the difference 
 between the Johannine and the Synoptic use of prepositions. 
 These words must therefore now be added to the two subjects 
 above mentioned as remaining to be discussed — namely, 
 inflexions, and combinations of words. 
 
 1 See references on pp. xxv foil. This is the sixth part of the series 
 entitled Diatessarica. The fifth part of the series ("Johannine Vocabu- 
 lary") terminated with subsection 1885. 
 
 2 E.g. "apprehend" (1443, 1735 e—g) may mean "understand" or 
 " take prisoner." 
 
 3 " Inflexions" include those of all parts of speech. 
 
 4 " Combinations " include those in phrases, in clauses, in sentences, 
 and in paragraphs (or sections). 
 
 A. VI. I I 
 
[1887] INTRODUCTION 
 
 [1887] In Johannine Grammar it is proposed to treat of 
 these matters with a view to two objects. The first object is 
 to ascertain the evangelist's meaning ; the second is to compare 
 or contrast his Gospel with those of the Synoptists. A great 
 deal will be omitted that would be inserted in a Grammar of 
 New Testament Greek, or in a Grammar that proposed to 
 examine the differences between Johannine and, for example, 
 Pauline style. On the other hand, a great deal will be inserted 
 that would not find place in a treatise attempting simply 
 to elucidate the obscurities of the Fourth Gospel. As in 
 Johannine Vocabulary, so in Johannine Grammar, many 
 remarks that may seem superfluous for explaining the special 
 passage under discussion may be found to be justified hereafter 
 by the use made of them in a commentary on parallel passages 
 in the Four Gospels 1 . 
 
 § 2. The arrangement and proportions of tJic work 
 
 [1888] Logical arrangement, symmetry, and complete- 
 ness, will be subordinated to the object of illuminating the 
 Fourth Gospel as a whole, and passages of recognised difficulty 
 in particular, by ready reference to groups of similar Johannine 
 idioms. For this purpose, English alphabetical order will be 
 adopted as regards subjects, e.g. Adjectives, Adverbs, Anaco- 
 luthon, Asyndeton etc., and Greek order, for the most part, as 
 regards Greek words discussed separately under these several 
 headings. Under " Adjectives " — in accordance with the 
 promise to omit all that did not bear on Johannine style — 
 very little will be said except as to John's use of two or three 
 special words. For the rest, the reader will be referred to 
 ' Article" — since the repetition of the article with an adjective 
 makes the latter emphatic. The same rule will apply to 
 Adverbs. On the other hand, under " Anacoluthon" (i.e. want 
 
 1 Sec Johannine Vocabulary, Prof. p. ix. 
 
 2 
 
INTRODUCTION [1890] 
 
 of grammatical sequence) space will be given to the discussion 
 of several difficult passages ; and " Asyndeton " — i.e. the 
 omission of connecting particles between clauses and sen- 
 tences — will receive a space proportioned to the number of 
 instances in which it causes ambiguity. 
 
 [1889] Under " Mood," the reader will find hardly anything 
 except a reference to other headings and especially to "Tense." 
 The reason is that many Johannine distinctions of mood — 
 occasionally (2511 foil.) so important as almost to amount to 
 a distinction of word — arise from the evangelist's distinction 
 between the present and the aorist in the same mood and may 
 be most conveniently discussed as Presents and Aorists rather 
 than as Imperatives, Subjunctives etc. Concerning the am- 
 biguous Trio-revere in xiv. I rendered by R.V. " Ye believe in 
 God, believe also in me," with a marginal alternative "Believe in 
 God," it was remarked three centuries and a half ago, " It may 
 be read in four ways 1 ." There are several other passages of 
 a similar character about which much the same thing is likely 
 to be said till doomsday unless some conclusion can be 
 arrived at by a grouping of similar Johannine ambiguities. 
 The best heading for these appeared to be, not " Indicative" 
 or " Imperative," but " Interrogative." 
 
 [1890] Under "Prepositions" will be given avd, although 
 it occurs in only one Johannine passage, ii. 6 " two or three 
 firkins apiece" and dvrl, although that, too, occurs only in 
 i. 16 "grace for grace." In the latter, not much doubt as to 
 the meaning exists ; in the former, none at all. But some 
 space has been given to both, because it happens that 
 expressions similar to these occur in the Book of the Revela- 
 tion of St John and in the works of Philo, and, if questions 
 should arise hereafter, in dealing with the Fourfold Gospel, as 
 to allusiveness or latent mystical meanings in either passage, 
 these external quotations may be of use. Similarly, under 
 
 1 So Suicer (ii. 721) quotes Erasmus, " Quadrifariam legi potest." 
 
 3 1—2 
 
[1891] INTRODUCTION 
 
 " Pronouns," in treating the Johannine " I am," an attempt 
 will be made to ascertain, by reference to Hebrew and LXX 
 usage (as well as to Johannine passages) when John uses it 
 (if he ever does) to mean simply " I am the person you speak 
 of," and when he uses it to mean (or to suggest) the divine 
 I AM. 
 
 [1891] In those parts of the work which relate to the 
 order and arrangement of words, something will need to be 
 said about Philonian and Rabbinical canons of sacred 
 expression, and about the repetitions so frequent in Hebrew 
 poetry and in Jewish liturgy. For these may explain some 
 curious twofold and threefold repetitions of the same state- 
 ment, and some (logically speaking) superfluous combinations 
 of affirmation and negation. But even when the most 
 is made of these, much in the Johannine style will remain 
 inexplicable, perhaps, except by particular influences and 
 circumstances. The book seems to combine the occasional 
 diffuseness of an old man with the general and pervasive 
 subtlety of a master of words in the prime of intellect. It 
 has curious sevenfold arrangements of events and sayings 
 that strike a modern reader as highly artificial, and likely to 
 have required much forethought and elaboration. Yet some- 
 times it halts, adds after-thoughts, breaks into parentheses, 
 seems to make inexact statements and to correct them, and it 
 certainly mixes words of the Lord and of other speakers 
 with remarks of the evangelist in such a way that the most 
 careful commentators are tasked to disentangle them. 
 
 [1892] Some of the phenomena above mentioned resemble 
 phenomena that we find in the Apocalypse. Others indicate 
 a subtle use of Greek grammatical forms quite unlike any- 
 thing in that book. Yet the Gospel has not two styles. 
 Indeed, as has been pointed out in the Preface, it has such 
 a sameness of style that the words of the Baptist or of 
 Christ — although distinguishable on close examination — ap- 
 pear to have been confused by some able critics with words of 
 
 4 
 
INTRODUCTION [1893] 
 
 the evangelist. There may, however, have been one originator 
 who did not write, and one writer, who did not originate. In 
 other words, there may have been, in effect, two authors, of 
 whom the second and later — while impressing his own 
 character on the style of the whole — may have preserved here 
 and there with special fidelity (sometimes at the cost of 
 clearness, 1927 c) the traditions of the first, in whose name 
 he wrote nominally as an amanuensis but actually as an 
 expounder and interpreter. These considerations will come 
 before us (2427 — 35) in discussing the remarkable textual 
 variations in the passage about " the disciple that beareth 
 witness of these things," but they ought to be always so far 
 present that our minds may be kept open to all evidence 
 bearing on the question of authorship. 
 
 [1893] The Fourth Gospel is admitted by all Greek 
 scholars to be, in parts, extraordinarily obscure. No honest 
 writer of history is obscure, as a rule, except through careless- 
 ness or ignorance — ignorance, it may be, of the art of writing, 
 or of the subject he is writing about, or of the persons he is 
 addressing, or of the words he is using, but, in any case, 
 ignorance of something. But an honest writer of poetry 
 or prophecy may be consciously obscure because a message, 
 so to speak, has come into his mind in a certain form, and he 
 feels this likely to prove the best form — ultimately, when his 
 readers have thought about it. Instances will come before 
 us, for example, where on may mean " that " or " because," 
 and where Kadd><$ may look back to what precedes or forward 
 to what follows : and as to these we may say that the writer 
 may have preferred to let the reader think out the meaning 
 or the connexion for himself. But what are we to say to 
 x. 38 " that ye may come to k now definitely (yvcare) and that 
 ye may continue in the ever growing knowledge (yivcoo-Krjre) 
 that the Father is in me " ? Here the difference between 
 the aorist and the present subjunctive is so great as to 
 amount almost to the difference between two distinct words : 
 
[1893] INTRODUCTION 
 
 but is it like a poet or a prophet to write after this fashion ? 
 We must frankly admit that such language — of which there 
 are many instances (2524) — would appear highly artificial in 
 any Greek writer unless there were special reasons for it, as, 
 for example, a desire to protest tacitly against some popular 
 and erroneous notions about "knowing" and "knowledge." 
 A Grammar is not the place to discuss the question whether 
 such notions existed and whether the evangelist would be 
 likely to protest against them ; but it may be of use here to 
 prepare the reader for a multitude of such minute gram- 
 matical distinctions. In an ordinary book, we should stig- 
 matize them as pedantry ; in the Fourth Gospel, they must 
 be explained (we may feel sure) by very different reasons. 
 The business of the Grammar will be to collect and classify 
 these and other peculiarities so as to lead the way to an 
 explanation that lies beyond the limits of a grammarian. 
 
BOOK I 
 
 FORMS AND COMBINATIONS 
 OF WORDS 
 
' OF THE 
 
 BOOK I 
 
 FORMS AND COMBINATIONS OF WORDS 
 
 General warning as to use of Index 
 
 [1894*] N.B. For all matter affecting Adjectives, Adverbs, 
 Anacoluthon etc., and not occurring under these several headings, 
 the reader is referred to the Index. For example, under the heading 
 "Adjectives "in the following paragraphs nothing will be found about 
 their frequent use with the reduplicated article for emphasis, nor 
 about their occasional use with the ellipsis of a noun. But these 
 deficiencies will be supplied under the heading " Adjectives " in the 
 Index at the end of the book, where the reader will find references 
 to " Article," to " Ellipsis," and to passages dealing with emphasis. 
 Also, as regards some special adjectives, discussed at considerable 
 length, but not here (e.g. 18109, iro\v<s i TrpofiaTLKrj), the reader will 
 be referred to the paragraphs dealing with them by the two Indices 
 of Greek words, where they will be found in their alphabetical order. 
 The Index to the " Vocabulary " will give the statistics of the words ; 
 the Index to the "Grammar," their grammatical use. 
 
 Adjectives 
 
 (i) Used predicatively 
 
 [1894] The adjective is used predicatively in iv. 18 tovto d\r]6ls 
 €tpr/K-a?, which is quite different from tovto d\r)@<Zs elpr]Ka<;. The 
 latter might have meant (1) " Truly, i.e. in truth, thou hast said 
 this," or (2) "Thou hast said this truly, i.e. with truth.'''' But the 
 former means " This, at all events, among all that thou hast said, is 
 
[1895] ADJECTIVES 
 
 true"— implying that hitherto the woman has talked in a reckless 
 and trifling way 1 . 
 
 (ii) Special 
 
 (a) Monoc 
 
 [1895] Mdvos occurs as follows in v. 44 (W.H.) "How can ye 
 believe, receiving glory from one another: — and the glory that comes 
 from the only [God] (rrjv So^av ttjv irapa too) fxovov [#eoi)]) ye seek 
 not ! " ®euv is here omitted not only by B but also by a ("gloriam 
 ab unico non quaeritis ") and b ("honorem ejus qui est solus'")". If 
 the omission occurred in B alone, it might be explained as an 
 omission — sometimes occurring in that excellent ms.— in a group of 
 similar letters 3 . But it occurs also in Origen 4 , which demonstrates 
 that the reading was much earlier than the draughting of B. More- 
 over, the omission, being unusual, would suggest a lacuna, which 
 scribes would be tempted to fill up, conforming the passage to "the 
 only true God" later on, and to general usage 5 . The Greek "only" 
 is used (as in Shakespeare, "the only man of Italy ") to mean 
 "unique" — more than merely "first." In N.T. "only" is connected 
 with ascriptions of glory 7 . Horace speaks of Jupiter as having "no 
 like or second" although Pallas occupies "the place next in honour 8 ." 
 Aristotle says that the heaven is "one and alone and perfect 9 ." But 
 
 1 [1894 «] R.V. ("this hast thou said truly") is ambiguous, and might agree 
 with X 1), f, a\r)6u>s "thou hast indeed (or, in truth) said." Comp. Demosth. 
 (Teubn. p. 87) tovt6 ye dXrjdes (but better MSS. dXrjdi]) Xeyov<Tu>. Such a predica- 
 tive use is prob. without another parall. in N.T. 
 
 [1894/-*] In xiii. 34 ivToXrjv Kaivrjv 5lowfj.i vyuv iva. ayairare dXX^Xoi's — Ka^ws 
 ■qydirrjcra iifids, 'iva ko.l iifxeh dyairdre dXXrjXovs, the adj. "new" is not predicative. 
 The meaning is, " I give you a new commandment " : and it is " new " because it 
 enjoins a new kind of "love," not revealed through the Prophets, but for the first 
 time through the Son and through His love of men. Comp. 1 Jn ii. 7 — 8 "Not 
 a new commandment do I write to you on the other hand (7rdXti<) a new com- 
 mandment do I write to you — which [paradox] (0) is true in him and in you," i.e. it 
 is " old " yet made " new " in Christ and in His newborn disciples. 
 
 - [1895 a] The Lat. / has "quae a Deo solo," ff" quae ab illo solo est Deo" 
 (where " Deo" looks like an interpolation out of place). Neither of these retains 
 the (Ik order as in d (" gloriam ab unico deo ") and e ("gloriam a solo do "). 
 
 '■'■ [1895 /'J See 2650: OT might be omitted coming between the OT of fxivov 
 and that of Oi). 
 
 4 Orig. Huet i. 392, and see 2664. B Jn xvii. 3, Rom. xvi. 27, 1 Tim. i. 17. 
 
 6 [1895c] Much Ado iii. 1. 92. See also Lucian (ii. 386, Demon. 29) where 
 a man boasts that he is /xdvos ko.1 TrpQros tuiv 8ta\eKTiKu>i>, and is rebuked for being 
 illogical. " Rom. xvi. 27, 1 Tim. i. 17, Jude 25, Rev. xv. 4. 
 
 8 Odes, 1. xii. 19 — 20. 9 De Cacl. i. 9. 8. 
 
 10 
 
ADJECTIVES [1897] 
 
 no passage is alleged in the Thesaurus where Greeks call God 6 /xoVos: 
 and such a use, if it existed, must have been rare among the Jews 1 . 
 More to the point is the saying of Philo that the words " It is not 
 good for man to be alone " are uttered because " It is good that the 
 Alone should be alone 2 ,'' meaning the Only God. On the whole, it 
 seems fairly probable that, when speaking about "glory" and its 
 source, the evangelist used 6 MdVos — with allusion to the connexion 
 of the word with "glory" both in Hebrew and Greek — to mean 
 briefly " He that is alone glorious " i.e. " He from whom alone all 
 glory comes." 
 
 (/3) TTpooToc 
 
 [1896] ITpojTos is followed by a genitive, and is said by some to 
 mean "first in regard of," in (a) i. 15 (R.V.) "He that cometh after 
 me is become before me (epurpoaOev /xov) ; for he was before me (on 
 7r/owTos fiov rjv) " and i. 30 (R.V.) "After me cometh a man which is 
 become before me ; for he was before me " (R.V. marg. in both 
 verses "first in regard of me "). It is rendered by the conjunction 
 "before," supplying a verb, in (b) xv. 18 (R.V.) " If the world hateth 
 you, ye know that it hath hated me before [it haled] you (irpuTov 
 
 v/xwv). 
 
 [1897] To deal first with (a). Stephen's Thesaurus quotes from 
 Aelian 3 "those who have investigated these things before me (ol -n-pwroL 
 p.ov TavTCL avi^veucrai'res)." But 7rpajro's tlvos e7rot^cra ti is different 
 from 7rpwT09 rtvos rjv. More to the point is 7rpcoi-os wv in the 
 Scholiast's Preface to the Phoenissae of Euripides quoted in the 
 Thesaurus thus : " Eteocles, as though he 7ve re first [in regard] of his 
 brother (are TrpGno% wv tov dSeXcpov)," given by Dindorf (presumably 
 correcting the text) as t<2v d8e\<pm>. Another Scholiast explains 
 {Hecuba 458) " firstborn palm (7rpwTo'yovos re cpohn£) " by saying 
 "created first [in regard] of the bay-tree (ttp<Ztov yewrjdivra rrj? 
 8d<f>vr)<;)." Origen seems to take 7rpwros p.ov as parallel to, and 
 
 1 [1895 (/] Levy ii. 234 £ quotes Genes. Rab., on Gen. iii. 22 "one of us," 
 explained as "like the Only One of the universe," and Levy Cliald. i. 331 b quotes 
 a Targ. on Job xiv. 4 "not one," explained as "shall not the Only One}'' (so 
 Vulg. " nonne tu qui solus es?"). 
 
 - Philo i. 66 Aia rl rbv avOpuiwov, ci jrpo^^ra, ouk Zari koKov elvai p.ovov ; "On, 
 (f>rt<rl, ko\6v eari rbv fxovov elvat. fidvor. Moj'oj 5^, Kal ko.6' avrbv, eh u>v, 6 deds, 
 ovdeu 5e 6/j.olov dei^i. 
 
 3 [1897a] Ael. N. A. viii. 12. Steph. also quotes Plut. Vit. Cat. Min. % 18 
 oiire irpCirbs tis avefii].. .Karuivos otire varepos airrfKde : but he thinks irporepos 
 should be restored here, and he expresses doubt about the quotation from Aelian. 
 
 II 
 
[1898] ADJECTIVES 
 
 included in, tt/dwtotokos irdcr-q'i ktictcws 1 , i.e. "firstborn [brother] of 
 all creation," so that -n-pwro-; fiov would mean " firstborn [brother] of 
 me," i.e. " my eldest brother." His words are : " The Baptist teaches 
 [us] how Jesus ' is become before him [by] being first [in regard] of 
 him (wv TrpuJTos avrov)' since He was the firstborn (ttpcjto'tokos) of every 
 creature 2 "; and the same view is suggested by irapd (implying the 
 metaphor of a household) in the following words, " I understand 
 that He was first [born in respect] of me and more honourable in 
 the house of the Father (irapa. tw IlaTpi)." Chrysostom, without using 
 the word "firstborn," argues that the words must refer to precedence 
 in point of time 3 — not in point of rank, rank having already been 
 expressed (as he says) by the words "become before me." 
 
 [1898] According to Luke, the Baptist was born before Jesus. 
 If that was recognised as a historical fact by the earliest readers of 
 the Fourth Gospel, " first in regard of me " could not appear to them 
 to mean "born before me [on earth]." But some have supposed 
 it to mean " begotten before me in the beginning." If so, why did 
 the Baptist omit "in the beginning," which is essential, and insert 
 "before me," which, had "in the beginning" been inserted, would 
 not have been essential ? Many will feel great difficulty in believing 
 that John the Baptist, at this stage in his testimony to Jesus (if 
 indeed in any stage) proclaimed to the Jews (i) the pre-existence 
 of Jesus, as being the Messiah — and proclaimed Him, too, as 
 pre-existent, not "from eternity" nor "from the beginning," but 
 (2) relatively to himself. The former doctrine, the eternal pre- 
 
 1 [1897 ^5] Col. i. 15 irpwroTOKOs Trdinjs Kricreuis, comp. the genitive in Rev. 
 i. 5 ttpwt6tokos tQiv veKpuiv, and see Col. i. 18 i] dpxv, wputotokos eK tCov veupCcv, 
 Gen. xlix. 3 irpwroTOKos fiov, crv layis fxov kclI dpxv t£kvo3v p.ov, Rom. viii. 29 eh to 
 dvai avrov TrpwroroKov tv iroWoh doe\<pois, Col. i. 18 'iva yevrjrai. iv iracnv avrbs 
 wpwrevuv, and 2 S. xix. 43 irpwroTOKos eyu rj av (LXX error). These passages shew- 
 that wpurbroKos, suggesting supremacy among brethren, might be replaced by 
 Trpurevuu, or irpGiros, if one wished to say "my firstborn [brother]," because "my 
 firstborn" would naturally be taken to mean " my firstborn [son]." The phrase 
 "my elder [brother]," TrpecT^vTepds fxov, would convey none of the old associations 
 of the blessing and supremacy belonging to the Firstborn. 
 
 2 Orig. Iluet ii. 99. 
 
 8 [1897c] "It is not to be supposed, says [the Baptist], that, whereas I was 
 first, He, by outstripping me (so to speak) in the race, cast me behind [Him] and 
 'has become before ' | i.e. superior]. On the contrary ' He was first [in regard] of 
 me [in point of time],' for all that He is coming last into [view]," 0i'5£ yap Ik 
 Tiros, (t>T}<rl, TrpoKowrjs trp&Tbv p.e ovra. dnta-cj pttpas Zp.irpo<T6tv yiyovtv, dWd llpwrds 
 fjiov tjv, d xal vurepos irapayherai. He explains lfxirpo<r$(v as Xaffrrpdrepos, 
 IvTiixbrfpos. On ffov TrpQirbs dp.i in the I.eyden Papyri, see 2667. 
 
 12 
 
ADJECTIVES [1900] 
 
 existence of the Messiah, may possibly have been entertained by 
 some Jews in the Baptist's time : but, even if it was, it is difficult 
 to believe that the Baptist gave it such prominence and in such 
 a shape. 
 
 [1899] The Synoptists 1 , instead of u first in regard of me," have 
 "mightier than I." This suggests that some word capable of 
 meaning " firstborn " might also be interpreted as " superior to," 
 "stronger than 2 ." The Hebrew Rab, the root of "Rabbi," 
 " Teacher," is capable of the two meanings (1897 b). The Baptist 
 may have said, in effect, "Jesus of Nazareth numbers Himself 
 among my disciples, but He was from the first my Teacher, or Rab." 
 Now whenever a Jewish Teacher spoke about the divinely ordained 
 relations between the elder and the younger, so prominent in 
 Hebrew history, he might use the word Rab (420) to mean 
 "firstborn," alluding to the supremacy of Jacob preordained in the 
 words " the elder shall serve the younger 3 ." But Rab is also used for 
 "mighty" in Messianic passages such as "mighty to save" and 
 " a portion with the mighty*." John may have taken the word in the 
 former sense, the Synoptists in the latter. 
 
 [1900] Apart from the question — which cannot be answered with 
 certainty — as to the original word used by the Baptist, we may be 
 sure that this rare expression 7rpajTo's fiov means something more than 
 Iacl&v /xov. Probably the writer had in view the Johannine 
 traditions " I am the First and the Last 5 ." As one can speak of " my 
 God" " my Rock" " my Light," so one might speak of " my First," 
 having in view the Firstborn of God, the Beginning. The evangelist, 
 without supposing that the Baptist consciously intended hereby to 
 set forth to the world the eternal pre-existence of Christ as the Logos, 
 might very well represent him as unconsciously including in his 
 language (after the manner of all the Prophets and the Psalmists) 
 more than he included in his thought. According to this view, the 
 Baptist meant " He was from the cradle my superior, my elder 
 brother" ; but he said words that might be interpreted as meaning 
 
 1 Mk i. 7, Mt. iii. n, Lk. iii. 16. 
 
 2 [1899<?] In 2 S. xix. 43, the LXX, confusing "in David" with "firstborn," 
 uses the latter as a comparative adjective, "I am firstborn than thou," irpwroroKos 
 eyw rj cru. But the Hebrew word there erroneously read by the LXX never means 
 "strong." 
 
 3 Gen. xxv. 23. 4 Is. lxiii. 1, liii. 12. 
 5 Rev. i. 17, xxii. 13. 
 
 13 
 
[1901] ADJECTIVES 
 
 " He was, from the beginning, my First? i.e. the Firstborn of God, 
 the object of my worship. 
 
 [1901] We come now to the use of 7rpwrov with the genitive in 
 (b), xv. iS "If the world hateth you, ye know that it hath hated me 
 (R.V.) before [it hated] you." No precedent is alleged from Greek 
 literature for such a rendering of the italicised words. But -n-pwrov 
 rendered as above will make sense here : "It hath hated me, your 
 First, i.e. your Chief." Something like this (" priorem vobis ") is the 
 rendering of the Vulgate and of one of the oldest Latin mss. ; and 
 others, though they omit " you," take irpQrov as an adjective 
 ("priorem 1 )." Thus rendered — if "first" be taken as suggesting 
 "firstborn brother" — the words prepare the disciples for the new 
 sphere of life and thought that was to follow the Resurrection, 
 wherein Christ was to become " the firstborn of the dead, the ruler 
 of the kings of the earth 2 ." He was not to be alone. He was to be 
 " the firstborn among many brethren 3 ." The whole Church was to 
 be "the Church of the firstborn 4 ," and He Himself was to be the 
 First of the firstborn, the " first-fruits of them that had fallen asleep 5 ." 
 The Johannine context leads the disciples to regard themselves as 
 branches in the Vine, " friends " (no longer " slaves ") of the Son — 
 " friends " that must henceforth partake in His life and in His secret 
 counsels 6 . Being now destined to become younger brothers of the 
 Firstborn, they must expect to share the Elder Brother's sufferings : 
 " If the world now hateth you, adopted brethren of the Family 
 of God, remember that it hath hated me — the First[boru] of you 
 [a//]'." Possibly the evangelist wishes not so much to say this as to 
 
 1 [1901 a] " You" is om. by a ("me prius odiit ") and e ("me primo odiit ") 
 and also by D (d has "me primum odiuit ") ; b and ff have "me priorem odio 
 habuit,"_/and Vulg. " me priorem vobis odio habuit." See 2665 foil. 
 
 2 Rev. i. 5, quoting Ps. lxxxix. 27, where David is declared •'firstborn." 
 
 3 Rom. viii. 29. 4 Heb. xii. 23. 
 5 1 Cor. xv. 20. 6 Jn xv. 15. 
 
 "' [1901 />] In i. 41 euplcTKei ovtos wpurov top adeXcpbv rov idioi> ~i(iuva, several 
 authorities have irpwros : /'and e have "mane," apparently having read irpui. 
 The Syriac (Burk.) has "And he, Andrew, saw Simon Kepha and saith to him...," 
 SS "And he, Andrew, saw Simon his brother on that day." It is generally 
 upposed (1720/) that the meaning is, "Andrew first found his own brother [before 
 Andrew's companion John the son of Zebedee found his own brother James the 
 son of Zebedee]." But there may be also some allusion to ancient traditions in 
 which trpuiTov ili/iwa, or (as in Mt. x. 2) irpuiros —ifj.u>i>, occurred at the head of 
 a list of the Apostles. If wpuiros were read above, it would lay rather more stress 
 on the fact that Andrew was the fir 1 Christian disciple that made a convert. 
 
 14 
 
ADVERBS [1903] 
 
 suggest this, by expressing the phrase " before you " in a manner that 
 would convey more than one meaning. See also 2665 — 7. 
 
 Adverbs 
 
 (i) Intensive 
 
 [1902] The adverbs Xiav, Trepurcrws etc. are rarely used by John, 
 who differs greatly in this respect from Mark and Matthew, and 
 slightly from Luke 1 . When John wishes to emphasize an adverb or 
 adverbial phrase he gives it an unusual place, e.g. at the beginning of 
 the sentence, xvi. 31 "Apri iruTTtveTt, xii. 27 NCi/ r/ ij/vXV f xov TCTa'puKTou, 
 xvi. 30 iv tovtu) TTLcrTevofxev, vii. 14 77817 Se rrj<; i. /xeo-oucrris, vii. 37 cv Se 
 rfi layanj 77/xe'pa . . . , xiii. I 7rpo 8i tt/; eoprrys r. Trdcr^a, xvi. 22 TraAtv Se 
 oi//opat vpas 2 . See 2636 r and 2668. On d/ify dfjLtjv see 2611 a. 
 
 (ii) Special 
 (a) "AnooBcn 
 
 [1903] The most important adverb in the Fourth Gospel is avi»6a; 
 as used in iii. 3 — 7 (R.V. marg.) "Except a man be born from above 
 (avwOev) he cannot see the kingdom of God.... Marvel not that I said 
 unto thee, Ye must be born from above." Nicodemus takes this as 
 meaning " born a second time " ; and he replies, " Can a man enter 
 a second time into his mother's womb and be born ? " Chrysostom 
 says that our Lord here speaks obscurely in order to lead Nicodemus 
 on to further question ; and he adds, ""Aru>0eu here means, some say 
 '■from the heaven,' others 'from the beginning 2 .'" The following facts 
 indicate that our Lord is intended by the evangelist to mean "from 
 
 1 [1902 a] Aiav occurs Mk (4), Mt. (4), Lk. (1), Jn (o) : atp65pa, Mk (1), 
 Mt. (7), Lk. (1), Jn (o): TrepiaaQs, Mk (2), Mt. (1), Lk. (o), Jn (o). Mk has 
 adverbial forms of 7roXi^s more freq. than Mt. Lk. Jn taken together. 
 
 - [1902 £] But see 1914 as to the position of evdvs, and comp. xi. 29 riyepdij 
 to-xv with xi. 31 raxe'ws aviar-q, where raxe'ws (2554/') before its verb appears to 
 be more emphatic than raxu on which the voice does not rest. An adverb may also 
 be emphasized by coming at the end of a sentence. 
 
 3 [1903 a] Chrys. himself, in a very long comment, gives the impression that 
 he takes &vwdei> to mean "from heaven" and that Nicodemus materialises it: 
 " Why draggest thou," he says, apostrophizing Nicodemus, "the meaning (\6yov) 
 down to earth? This kind of birth is above such birth-pangs (avuirepos iari tCjv 
 tolovtwv wdii/icv ovtos 6 t6kos)." Origen's comment ad toe. is lost, but elsewhere 
 he contrasts yefvarai avwdev with e/c tui> koltu yiverai in such a way as to demonstrate 
 that he took the former to mean " born from above.'" See 2573. 
 
 15 
 
[1904] ADVERBS 
 
 heaven" and that Nicodemus is intended to be regarded as misunder- 
 standing Him, or affecting to misunderstand Him, as though He 
 meant "a second time." 
 
 [1904] "Avwdev occurs in N.T. thirteen times. Apart from the 
 passage under consideration, it never means "from the beginning" 
 except thrice, and then it is joined to "again" or "knowing," 
 or "ascertaining 1 ." The Thesaurus shews that (i) it often means 
 " from the beginning " in connexion with the tracing of a genealogy, 
 describing one's ancestry or early life, or a friendship of long date, 
 relating ancient history, or speaking of ancient times, or repeating a 
 story over again from the beginning ; and Suicer shews that dviodev 
 is thus used in connexion with WAiv, and with i£ ap^?;?. On the 
 other hand (2) it means "from above " in a spiritual sense in Jn hi. 
 31 "he that cometh from above" xix. 11 "given to thee from above." 
 In the Epistle of St James, it refers once to "every perfect gift" as 
 being "f?-om above, coming down from the Father of lights... By his 
 will (fiov\r)9eis) he brought us forth (txTreKvrjcrev) by the word of truth " 
 — thus connecting "from above" with spiritual generation: in two 
 other passages St James connects it with " the wisdom that is from 
 above 2 ." In the LXX, it always has a local meaning, except once 
 (where it is joined with 7rd\iv) in the Wisdom of Solomon 3 . 
 
 [1905] Apart from LXX and N.T. usage, the rendering "from 
 above " in the Dialogue with Nicodemus is also favoured by the 
 probability that the intention is to fix the attention not on being born 
 " over again " — which might be a change for the worse — but upon 
 being born into a higher life. This latter thought is approximated to 
 by Philo, in various phrases including avw#ei/, when he speaks of 
 "him that is inspired from above" (in connexion with those who 
 avoid the life of the flesh and live to God) and of those who 
 "philosophize, so to speak, from above*." Commenting, also, on the 
 calling up of Moses to Mount Sinai, he describes it as "a second 
 
 1 Lk. i. 3, Acts xxvi. 5, Gal. iv. 9. 
 
 s [1904rt] Jas i. 17 — 18, iii. 15, 17. In Jn xix. 23 Ik tQu dvuideu v<f>a.vr6s, its 
 meaning is " from above." 
 
 3 [1904/'] Wisd. xix. 6. In Is. xlv. 8 "Let the heaven drop from abo ve, " 
 II. n Ezra says, "This is a commandment to the angels that they shall drop 
 righteousness." 
 
 4 [1905a] Philo i. 482 6 KaTairievadeis dvoodev, i. 264 oi avwdiv irws (pikoao- 
 ipriaavres, comp. ii. 442 rod dtiov trvfvfxaTos owep avutitv KaTairvevadtv eicipKrjtraTO 
 rfj \pi'XV> '• 49^ c * 7r ' ovpavov Karairvtvadds &vw0tv. 
 
 l6 
 
ADVERBS [1907] 
 
 birth better than the first," where there is "no mother, but only 
 a father, the Father of all 1 ." 
 
 [1906] The use of "from above'" to describe a heavenly ideal is 
 common in Jewish literature. St Paul speaks of " Jerusalem that is 
 above'''' as being free, in contrast with "the present Jerusalem," which 
 is in bondage 2 . The Apocalypse speaks of "the ne?c> Jerusalem," 
 but adds "coming down from heaven*." Somewhat similarly St Paul 
 says that the first man is of the earth, earthy, "the second man 
 is from heaven'." In the one case "new" and in the other "second" 
 might be used to paraphrase the expression "from heaven " ; and 
 similarly "generate anew" might be a substituted paraphrase for 
 " generate from heaven." But to say that a man on earth must be 
 " born from above" implies that he must also be "born ane7C," so 
 that the former has the advantage of being ampler. The former is 
 also more in accordance with Johannine doctrine, as well as with 
 Johannine use of avwOev. Again, all the Synoptists say that Jesus 
 asked the Jews whether " the baptism of John " was "from heaven or 
 from men 5 "; and "from heaven" in such a context might naturally 
 be expressed by the Aramaic "from above." Moreover, the very 
 beginning of the Bible describes, shortly after the motion of the 
 Spirit on the waters, a separation between " the waters and the 
 waters," or, as the Jerusalem Targum has it, " the waters above and 
 the waters below." 
 
 [1907] Thus, from several points of view, if a Rabbi came 
 to consult Jesus about baptism, and if our Lord wished to insist on 
 the need of a spiritual, and not a mere external, regeneration, we 
 might expect that the phrase "from above" would occur in His 
 mention of the operation of the Spirit. If Christ had said " new " 
 or "anew" this could not have been misunderstood; for the 
 Aramaic " new," like the Greek KaivoV, cannot be confused with 
 "above." Moreover if the evangelist had desired to represent in 
 Greek the mere thought of " regeneration " he might have used 
 avayewav. But " regenerate " — unless qualified as it is in St Peter's 
 
 1 [1905(5] Philo (on Ex. xxiv. 16) P. A. 502 " Sursum autem vocatio prophetae 
 secunda est nativitas (sive regeneratio) priore melior... cuius non est mater; sed 
 pater solus, qui etiam universorum." 
 
 2 Gal. iv. 25 — 6. 
 
 3 Rev. xxi. 2. 4 1 Cor. xv. 47. 
 5 Mk xi. 30, Mt. xxi. 25, Lk. xx. 4. 
 
 A. VI. 17 
 
[1908] ADVERBS 
 
 Epistle 1 — does not necessarily convey the notion of a birth unto 
 righteousness. Nicodemus was familiar with the doctrine of " new 
 birth " applied to baptized proselytes, and he knew that very often it 
 did not mean much 2 . But this doctrine of Jesus about " birth from 
 above," he dimly felt, meant a great deal more, some fundamental 
 change — what he would call a "miraculous" change. He therefore 
 asks what the miracle is to be: "It cannot be that a man is to 
 be literally born a second time £ ?" 
 
 [1908] In deciding this question we have to consider, not only 
 what our Lord may have said, but also how the author of the Fourth 
 Gospel, — in view of the misunderstandings of what He had said as 
 
 1 [1907 a] i Pet. i. 3 " the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who 
 regenerated us into a living hope... ," i. 23 "having been regenerated, not from 
 corruptible seed, but from incorruptible; through the word of God, living and abiding." 
 Comp. Jas i. 18 " he brought us forth by the word of truth" 
 
 - [1907(5] On our Lord's opinion of some proselytes, see Mt. xxiii. 15 "twofold 
 a child of hell." 
 
 3 [1907 c] There are naturally some cases where dvwdev is ambiguous, e.g. 
 Clem. Anc. Horn. ch. 14 tt)v eKKXrjo-iav ov vvv elvai dWa dvwdev. This (as in the 
 
 above quoted Gal. iv. 25 — 6 rfj vvv i) be dvw) might conceivably mean, "that 
 
 the Church is not of this present age ([tov] vvv [alwvos]), but from heaven?' But 
 such an ellipsis is unlikely ; and the contrast is more probably between or vvv 
 [ttpu/tov], "not now [for the first time] " (ov vvv irpwTov being freq. in Greek) and 
 " but from the beginning." Epict. i. 13. 3 " Wilt thou not bear with thy brother, 
 who hath Zeus for his ancestor, [and who] (wairep, ? 6s wo-irep) as a son, is born from 
 the same seed and from the same celestial sowing (ttjs aiTr)s dvwdev KaTa^oXijs) " 
 might be, but less probably, "initial sowing." Philo ii. 141 i)pxa.t.o\6yriffev dvwdev 
 aps&fievos ttjs tov wavrbs yevecrews probably means "beginning from the beginning 
 [i.e. the First Cause] " — having in mind the ancient Greek saying " Let us begin 
 from Zeus" and " hi the beginning God created." He proceeds to say that the 
 fust object was to set forth "the Father and Maker of the world," and then man 
 obeying the Maker's laws. 
 
 [1907 d] Justin Martyr Tryph. 63 dvwdev /ecu btd yaarpos dvdpwTreias (describing 
 the birth of Christ) appears to mean ["by the action of the Sp'u'it] from above and 
 through a mortal womb " (although the Psalm (ex. 3) from which Justin has 
 quoted refers to birth (LXX) "before the morning star "). Comp. Kpiphanius 
 (Ilaer. Ii. ch. 6, vol. i. 428) about Mark as "nowhere saying [that] the birth 
 [was] from above (ovba.fj.ov dvwdev \iybjv tt)v y^vvrjo-iv) " and (ib.) ttjs dvwdev 
 KaTaywyrjs deov \6yov. So Simon Magus (Ilippol., ed. Duncker, vi. 18) 
 peaks of the generating principle as H from above." In Artemid. Oneirocr.'x. 13, 
 yewao-Oai dvwdev undoubtedly means " to be born again" but there the meaning 
 is prepared for in a peculiar way by the context : " If a man dreams that he is 
 
 being bom this indicates that he will have a son in every respect like himself : 
 
 for thus he might seem to be born over again (ovtw yap [av] dvwOev avrbs bo^ete 
 yevvdffOai)." And there it should be noted that the meaning is not "to be born into 
 a better life," but " to be born over again in every respect like what one was before." 
 
 I8 
 
ADVERBS [1910] 
 
 it had been recorded by the Synoptists — might think it right to 
 recast the saying. Christ's doctrine, " Become ye as one of these 
 little ones," might be in danger of being misunderstood literally 
 (somewhat after the manner of Nicodemus) as encouraging childish- 
 ness rather than childlikeness (i Cor. xiv. 20). It is in accordance 
 with the Johannine method that John should illustrate this danger 
 by exhibiting a great Rabbi as actually misunderstanding the doctrine 
 at its first utterance. It is also in accordance with his method of 
 " narrowing down " (2290) that he should first introduce a general 
 term "from above" including as St James says "every perfect gift" 
 that comes from heaven — and then define it as a spiritual influence. 
 The saying of Christ, that a proselyte, — who was compared by the 
 Jews to a new-born child, — might be made a " child of hell" is of 
 itself sufficient to explain why it might be necessary to emphasize 
 the truth that regeneration must be "from above." See 2573. 
 
 09) 3 A P ti see nyn (1915 (i) foil.) 
 
 (7) 'Ernfc 
 
 [1909] This adverb is used (1718) more frequently by John than 
 by the Synoptists all together. In Jn it never describes the nearness 
 of a person except in vi. 19, "they behold Jesus walking on [the 
 edge of?] the sea and becoming near the boat (eyyus tov ttXolov 
 yivo/jLevov)." 'Eyyt£w, "draw near," is frequent in O.T. and N.T., 
 and the Synoptists sometimes (Luke most frequently) apply it to 
 Christ, but John never uses it. Under " Prepositions " (2340 — 6) 
 reasons will be given for thinking that John regards the Lord as 
 " on the sea shore" and not as advancing over the sea to the boat. 
 If so, he may use yn'o'/xcroi' cyyu's as we speak of the coast "coming 
 into view " when we ourselves " come " within sight of it. The words 
 and their context are susceptible of a spiritual interpretation. At 
 first the disciples, in terror and unbelief, beheld (1598) Jesus 
 "becoming near." Then (vi. 21) "they willed to receive him"; 
 and " straightway the boat was on the land." That is to say, 
 like the Ephesians, "they that had been far off were made to 
 be near 1 ." 
 
 (S) Eyeeooc and eyOyc 
 
 [1910] Mark (1693) never uses ev8eu>s, but he uses evOvs abun- 
 dantly. Matthew uses both pretty often. Luke uses evOews and 
 ■xapaxpfjixa pretty often, but ev8v<; only once. John uses evdiws 
 
 1 Eph. ii. 13 iifj.ds o'i irore oVres fiaKpav iyevr)6riT€ iyyvs. 
 
 19 2 — 2 
 
[1911] ADVERBS 
 
 thrice, and tiOvs thrice. Whenever Matthew uses eiOvs (7), it is 
 found in the parallel Mark. The question arises whether John 
 distinguishes between the two words, or whether he uses now one, 
 now another, as Matthew appears to do, because he uses now one, 
 and now another, source of evangelic tradition. 
 
 [1911] As to evdvs "straightway," Phrynichus blames "many" 
 who used ev6v ("straight away") instead of it. Hesychius says 
 about it simply Ev9vs, avriov, which indicates that he took it to 
 mean "straight opposite [to]," "coming face to face with." He also 
 
 says, Eu#v, 6p8ov, OLTrXovv, eyyus, rrapa-^prjp.a, ets evOelar. Bonitz's 
 
 Index shews that Aristotle uses evOvs of place, before uVd, 7rpd?, /acto. 
 to mean "immediately under," etc. and also to mean "to take the 
 first instance that presents itself," i.e. "for example," which it also 
 means in Epictet. i. 19. 2 (where Schweigh. refers to many other 
 passages) 1 . In LXX, as a rendering of Hebrew, evOvs occurs only 
 
 in Gen. XV. 4 kou evdvs (pwvrj Kvptov iyivi.ro irpos avrov, xxiv. 45 evQvs 
 Pe/?£KKa i£e7ropev€TO, xxxviii. 29 kol evOvs i£y\8tv 6 aSeA.<£os avrov, where 
 
 the Hebrew has "behold!" Similarly, parallel to Mk xiv. 43 "and 
 straightway... there, cometh up," Matthew and Luke have "behold !" 
 A Scholiast on Thucydides, who describes the Plataeans as "killing 
 their prisoners straightway" says that here ev8v<; does not mean 
 immediately but offhand and without reflection 2 , which is probably 
 implied. Very likely Mark's evflus may be a loose rendering of 
 an original Semitic " behold 3 ." But even without any such hypo- 
 thesis the above-mentioned variety of meanings suffices to explain 
 why Luke almost always avoids the word. 
 
 [1912] Mark's non-use of evOlw; does not require explanation in 
 view of the fact that it is never used by Aeschylus and (though thrice 
 by Sophocles 4 ) only once by Euripides in a fragment 5 , whereas both 
 writers use evdv<; frequently. In the Indices of Epictetus and Lucian, 
 tv6v<> is found, but not tvOiw;, and Bonitz's Index to Aristotle shews 
 a very great preponderance of the former. The LXX Concordance 
 
 1 EvOius in Polyb. xii. 5. 6 is perh. similarly used. 
 
 - [1911 n] Step]), on Time. ii. 5 oi 5<: nXarcufJs aviKTeivav rods ae<5pas 
 
 evOvs, " Hie enim schol. ait evdvs non esse irapaxpv^ a i se( l e!;ev$eia<; et acTKoirws. " 
 
 3 [1911/'] It has been shewn (352—3) that "behold" in Mt.-Lk. freq. 
 corresponds to some verb of "coming to" in Mk. This maybe illustrated by 
 Ilesych. eiiOvs, avriov i.e. "coming to meet." 
 
 4 Sophocles also uses evdvs 7 times. 
 
 5 Fragm. 31. The I gypt. Pap. Indices have tvQtus (11), eidfc (2). 
 
 20 
 
ADVERBS [1914] 
 
 gives eufle'ws as only once representing a Hebrew word. It occurs 
 almost exclusively in Maccabees (especially book II). The insertion 
 of such a word (whether in Hebrew or in Greek) might depend on 
 the author's taste. The Jerusalem Targum has (Gen. i. 3) "And 
 immediately there was light," and in Susannah (29) LXX and 
 Theodotion severally insert cu^'ws and omit it. Aquila uses the 
 word (Micah ii. 7) to mean "straightforwardly," "righteously." 
 
 [1913] In N.T., apart from the Gospels, evOews is used frequently 
 in the Acts, and occasionally elsewhere 1 . Eu#vs occurs nowhere 
 except in Acts x. 16 "Now this was done thrice and straightway 
 (tvdvs) the vessel was taken up to the heaven." This occurs in a 
 Petrine passage describing the vision that resulted in the conversion 
 of Cornelius. But when Luke rewrites this in Peter's speech, he 
 alters the expression (Acts xi. 10) "Now this was done thrice and 
 everything was caught up again to the heaven" 2 ." This indicates (1) 
 that ev9vs might be expected in a Petrine Gospel such as Mark's 
 is generally believed to be, (2) that Luke, although occasionally 
 retaining it as part of an old document, might be expected to alter 
 it in re-editing or re-writing. 
 
 [1914] Coming to Johannine usage we find (a) ewfle'ws in the 
 Cure at the Pool of Bethsaida, the Walking on the Water, and the 
 Denial of Peter 3 . Only as to the last of these ("immediately the 
 cock crew") does the word occur in the parallel Synoptic narrative — 
 where Mark has evOvs but many authorities omit it, Matthew has 
 ei$vs but many authorities read ei'6*ew5, Luke has irapaxprjiJ.a*. 
 (/;) EvBvs occurs in Jn xiii. 30 — 2, "Having taken the sop, therefore, 
 he [Judas] went out straightway (i$rj\0ev eiOvs). Now it was night. 
 When, therefore, he went out, Jesus saith, (lit.) Now was the Son of 
 man glorified and God was glorified in him. And God will glorify 
 him in himself and will straightivay glorify (ev#us Sofacrei) him," 
 xix. 34 " One of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear and there 
 
 1 Acts ix. 18, 20, 34, xii. 10, xvi. 10, xvii. 10, 14, xxi. 30, xxii. 29, Gal. i. 16, 
 Jas i. 24, 3 Jn 14, Rev. iv. 2. 
 
 2 [1913 n] Actsx. 16 evdvs dve\r]/j.(pdr] to (TKevos, xi. 10 avecnrdadr] tt&\iv a iravra. 
 Also the Hebraic use of "all. ..not" is altered from x. 14 ovdevore tcpa-yov irdv 
 KOLvbv into xi. 8 koivov oiibiwoTe eicrrjXOev els to ard/xa fiov. 
 
 3 Jn v. 9, vi. 21, xviii. 27. 
 
 4 [1914 d\ Mk xiv. 72, Mt. xxvi. 74, Lk. xxii. 60 7rapaxpwta Zti \ix\ovvtos 
 avrov. In the Walking on the Water, Mk vi. 50 6 5e evdvs iXdXijaev, Mt. xiv. 27 
 evdvs oe i\d\7]aev are not quite parallel to Jn vi. 21 tvdeus eyivero to irXolov.., 
 
 21 
 
[1915] ADVERBS 
 
 came out straightivay (i$r}\8ev evOvs) blood and water." Comparing 
 (a) and (b) we must bear in mind that the Cure at the Pool has 
 many points of resemblance with the Cure of the Paralytic where 
 Mark and Luke describe the act as immediate, and that the Walking 
 on the Water is recorded by Mark and Matthew — so that we may 
 say generally that the instances in (a) have some connexion with 
 Synoptic narrative while those in (b) have not. In xiii. 30 the 
 emphasis rests on evOvs, which comes at the end of the sentence 
 (" rushed forth straightivay "). In xix. 34 the voice passes on from 
 €vOv<; to at/xa ko.1 uSojp, but the adverb indicates that the " fountain " 
 against "sin and uncleanness " (Zech. xiii. 1) was foreordained and 
 ready to gush forth. Having regard to the rarity of the adverb we 
 seem justified in thinking that, in xiii. 30 — 2, John deliberately 
 uses it twice in one and the same passage concerning the " im- 
 mediate" departure of Judas and the "immediate" advent of 
 "glory," the former being subordinate to the latter. 
 
 [1915] The conclusion is, that ev9v<; and evBew; are used in 
 N.T., not indiscriminately but with reference to meaning, or because 
 they occur in documents of this or that style. The only instance 
 of evOvs in Luke is in the passage about the house without foundation 
 (vi. 49) "against which the river burst and straightivay it fell in 
 a heap (evOv<; o-weVecre)," where Matthew (vii. 27) differs. It is 
 quite intelligible that Luke might be willing to apply to the fall 
 of a house an adverb that he might think unfit to apply to the 
 actions of Christ. 
 
 (e) Nyn and &pfi 
 
 [1915 (i)] In 1719, vvv was shewn to mean "at the present time" 
 (as distinct from apri "at this moment") and to imply, in Jn, a 
 contrast for the most part between the present and the past. This 
 is its general use in the Epistles, especially in contrasting the past 
 darkness with the present light ("ye were once darkness but now are 
 ye light in the Lord 1 "). But the interpretation of kolI vvv in xi. 22 
 (1719) is complicated by the use of the phrase in LXX, where "and 
 notv" is often connected with the thought "And now in this crisis, 
 or, at this stage, or, in these difficulties, or, in conclusion, what is 
 
 1 [1915 (i) a] Eph. v. 8 tJtc yap vore ctk6tos vvv 8Z (puis ev KvpLtp- Of course in 
 special phrases such as 6 vvv aiwv, 77 vvv ' \(povaa\i)tJ. etc. the contrast is with the 
 future as in 2 Pet. iii. 7, rS (the only instances of vvv in that Epistle). But in 
 1 I'et. i. 12, ii. 10 (bis), ii. 25, and iii. 21, the contrast is with the past. 
 
 22 
 
ADVERBS [1915 (iii)] 
 
 to be done ? " e.g. " And now, Israel, what doth the Lord thy God 
 require from thee?" "And now, Lord, what wait I for? My hope 
 is in thee 1 ?" So Peter, after reproaching the Jews for crucifying 
 Christ, says, "And 7iow, brethren, I know that in ignorance ye did 
 it," where the underlying thought appears to be, u And now, what is 
 to be done? Acknowledge your past ignorance 2 ." 
 
 [1915 (ii)] In 2 Thess. ii. 5 — 6, the words "Remember ye not 
 that while I was still with you I used to say these things to you," 
 come after a prediction about " the man of lawlessness " and before 
 the words "And ?ww ye know that which hindereth (ko.1 vvv to Kar^ov 
 otSaTe)," where Lightfoot doubtfully inclines to the logical meaning 
 (" Well, then, ye know") and says "this usage is particularly noticeable 
 with 018a following." But he suggests alternatively "and as to the 
 present time ye know what it is that restraineth " — -a transposition like 
 that in Jn iv. 18 "for thou hast had five husbands, and he whom thou 
 now hast (ko.1 vvv ov e^eis) is not thy husband*." 
 
 [1915 (iii)] These facts indicate that koI vvv, especially in an 
 author like John, prone to transposition and asyndeton, will 
 
 1 [1915 (i) ^] Deut. x. 12, Ps. xxxix. 7, see Gesen. 774 a quoting Gen. iii. 22 
 and many other instances. The LXX regularly represents the phrase by /cat vvv, 
 and it is extremely frequent, e.g. 2 S. vii. 28 (sim. 1 Chr. xvii. 26) "And now, 
 
 Lord God, thou art God, and thy words are truth now therefore, let it 
 
 please thee," where it might almost be translated " And in conclusion." It 
 suggests (1) the conclusion of a prayer, (2) a logical or inferential conclusion. 
 
 - [1915 (i) (] Acts iii. 17. In Acts this is often ko.1 to. vvv, e.g. Acts iv. 29 
 " And noiv (k. to. vvv), Lord, look on their threats," v. 38 " and now {k. [to.] vvv) 
 
 1 say unto you, desist- from these men." In Acts xx. 22 — 32 ko.1 vvv Idov, "and 
 now behold," is used first temporally ("and at the present time. ..I go bound "), 
 then with a suggestion of logical meaning (" and now behold I know ") and lastly 
 /cat rd vvv (" and now [in conclusion} I commend you to the Lord "). 
 
 3 [1915 (ii) a] Theoretically, the italicised words might begin a new sentence in 
 asyndeton, " The one that thou hast even now is not thy husband." But, even in 
 an author so prone to asyndeton as Jn, this is hardly possible. Col. i. 24 Xvv 
 Xalpu iv rot's Tra.drnj.aaLv, coming at the beginning of a paragraph and after a 
 description of the wealth of God's mercy, is explained by Lightfoot "Now, when 
 I see the full extent of God's mercy...," no doubt correctly. But he adds "compare 
 also 2 Cor. vii. 9 vvv xo.ipco, oi<x otl k.t.X., where again there is no connecting 
 particle." This, however, instead of coming at the beginning of a paragraph, is 
 printed by W.H. thus, 2 Cor. vii. 7 — 9, " ...dicrre p.e /.iclWov xapijvai. otl el ko.1 
 i\vwriaa v/xds iv rrj iirLffToX-r], ov fi€Tafxi\of.caf el ko.1 /j.€Tefie\6fJ.riv, ( r /3\e'7rw n otl r) 
 
 iTTLCTToXri eKeivT] el /cat 7rpos (lipav i\vw7]0-ev i'/J-as,) vvv x^P 03 " It might be printed 
 
 otherwise. But, however printed, the context indicates that vvv may be temporal. 
 According to W. H., the meaning would naturally be, "I may perhaps have 
 repented once, I rejoice now." 
 
 23 
 
[1915 (iv)] ADVERBS 
 
 depend, for its meaning, on its context. As in 2 Thess. ii. 5, there 
 is a reference to past teaching in 1 Jn ii. 18, TraiSCa, la-xarq wpa Icniv, 
 
 K(iL Ka8o)s ?/k-oucraTe on 'Avrr^ptcrTo? ep^erat, koj. vvv avTi^pLdroi 7roA.Aot 
 
 yeyovacnv, the meaning is " even as ye heard the prediction in past 
 time, even so (kcli) at the present time (vvv) it is fulfilled 1 ." There is 
 also some reference to past time in 1 Jn ii. 27 — 8, but the passage 
 comes at the end of a section enjoining "[steadfast] abiding," and ko.1 
 vvv appears to be logically or rhetorically (not temporally) used, 
 "But as (ok) his anointing teacheth you... and even as (koL KaOws) 
 it taught you, abide in it. And now [in conclusion, 1 repeat] abide 
 in it 2 ." 
 
 [1915 (iv)] There is again a reference to past teaching in 
 1 Jn iv. 3, "and this is the [spirit] of antichrist, [as to] which ye 
 have heard that ' it cometh,' and now (koi vvv) in the world it is 
 already (rj8rrj)V' Without any addition, ko.1 vvv might have meant 
 "and [accordingly] at the present time [in accordance with past 
 prediction] " : but by adding rjSrj, the writer shews that he intends 
 the meaning to be " before expectation." In 2 Jn 5 there is 
 reference to past teaching, " I have found some of thy children 
 walking in the truth, even as we received commandment from the 
 Father, and now (ko.1 vvv) I ask thee... that we love one another," where 
 the temporal and the logical meaning seem combined, but the latter 
 predominates. These are all the instances of /cat vvv in the Johan- 
 nine Epistles. Nw, apart from ko.1, occurs in them only once, 
 1 Jn iii. 2 "beloved, now are we children of God." This follows 
 the mention of what the Father's love has done for us, and precedes 
 the mention of what we shall become ; and vvv suggests the thought 
 of the isthmus between the past and the future. 
 
 1 [1915 (iii) a] But probably there is a double force in ko.1 so that it also 
 suggests "even now is antichrist here." 
 
 - [1915 (iii) b~\ 1 Jn ii. 27—8 ...teal kcl6ws i 5L5ai;ev v/j.as fiivere iv avT$. Kal vvv, 
 reKvia, /xivere. Theoretically the first fj.ivere might be indicative; but this would 
 be against Jn's general use of the word, and does not seem necessitated by to 
 Xp/ff/ua /xivei iv itfuv in the context: for the meaning may be "the Spirit of Christ 
 abides in you. ..take care to abide in Him." M^et iv v/xiv is an instance of the 
 rule laudando praecipere: the Spirit abideth in you — if ye are Christ's. The 
 repetition of "abide'' imperatively is like Phil. iv. 4, "Rejoice in the Lord alway, 
 again / will say Rejoice. 11 
 
 '■'■ [1915 (iv),/] A^ above, Kai vvv might theoretically mean "even now" and is 
 perhaps intended to suggest "even now," which, however, is made clearer by 
 adding ijor}. 
 
 24 
 

 UNIVEI 
 
 ADVERBS " [1915 (vi)] 
 
 [1915 (v)] Returning to xi. 22 xa\ vvv oT8a on oaa av alrqoig... 
 we find that many mss. and versions insert d\\d before /cat so as 
 to make the meaning (A.V.) " But... even now..f R.V. has "And 
 even now," apparently taking kuX vvv as "even now" and supplying 
 " and " for the sake of English connexion. This indicates a tendency 
 to take the phrase according to classical Greek idiom. But, having 
 regard to the fact that /cat vvv or koX vvv ISov, with oTSa, occurs in 
 N.T. elsewhere Hebraically (1915 (i) c) or with a suggestion of 
 Hebraic meaning, and that koX vvv in the Johannine Epistles is 
 frequent and sometimes Hebraic, we are justified in preferring a 
 Hebraic meaning here, like that of the Psalmist {"And now Lord, 
 for what do I wait ? "). In that case the meaning will be : " Lord, 
 if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. [But it pleased 
 thee to be absent although we sent unto thee.] And now [Lord, 
 what am I to say? My hope is still in theei\ I know that whatsoever 
 thou shalt ask God, God will give it to thee." This is confirmed 
 by two other passages where koL vvv seems to introduce a last word, 
 before the speaker passes from one subject to another : xiv. 29 — 30 
 " And now I have said [it] to you before it come to pass... No longer 
 shall I speak much with you," xvii. 4 — 5 "I have glorified thee on 
 the earth having perfected the work... and now glorify thou me." 
 
 [1915 (vi)] "Apn is distinguished from vvv as "this moment" 
 is distinguished from "this present time 1 ." "Apn is practically 
 (485 b) not a LXX word, and aV apn does not occur in LXX 
 at all. "The present [dispensation]," to vvv, might be said to date 
 "from the moment ( a V apn) " when the revelation of the Father 
 had been consummated through the Son 2 , and Jesus says to the 
 disciples, "From this moment ye know him (the Father)." "Ecus dpn 
 is used in v. 17 ("My Father worketh (A.V.) hitherto") of that 
 which has been going on "up to the prese?it moment" and is still 
 continuing, as also in 1 Jn ii. 9 (" is in the darkness up to this very 
 
 1 [1915 (vi) a] Comp. Mt. xxvi. 64 air' apn 6\pea6e "ye shall see from this 
 moment the Son of man seated," with Lk. xxii. 69 diro tov vvv 8e earai, which 
 presents much less difficulty than Mt. because airb tov vvv might mean "from the 
 [beginning of the all but] present [age]." Lk. xii. 52 again uses d7ro tov vvv, 
 which Jn never uses (except in viii. n interpol.). 
 
 2 xiv. 7 air dpri yivwo-neTe clvt6v. Wit' dpTi also occurs in xiii. 19. "From 
 this moment I tell you before it come to pass." On air' apTi, or airapTi, 
 "exactly," see 485 c. 
 
[1916] ADVERBS 
 
 moment 1 "). In the following, a distinction (though a slight one) is 
 drawn between dprt and iw, xiii. 33 — 7, "And as I said to the Jews 
 ' Where I go ye cannot come,' to you also I say [it]— for the moment 
 (kcu v/juv Aeyw apn)." Then, in answer to Peter's question, "Whither 
 goest thou?" Jesus replies "Where I go, thou canst not follow 
 me at the present time (vvv), but shalt follow later (vo-Tipov)." 
 The saying is only " for the moment," but He gradually reveals to 
 the disciples that the absence will be more than momentary extending 
 through "the present time." Peter, in his second question, is not 
 content with the promise that he shall follow "later," nor even 
 " at the present time (vvv)." "Why," he asks, "can I not follow thee 
 at this moment (apri) ? 2 " 
 
 (£) OfTOK 
 
 [1916] "Thus" in iv. 6 (R.V.) "Jesus... being wearied u-e*o- 
 7riaKw?) . . . sat thus (outws) by the well," is scarcely intelligible. But 
 R. V. marg. says " or, as he was." In classical Greek, ovtw; is often 
 used of something that happens before circumstances have time to 
 alter, e.g. of a speaker "departing thus" i.e. without another word, 
 of an assailant "departing thus," i.e. without suffering in return. 
 Similar to these is " I cannot answer thus," i.e. offhand. So here 
 the meaning is, "he sat down/2/.y/ as he was, being thoroughly tired 
 out." Probably Chrysostom is right in suggesting that the adverb 
 calls attention to the " sitting " as being in some sense casual, 
 although it was divinely foreordained to bring about the conversion 
 of the Samaritans. It also suggests, as he says, the indifference of 
 the true King to the external symbols of royalty 15 . Almost all the 
 
 1 [1915 (vi)/>] R.V., in both, "even until mm," but in xvi. 24 R.V. and A.V. 
 have " Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name." Comp. 1 Cor. iv. 13, viii. 7, 
 xv. 6. In v. 17 the meaning appears to be, "My Father worketh [on the sabbath 
 from the beginning\ until this moment, and I accordingly work [such acts as my 
 
 Father prescribes on the sabbath]." 
 
 2 [1915 (vi) c\ Comp. 1 Cor. xiii. 12 "For we see for the moment (<5(/m) through 
 a mirror." When Jn uses vvv thus, he adds fxev in xvi. 22 "and ye now indeed 
 (vvv niv) have sorrow... but I will see you again and your joy none shall take from 
 you." 
 
 [1915 (vi)*/] ~Svv, in Mk xiii. 19, Mt. xxiv. 21 £ws tov vvv, Mk xv. 32, 
 Mt. xxvii. 42, KarajiaTU) vvv airb t. (rravpov, and also in Mt. xxvi. 65, xxvii. 4/; has 
 almost the meaning of dprt, "at this moment." But in Mk x. 30 vvv ev r. Kaipf 
 tovt<p it means "at the present time." These are all the instances in Mk-Mt. 
 In I.k. (1719) it is much more frequent. 
 
 8 [1916(7] Chrys. ad loc.'. Aia tov kottov (Cramer t6wov) ij KaOedpa ydyove, 5ta 
 
 26 
 
ADVERBS [1917 (i)] 
 
 Latin mss. omit the adverb, and SS has " sat [so] that he might rest 
 himself," perhaps confusing kottluw and Ko-n-d^w. 
 
 [1917] This passage prepares us for the true reading, and 
 rendering, in xiii. 25 (R.V.) " He [the beloved disciple] leaning 
 back, as he was (outws), on Jesus' breast, saith unto him, ' Lord, 
 who is it ? ' " where many authorities omit ovtuos. The meaning 
 probably is, that the beloved disciple, instead of turning round to 
 speak to Jesus (which would have attracted attention) merely "leaned 
 back a little, keeping the same attitude." But further, if any reader 
 asked, " How could any of the disciples venture to ask such a 
 question?" this adverb suggested an answer, "He did it, at Peter's 
 suggestion, and being so close to the Lord, 'just as he was,' i.e. 
 unpremcditatedly '." 
 
 (??) TTapphci'a 
 
 [1917 (i)] liapprja-ia, " speaking all [one's mind]," " freedom of 
 speech," when applied to language, may be opposed — as Lightfoot 
 (on Col. ii. 15) says — "either (1) to 'fear,' as John vii. 13, Acts iv. 
 29, or (2) to 'ambiguity, reserve,' Job. xi. 14, xvi. 25, 29; but 
 ' misgiving, apprehension ' in some form or other seems to be always 
 the correlative idea. Hence when it is transferred from words to 
 actions, it appears always to retain the idea of 'confidence, bold- 
 ness '....The idea of publicity may sometimes be connected with the 
 word as a secondary notion, e.g. in Joh. vii. 4, where iv irappyjaiu. 
 elvaL ' to assume a bold attitude ' is opposed to iv KpvwT^ ttouIv 
 (comp. xviii. 20) ; but it does not displace the primary sense." 
 Hence, in Col. ii. 15 (R-V.) "he made a shew of them openly (iv 
 ■jrappTquia) triumphing over them in it [i.e. in the cross]," Lightf. 
 substitutes "boldly" and (earlier) paraphrases thus, "As a mighty 
 
 t6 Kav/xa, 5i& to wepifxelvaL tovs fxadrjT&s- ydei fxev yap <rv/j.l37](r6fia>ov to kclto, roi's 
 HafiapeiTas, ovk sttI tovto 5e fjXde Trpor)yov[xtvu>s...'ri 64 eaTiv, Ovtws; Ovk ewi 
 6p6vov, (prjalf, ovk sttI irpoo~Kecpd\aiov, d\X' awXuis ko.1 ws ^tuxc £tt e5d<povs. 
 
 1 [1917 a] Ovrus in the Gospels almost always looks backward, " thus as has 
 been said above.'" It seldom means "thus, namely, as follotvs" {e.g. Mt. i. 18, 
 vi. 9, Jn xxi. 1). Mk iv. 26 Oiirws €<ttiv i] ft. t. deov u>s..., "the kingdom of heaven 
 is even so as [if] a man were to cast seed...," is exceptional in the Gospels and 
 also non-classical. Oiirws wore occurs in Jn iii. 16, Acts xiv. 1, but, in Jn with 
 indie, in Acts with infin. : Jn's construction, unique in N.T. (2203), is frequent in 
 classical Greek and is one of many proofs that the passage was not regarded by 
 the evangelist as a saying of the Lord, but was written as an evangelistic comment 
 in a somewhat less Hebraic style (see Preface, p. viii). 
 
 27 
 
[1917 (ii)] ADVERBS 
 
 conqueror He displayed these His fallen enemies to an astonished 
 world, leading them in triumph on His cross." 
 
 [1917 (ii)] This view of the adverbial 7ro.pprjaria, namely, that it 
 " appears always to retain the idea of ' confidence, boldness,' " is 
 confirmed by its use as a noun in the rest of N.T. where R.V. 
 regularly renders it to that effect 1 . Moreover in the Johannine 
 Epistle it occurs four times, and always to express the "boldness," 
 or "confidence" of Christ's followers, confidence "toward God," or 
 confidence as to future judgment 2 . Even in xi. 14 "then therefore 
 Jesus said to them without ?nore reserve (Trappqo-La) 'Lazarus is dead,'" 
 the meaning may be, that Jesus, having prepared His disciples for 
 the disclosure, revealed the truth without (as Lightfoot says above) 
 " misgiving or apprehension " lest their faith should fail : for a 
 teacher will not use -n-app-qcria unless he is "confident" as regards his 
 pupils, that they are ready to receive the teaching. This, too, may 
 explain xvi. 25 "I will announce to you without reserve concerning 
 the Father"; and xvi. 29 "Behold, now speakest thou without 
 reserve" i.e. frankly, and fully, and clearly. 
 
 [1917 (iii)] There remain two questions as to Trapprja-La in the 
 Gospels. (1) Why do Matthew and Luke omit it in the single 
 passage where Mark employs it (viii. 32) "and he [i.e. Christ] was 
 boldly (R.V. openly) speaking the word"? (2) What is the reason 
 for the abundant use of the word in the Johannine Gospel and 
 Epistle where it occurs thirteen times, as often as in all the rest of 
 N.T. together (setting aside the Acts, where it occurs five times) ? 
 Out of these may arise a third question. (3) Is there any reason 
 for thinking that this is one of the many passages where John 
 intervenes to explain something in Mark that is omitted by Matthew 
 and Luke ? 
 
 [1917 (iv)] In order to understand Mark's use of " boldly " 
 (Mk viii. 32 "boldly speaking the word") we must bear in mind that 
 Christ's prediction of His own crucifixion was the prediction of a 
 Gospel that proved " to the Jews a stumbling block and to the 
 
 1 [1917 (ii) a] See Acts iv. 13, 29, 31, xxviii. 31, 2 Cor. iii. 12 (where A.V. 
 has "plainness of speech," but R.V. "boldness of speech"), vii. 4 etc. Sim. 
 Acts ii. 29 (R.V.) "I may say unto you freely" (A.V.) "let ma freely speak unto 
 you." 
 
 - 1 Jn ii. 28, iii. 21, iv. 17, v. 14. 
 
 28 
 
ADVERBS [1917 (v)] 
 
 Gentiles foolishness'." The shock caused by "the word" to the 
 disciples, and especially to Peter, shews that their Master had need 
 of "boldness" (not for Himself in facing death, but for them in 
 predicting it — boldness in believing that He would ultimately carry 
 them with Him and that they would not abandon Him irrevocably). 
 But still, to readers that did not realise the circumstances of the 
 moment, Mark's brief phrase might seem obscure. Some might 
 take Trapp-qcria as "openly" i.e. to all the world. These might say 
 that the phrase was misplaced, since Christ was addressing the 
 disciples alone. Others might take the view of the Sinaitic Syrian, 
 the Arabic Diatessaron, and the Codex Bobbiensis, which agree (1252) 
 in making the words part of a prediction of Christ, that, after death, 
 He would rise again and speak the word " openly" or "until confidence " 
 to the disciples. Matthew and Luke — perhaps for one of these two 
 reasons — omit the phrase. Clearly this tradition called for explana- 
 tion on the part of any writer of a fourth authoritative Gospel. 
 
 [1917 (v)] Moreover, at the close of the first century, there were 
 special reasons why attention should be called — among Christians, 
 among non-Christian Jews, and among Greeks — to -n-apprjaia as the 
 mark of a great Teacher of divine truth. It was a time of religious 
 impostures. Many people made money out of them. St Paul lays 
 great stress on his own "sincerity/' "confidence," and "boldness" 
 (or "frankness"). He is not one (he says) of those who "water 
 down" the Gospel for gain 2 . Speaking from another point of view, 
 there was a " veil," he adds, on the face of Moses proclaiming 
 the Law (which was unto death) but not on the face of Christian 
 teachers : " Having such a hope [as I have above described] we use 
 great boldness — and not as Moses used to put the veil on his face 3 ." 
 
 1 [1917 (iv) a] Comp. Rom. i. 16 "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it 
 is Ike power of God... to the Jew first and also to the Greek" with i Cor. i. 23 — 4 
 " IVe preach Christ crucified — unto Jews a stumbling block and unto Gentiles 
 foolishness, but, unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the 
 po'uer of God and [Christ] the wisdom of God." 
 
 - 2 Cor. ii. 17 "watering down" or "making merchandise" Kair-qXevovres, 
 "of sincerity" e£ eLXcKpiveias, iii. 4 "confidence," ireTroidTjcriv. 
 
 3 [1917 (v) a] 2 Cor. iii. 12 ^xoeres ovv tomxvtt)v eKirlda iroWrj irapp-qala 
 
 Xpw/xe&a Comp. 2 Cor. vii. 4, Eph. iii. 12, vi. 19, Phil. i. 20, Col. ii. 15, 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 13, Philem. 8, Heb. iii. 6, iv. 16, x. 19, 35; also Acts xx. 20 ovdef 
 vweaT€L\dn7]i/, at first limited by tQv crufxtpepovrup, but repeated xx. 27 ov yap 
 VTrecTTei\djjL7]v rod p.-q dvayyelXat. irdcrav rr\v $ov\r\v r. deov v/xiv, where "all the 
 counsel of God" implies the fore-ordained sacrifice on the cross, which was, to 
 some, "foolishness" or "a stumbling block." 
 
 29 
 
[1917 (vi)] ADVERBS 
 
 Philo, describing the freedom of speech used by Abraham toward 
 God, classes Trapp-qo-ia among "admirable virtues," the sign of a 
 "good conscience," and quotes with approval the saying of a comic 
 poet that a slave may be a storehouse of knowledge and yet "a 
 rascal" unless you "give him a spice of -appyo-La. 1 ." Arrian, too, 
 publishing the sayings of Epictetus, just as he had heard them, 
 describes them as intended to be " notes to remind himself of the 
 teacher's understanding and Trapprja-icL 1 ." Epictetus had been a 
 slave ; but his teaching is permeated with a twofold Trapprjcrla. He is 
 free from all misgivings as to the truth of his teaching ; he is also 
 absolutely free from personal fear as to the consequences of uttering 
 what he thinks right to utter. 
 
 [1917 (vi)] These facts may well explain the prominence given 
 by John to Christ's irappyjaia, and the different circumstances in 
 which he mentions it — so as to suggest that traditions might vary 
 about it and yet might be reconciled. For example, Christ's brethren 
 urge Him, indirectly, to "take a bold attitude 21 " He refuses, at the 
 moment, because His " hour was not yet come." Soon afterwards, 
 the multitude is represented as " not speaking boldly through fear of 
 the Jews," and this timid multitude testifies to Christ, "Behold, he 
 speaketh boldly*." Later on, it is said that Jesus would no longer 
 walk and teach "boldly" among the Jews; but this is almost 
 immediately followed by His final journey to Jerusalem and to 
 death 5 . To the Jews, who say " If thou art the Christ, tell us boldly." 
 He replies in a dark saying ; yet to the High Priest He protests 
 " I have spoken boldly to the world 6 ." The impression left by these 
 
 1 [1917 (v) b~\ Philo i. 473 u>s koX to ku(xlkov dipevbu>s /xdWov t) ku>/j.ikus eipTJadai 
 
 OOKtlv — 
 
 " Av wdvd' 6 bovXos riavxa-tw iJ-avddvri 
 Hovr/pos forai' /xerabibov Trapprjcrias. 
 
 - [1917 (v)r] Letter of Arrian to Gellius, introducing the Dissertations: Ovre 
 avviypa\j/a eyw tovs 'EviKTrjTov Xbyovs ovtus ottuis &v tls cn<yy pdipeie to. rotaOra* 
 ovre e^-qveyKa eh dvdpwirovs avrbs bs ye ovbe avyypd\pcu <pr]fxi. baa be tjkovov avrov 
 Xiyovros, ravra avra eTreipddr]i', avrols ovoflavin a>s olbv re rjv ypa\pdp.evos, VTrofxvi)- 
 fiaTa eh varepov e/j-avrcp bia<pvXdi;ai. rfjs exelvov Otavoias xai Trapprjaias. Aristotle 
 I-'.th. Xic. iv. 3. 2$ says that the p.eyaX6\pvxos must be irappr]<naaTiKbs. Plutarch 
 ii. 68 — 9 (Dc Adulatore 27 — 9) has a long discussion on the good and bad Trapprjcria 
 rather inclining against Trapprjulav kwik^v k. Xbyovs rpaxeh. 
 
 '■'■ See 1917 (i), where Lightf. is quoted as rendering Jn vii. 4 "assume a bold 
 attitud 
 
 4 vii. 13, 26. "' xi. 54. \ii. 1. (i x. 24, xviii. 20. 
 
 30 
 
 
ADVERBS [1918] 
 
 superficial inconsistencies is that our Lord always spoke "boldly," 
 but not always "clearly," — at least not clearly to the disciples 
 because the disciples were "not able to bear 1 " the clear and full 
 doctrine as yet. They also suggest a probability that John may 
 have had in view misunderstandings arising from the doctrine of 
 Mark, that "Jesus taught the word boldly." Perhaps, too, he may 
 have had before him a version of Mark like that of SS, namely, 
 that Christ would "rise from the dead and speak the word boldly" \ 
 for this is very much like the Johannine tradition, " The hour 
 cometh when I shall no longer speak to you in proverbs, but shall 
 announce to you without reserve concerning the Father 2 ." 
 
 (6) Ta'xgion 
 
 [1918] Ta'xeiov (or Ta'xiov) occurs in xiii. 27 and xx. 4 "the other 
 disciple ran on before more quickly than Peter." In N.T., it occurs 
 also in Hebrews xiii. 19 (R.V.) "that I may be the sootier restored to 
 you," and xiii. 23 "if he come (R.V.) shortly" but the meaning is 
 doubtful (2554(f) 3 . John also uses both jayi^% and ra^i' 4 . We 
 pass to the important passage xiii. 270 7roiets iroirja-ov rdx^ov. R.V. 
 renders this " do quickly, ." But it seems reasonable to suppose that 
 John does not use the form ra^etov exactly like Taboos and rayy. 
 And it makes excellent sense to suppose that Judas, who had not been 
 originally purposing to commit the act of treachery on that flight, zvas 
 
 - [1917 (vi) a] xvi. 25. It is interesting to note that the disciples, in spite of 
 this warning as to the need of waiting for the irappijala, persist in affirming that 
 Christ already speaks (xvi. 29) iv irapp-qoiq.. It should be added that wapprjaia occurs 
 (5 or 6) in Canon. LXX, but only once (cf. Oxf. Cone. Lev. xxvi. 13 "upright," 
 i.e. "with head erect as freemen") with correct Heb. equiv. Levy iv. 103 — 4 
 says that the Hebraized word may mean (1) "publicly," (2) " mit lauter 
 Stimme. " 
 
 3 [1918 a] The Thesaurus indicates that ddacrov is frequently used (perhaps 
 meaning Oclttov \6yov, "quicker than one can tell it") for "at once," as it is also 
 in the second book of Maccabees iv. 31, v. 21, xiv. 11 (A.V. "in all haste," "no 
 sooner but"), and t6.x<-ov is also thus used, though not nearly so many instances are 
 given. Tdxioj' occurs thus in Diod. Sic. and in Plut. Moral. 2400 "Unless you 
 turn the stranger (gevtiXhiov) out of doors at once, he will corrupt you." It belongs 
 to vernacular Creek and is condemned by Phrynichus. 
 
 4 [1918/'] xi. 29 raxv, xi. 31 rax^ws. In Wisd. xiii. 9, t&xiov means "sooner." 
 In 1 Mace. ii. 40 iav.../j.ri Tro\efir)<no/j.ev ...vvv rdxiov Tjfids oXeOpevaovcnv, the context 
 allows the meaning to be (1) "quickly" or (2) "all the more quickly," "sooner." 
 In view of general usage, (2) is probable. In N.T. , rax^ws, iv rax^, and rax", 
 are all in use, so that there was no lack of words to express "quickly" regularly 
 and accurately. On the variation in xi. 29 — 31, see 2554 />. 
 
 31 
 
[1919] ANACOLUTHON 
 
 driven to quicker action by the words of Jesus. In other words, Judas 
 had in his mind some thought similar to that expressed by the chief 
 priests in Mark and Matthew 1 , "Not on the feast day lest there be 
 an uproar of the people": but he was forced to do the deed "more 
 quickly? And so it was brought about that the crucifixion took 
 place on the Day of the Passover. Luke omits all mention of this 
 original intention to delay the arrest of Christ. If John's ra.yf.iov 
 refers to it, it is one of the many instances where Luke omits and 
 John intervenes. 
 
 Anacoluthon 
 
 (i) Generally 
 
 [1919] Anacoluthon 3 (lit. " not following") is the name given to 
 a grammatical irregularity wherein, though the meaning may be clear, 
 what is expected to follow does not folloiv, e.g. xv. 6 (R.V.) " If a man 
 (tis) abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch and is withered ; 
 and they gather them (aura) \i.e, the branches] and cast them into the 
 fire." Here " as a branch " is simile, but " he is withered " is 
 metaphor: and strictly "them" ought to be "it." Moreover, the 
 following words tell only what becomes of the branches, not what 
 becomes of the man. But the sentence is clear in meaning and calls 
 for little comment. 
 
 (ii) The Subject suspended 
 
 [1920] Several instances may be illustrated by the Hebrew 
 custom of putting the subject at the beginning of a sentence, and 
 then repeating it as a pronoun, e.g. " The Lord, he is God." So in 
 Revelation (iii. 12, 21) "//t'that conquereth (6 vikuv) " is followed by 
 " 1 will make him a pillar," " I will give to him." Somewhat more 
 correct Greek is given earlier (Rev. ii. 7, 17) "To him that con- 
 quereth I will give to him." Compare Josh. ix. 12 ovtol ol uprot... 
 
 icfnj)Stdo-dq/j.€i' olvtovs, Ps. ciii. 1 5 avOpwrros, were! ^opro? at r)fxepaL 
 
 avrov etc. The following passages may be thus explained. 
 
 1 Mk \iv. 2, Mt. xxvi. 5. 
 
 - The Johannine passages quoted under this head are i. 15, v. 44. vi. 39, 
 vii. 38, 49, viii. 53, x. 35 — 6, xii. 35, xiii. 29, xv. 2 — 6, xvii. 2, xx. 18, x\i. 12: 
 a]-. 1 i |n ii. 24 -. 
 
 3- 1 
 
ANACOLUTHON [1923] 
 
 [1921] vi. 39 "...In order that all (irav) that he hath given me 
 I may lose none of it"; vii. 38 "He that believeth (6 7rio-T€iW)... 
 rivers... shall flow from his belly"; x. 35 — 6 " Whom (ov) the Father 
 sanctified... do ye say [to him] 'Thou blasphemest,'" best explained 
 as [eVeti'o?] ov (in the light of the preceding passages); xv. 2 — 5 
 " Every branch (KXrj/ia) in me that beareth not fruit he taketh it 
 away... and every [one] (Tray) that beareth fruit he purifieth it... he 
 that abideih ( 6 /xeVwv) in me and I in him, he (ovto<;) beareth much 
 fruit" ; xvii. 2 "In order that all (ttuv) that thou hast given to him 
 [i.e. to the Son] he [I.e. the Son] should give to them eternal life." 
 Here, grammatically, the meaning would be that the Son should give 
 all that He has received frotn the Father, namely, eternal life. But the 
 meaning is that He should give eternal life to the whole Church 
 (comp. vi. 39 above). See 2422. 
 
 [1922] 1 Jn ii. 24 — 7 " Ye (emph.) (v/ms)» that which ye heard 
 from the beginning — let it abide in you. If in you there abide that 
 which ye heard from the beginning, ye also shall abide in the Son and 
 [in] the Father... And ye (emph.) (vfuls), the chrism that ye received 
 from him abideth in you, and ye have no need that any man should 
 be teaching you." Here the writer emphasizes those that confess 
 Christ ("ye") as opposed to those previously mentioned, who deny 
 Him ; and he may perhaps have begun by intending to say, " Ye, 
 abide ye (imperat.) in the Son." But he deviates into saying, 
 "let the chrism of the Son abide in you and then ye will abide 
 in the Son." 
 
 Having regard to the instances in which the initial word {"he that 
 conquereth," "he that believeth," "ye") is clearly nominative, it is 
 probable that it is nominative in other cases, where the ambiguous 
 neuter {-nS.v, KXrj^a) would allow the accusative. 
 
 (iii) Digression 
 
 [1923] In the last section, anacoluthon sprang from the desire to 
 insist and repeat. More often it digresses, e.g. in v. 44 " How can ye 
 (emph.) believe, receiving glory from one another and— the glory that 
 [is] from the only God ye seek not}" The writer perhaps began with 
 the intention of saying "receiving from one another... and not 
 seeking from God," and then strayed away into the definite statement 
 "ye seek not." In viii. 53 "Art thou greater than our father 
 Abraham, who (o<ms) is dead? and the prophets are dead; whom 
 
 A. vi. 33 3 
 
[1924] ANACOLUTHON 
 
 makest thou thyself?," as in the preceding example, the writer 
 deviates from the logical continuation of the interrogative ("and 
 greater than the prophets who are dead ? ") into a more brief and 
 trenchant affirmation. This deviation is favoured by oo-ris d-n-Wavev, 
 which may imply an affirmation, " Now he (ox, for he) is dead," so as 
 to prepare the way for a second affirmation. In xii. 35 " Walk as 
 (w?) (2201) ye have the light, lest (u*a ^77) the darkness overtake you 
 and [then]— he that walketh in the darkness knoweth not where he 
 goeth," the speaker digresses from a particular consequence ("and lest 
 ye walk in darkness and know not ") into a general one ("and then — 
 what is the consequence ? A man that walketh in darkness, knoweth 
 not whither he goeth "). 
 
 [1924] It was pointed out above (1919) that after mentioning 
 " branch " John speaks of " them " instead of " it." So he has 
 vii. 49 "This multitude that understandeth not the Law — [they] are 
 [all] accursed (i-n-dpaTOL tlo-iv)," which is more emphatic than the 
 singular. Also xxi. 12" No one (ouSci's) of the disciples was bold 
 enough to question him, ' Who art thou ? ' knowing \all of them] 
 (ttSoTes) that it was the Lord," though ungrammatical, is brief and 
 clear 1 . 
 
 (iv) Impressionism 
 
 [1925] Anacoluthon in John often proceeds from his desire to 
 let readers receive impressions of things in his pages as they receive 
 them in nature, that is to say, first seeing the most striking of a 
 group of things at a glance, and then gradually taking in the rest. 
 In order to effect this, he may even deliberately let pass a statement 
 that he afterwards corrects, as where he says that Jesus was baptizing 
 and then adds that He Himself did not baptize, but His disciples 
 did (iii. 22, iv. 1 — 2). Take, for example, the way in which he 
 introduces (a) the Baptist's testimony concerning the coming of 
 Christ, (/>) Mary Magdalene's testimony concerning the Resurrection : 
 
 (tf) i. 15 (W.H. marg.) Ioiai^s /naprvpel irf.pl avrov Kal KtKpayev 
 \eywv, Ol'to? tjv ov airov 6 oTriaw (or, ...bi> elirov OTTiau}) fiov 
 
 1 [1924 <?] Clear so far as concerns the pi. But the participle, in such a 
 context, suggests two interpretations, (1) "They dicl not dare to question though 
 they knew it was he," (2) "They did not dare to question because they knew it 
 was he." The Latin ha^ the pi. part., SS has "because they were believing that 
 it was he," (Walton) "since they knew that it was our Lord." See 2273. 
 
 34 
 
ANACOLUTHON [1927] 
 
 €p^oju.evo?...(W.H. txt \4ytav — outos rjv 6 elirtuv — 'O oVio-w...) 1 , 
 (/>) XX. 1 8 €px eTat Mapta/x. T] Ma.y8aA.T7rr/ dyye'/XAovcra T019 pa^r/Tais 
 ort 'Ewpa/ca tov Kvpiov kolI Tavra £t7T€V avrrj. 
 
 [1926] In the latter (b), W.H. give no various reading: but 
 A.V. follows a text (similar to that of D and some Latin versions) 
 that creates regularity by turning both clauses into reported speech, 
 " M. M. came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord and 
 [that] he had spoken these things unto her 2 ." The true text, however, 
 gives prominence to the all-important words — all-important, at least, 
 for the speaker — " I have seen the Lord." Then there is a drop into 
 reported speech ("and he said these things to her," where "these 
 things " refers to the message just recorded by the evangelist and 
 therefore not repeated). Some might have expected on to be omitted 
 before the direct speech, and to be inserted before the reported 
 speech. But the writer reverses this, apparently using on (2189 — 90) 
 to mean "these were her words," as the sign of quotation, (lit.) 
 "There cometh M. M. bringing tidings to the disciples that" — 
 i.e. these were her words — " ' / have seen the Lord'' — and [that] 
 he said these things to her 3 ." 
 
 [1927] In the earlier passage (a) above quoted (1925), we should 
 expect outos r/v ov (or, -n-epl ov) elwov otl — if the meaning had been 
 "This was he [concerning] whom I said that he that cometh after 
 me is become before me 4 ." Consequently we are led to another 
 
 1 [1925 a] The best MSS. give o eiwuv : but (1) SS (Burk.) supports W.H. 
 marg., (2) the scribal difference turns on a point on which the evidence of B is 
 comparatively weak, (3) the sequence of similar syllables, oemoooniCO), may 
 have been a special cause of confusion (1961, 2650 — 2). 
 
 2 [1926 a] SS has "and the things which he revealed to her she said to them," 
 D /cat a eiirev avrij e/j.ijvvaei' (d adnuntiauit) avrois, a "et haec dixit illi," b " et 
 haec dixit," /"et omnia quae dixit ei," e "et quae dixit ei manifestavit." Con- 
 fusion may have arisen from reading T&yT&eineN as T&Y TAAeiTTeN anc l from 
 supplying what then seemed needful to complete the sentence. 
 
 3 [1926/'] Jn xiii. -29 "For some thought... that Jesus was saying {\eyei) to 
 him [i.e. to Judas Iscariot] Buy (1176^00-01') the things we have need of for the 
 feast, or, that he should give something to the poor (17 tois tttwxois 'iva ti 5o))" is 
 perhaps hardly to be called anacoluthon, but rather variation, the sentence passing 
 from a direct to an indirect imperative. The change seems to be one from definite- 
 ness to vagueness, from the authoritative "buy" to "instructions about giving" — ■ 
 as to which Judas, the (Jn xii. 6) " thief," might be supposed to need a stimulus 
 (" do (1918) more quickly "). 
 
 4 [1927 a] For the construction of the relative, comp. Jn viii. 54 6v v/xeh \4yere 
 6'rt . . . 
 
 35 3—2 
 
[1928] APPOSITION 
 
 rendering, "This was he that I said" i.e. "meant, or contemplated, 
 [in all my utterances] " ; and the following words (" He that cometh ") 
 may be a new statement of the Baptist's. Later on, the Baptist uses 
 a preposition, thus "This is [he] in behalf of whom (or, about whom) 
 I said, 'After me cometh a man... V " It is reasonable to infer that in 
 the first passage the Baptist must not be supposed to mean "/'« behalf 
 of whom (or, about whom)" for else the evangelist would not have 
 varied the phrase 2 . On the whole we may believe that, at some cost 
 of immediate clearness of detail, the evangelist wishes to put briefly 
 before his readers the essence of the Baptist's testimony as being, 
 from the beginning, twofold : — in the first place one of prediction, or 
 anticipation, in the next place one of subordination. Then he can 
 fill in the details afterwards. The first point is that when Jesus first 
 appeared, the Baptist at once testified "This was he that I said" the 
 second, " After me yet before me." Later on, he connects the two. 
 At first he places them side by side without connexion 3 . 
 
 AORLST, see Index 
 Apodosis, see Index 
 Apposition 
 
 (i) With proper names 
 
 [1928] Apposition is a method of expressing the phrase "that is 
 to say" without writing it, by "apposing " a second word with a case- 
 ending to a first word with the same case-ending, as in xi. 16 
 "Thomas, [that is to sa)'] he that is called Didymus," xx. 24 
 " Thomas, [that is to say] one of the Twelve, [that is to say] he 
 that is called Didymus," vi. 71 "This man (i.e. Judas Iscariot) was 
 
 1 Jn i. 30 ovrds eariv vvip oO iyu: dirov, 'Qiricrw fiov Zpxcrai dvrip 
 
 2 [1927/'] See 2360, 2369 — 70. Supposing virip to be used for 7rep/ "concern- 
 ing," as it is used by many authors, the argument will still hold good, that John 
 would not have used virtp ov to denote exactly the same thing as 6v. 
 
 3 [1927 c] After all attempts at explanation it remains difficult to understand 
 how any writer — and particularly one that shews himself so subtle and careful 
 occasionally in distinguishing various shades of meaning — could here express 
 himself with such extraordinary irregularity, abruptness, and obscurity. Possibly 
 we have here (1892) some clause of ancient tradition inserted with the result of 
 dislocating the context. The expression "This was he that I said" — if it means 
 longing expectation — is similar to that in The Gospel of the Hebrews (1042) "Fill 
 mi, in omnibus Prophetis exspectabam te." 
 
 36 
 
APPOSITION [1929] 
 
 destined to deliver him up [(?) that is to say] one of the Twelve," xii. 4 
 "Judas Iscariot, [that is to say] one of his disciples, he that was 
 destined to deliver him up." This construction conduces to brevity 
 and force, but sometimes to obscurity as is seen in the above queried 
 
 vi. 7 1 outos yap e/xeAAej' 7rapaSi86Vai avrov — eis e« twv Sajoe/ca. This 
 
 may be mere apposition, but it may be an abbreviation of eh u>v, 
 "being one," understood to mean "though he was one 1 ." There 
 is also serious ambiguity in xix. 25 " His mother and the sister of 
 his mother Mary the [daughter] of Clopas and Mary Magdalene." 
 Here it is impossible to tell, from the text apart from other evidence, 
 whether " the sister of his mother " is " Mary the [daughter] of 
 Clopas," or whether they are two persons. 
 
 (ii) In subdivisions 
 
 [1929] Apposition is used after a broad statement to define its 
 parts. But the first of the instances given below is not a certain 
 one. John is referring to a previous statement that Jesus " found 
 in the Temple those that 7vere selling oxen and sheep and doves." 
 What follows may mean that Jesus (ii. 15) "drove all [of them] out 
 of the Temple, both sheep and oxen (-n-aiTas i$e(3a\ev £k tov Upov, rd 
 tc TrpofSaTa kuI rovs /5das)," i.e. the men and what they sold, indicating 
 that "all [of them]" included their belongings, "sheep sellers and 
 ox sellers, sheep and oxen." And this may be his meaning in using 
 t€ — which occurs nowhere else in this Gospel without introducing 
 a verb 2 . If so, the instance is appositional. Whatever the con- 
 
 1 [1928 a] Comp. Mk xiv. 10 'I. 'Ick. 6 els rCov dwSeKa, Mt. xxvi. 14 els r. du>5. 
 6 Xeyo/xevos I. 'I., Lk, xxii. 3 'lovdav rbv KaKovfxevov 'Io~k., 8vra £k tov dpt^/xoO r. 
 8u>8., where Mk's 6 is very curious. Later on, W.H. read Mk xiv. 43 [6] 'I., eZs r. 
 d., parall. to Mt. xxvi. 47 'I. ets r. 5., Lk. xxii. 47 6 \ey6/jLei>os 'I. eh t. d. In 
 illiterate Gk MSS. of the 1st cent., and w being interchanged, the participle Cov 
 might be written and confused with the article. 
 
 [1928/'] It is worth noting that, in John, these appositional constructions have 
 to do with (a) Thomas, who was called by some {Enc.Bib. 5058) "Judas Thomas," 
 with [b) Judas Iscariot, and (xiv. 22) with (c) "Judas not Iscariot " — all of whom 
 might need to be distinguished. But in other cases also, when the Gospels came 
 to be read publicly in sections, there would be found great use and clearness in 
 appositional clauses defining personality at the beginning of a section, even though 
 such a clause had been already inserted on the introduction of the character in an 
 earlier section. 
 
 2 [1929 a] Te occurs only thrice in this Gospel. The other two instances are 
 iv. 42 rrj re yvvaiKi gXe-yoi', vi. 18 77 re 6a.\ao-o-a...8ieyeipero. In ii. 15, A.V. has 
 "drove them all out... and the sheep," R.V. "cast all out of the temple, both the 
 
 37 
 
[1930] APPOSITION 
 
 struction may be, the context implies that Jesus dealt in one way 
 with the sellers of cattle and in another with the sellers of doves. 
 
 [1930] R.V., in v. 3 "A multitude of them that were sick 
 (ao-OevovvTwv), blind, halt," apparently takes the participle as parallel 
 to the adjectives : but A.V. takes the participle as including them, 
 "a multitude of impotent folk," i.e. "of blind, halt...." In that case, 
 the construction is appositional. If the former had been intended, 
 we should have expected ao-devrjs the adjective, or some more special 
 word, such as " paralysed." Other instances of subdivisional 
 apposition in v. 29, ix. 2, xx. 12, are perfectly clear, and call for 
 no comment. 
 
 (iii) Explaining, or defining (not with Participle) 
 
 [1931] In most of the following instances the writer places at or 
 near the end of a sentence some word or clause introduced without 
 any preparatory or connecting word. Often, but not always, the clause 
 is of such a nature that we may suppose it to have taken the hearer 
 by surprise, when first uttered. They may be conveniently grouped 
 here together and discussed severally in 1932 — 6. 
 
 i. 45 "[Him of] whom Moses... wrote... we have found — Jesus, 
 son of Joseph, the [Jesus] of Nazareth " ; iii. 13 " He that came down 
 from heaven — the Son of man " ; vi. 4 " Now there was at hand the 
 passover, the feast of the Jeivs" (W.H. enclose "at...passover " in 
 half brackets. Contrast vii. 2) ; vi. 27 " For him did the Father seal 
 — God" ; vi. 71 "For this [man] was destined to deliver him up — 
 one of the Twelve," i.e. probably " though he was one of the Twelve " ; 
 vii. 2 " Now there was at hand the [great] feast of the Jews — the 
 feast of tabernacles" ; viii. 40 "Ye seek to kill me — (lit.) a man, [me] 
 who have spoken to you the truth " (As to this difficult passage, see 
 1934 — 5) ; viii. 41 " We have one Father — God" ; viii. 44 " Ye are of 
 [your] father — the devil" ; ix. 13, 18 "They bring him (avrov) to the 
 Pharisees — (lit.) the once blind [man] (tov irore tv<j>\ov) "..." they 
 called his parents — [the parents of] him that had recovered sight 1 " ; 
 
 sheep and the oxen." The former is hardly in accordance with Gk idiom. But 
 in a writer so fond of parenthesis as Jn the meaning might be, " He cast them all 
 OUl uf the temple — both the sheep and the oxen [did he cast out] — and he poured 
 forth the money...." 
 
 1 [1931 a] Toi/s yoveis avrou tov avapXtyavTos (which, strictly, belongs to 
 apposition with participle, 1937), would mean, in ordinary Greek, " the parents 
 of the very man that had recovered sight." But this, besides making poor sense, 
 
 38 
 
APPOSITION [1932] 
 
 xii. 46 "I (emph.), light, have come into the world " ; xiii. 14 "If 
 I (emph.), then, have washed your feet — the lord and the teacher...'''' 
 (perhaps generally interpreted as meaning "though I am the lord 
 and the teacher,'' but possibly meaning " because I am the lord and 
 the teacher," if Christ assumed that it was the attribute of the lord to 
 sen.ie); xiv. 16, 26 "And another Paraclete shall he give to you. ..the 
 Spirit of truth," " But the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit... he shall teach 
 you"; xv. 26 "But when the Paraclete shall have come — the Spirit 
 of truth" \ xvii. 3 "That they may grow in the knowledge of thee, 
 the only true God, and of him whom thou sentest — Jesus Christ " ; 
 xviii. 16 "The other disciple — the friend (6 yrwo-Tos) of the high 
 priest...." 
 
 [1932] Some of the above quoted instances require little 
 comment, being simply short and sudden ways of implying "that 
 is to say," or "and it is," e.g. (viii. 41, 44) "We have one Father 
 [and it is] God," "Ye are of [your] father [and it is] the devil." 
 Similarly xviii. 16, "the other disciple, the friend..." means "now 
 he was, as I said before, a friend of the high priest, and hence he was 
 able to introduce Peter into the house." In i. 45, "son of Joseph" 
 and "of Nazareth" are mentioned abruptly by Philip as attributes 
 of the Messiah, whom he accepts. In i. 46 and vi. 42 the same 
 phrases are mentioned as reasons for rejection 1 . The abruptness 
 with which Philip obtrudes them (so to speak) on the learned 
 Nathanael (who is shocked by "Nazareth") may be intended 
 to illustrate Philip's character and faith. In iii. 13 the words 
 "coming down from heaven" followed, not by "the Son of God," 
 but by "the Son of man 2 ," stimulate the reader to think of what was 
 
 would be a rare Johannine usage. In the only Johannine instance of avros 6 
 applied to persons (xvi. 27) "The Father himself {avros yap 6 TraT-qp)," it means, 
 "of himself" (2374) — that is, unsolicited by me. These clauses ("the once 
 blind" etc.) are not needed for clearness. They suggest the reason for the " bring- 
 ing" and the "calling." More amply it might be expressed by "'Here,' said 
 they, ' is the man that was once blind,'' " or " full of astonishment at the cure 
 of the man that was once blind." 
 
 1 [1932 a] Also in vii. 42, " Nazareth " is (in effect) tacitly indicated as an 
 objection, by the mention of "Bethlehem" as the foreordained birthplace of the 
 Messiah. 
 
 2 [1932 1^] R.V. adds "which is in heaven": but this clause is not even placed 
 in the marg. by W.H., being absent from the best MSS. and from ancient quotations, 
 which stop short, omitting these words (W.H. ad loc). Probably a feeling of 
 abruptness and paradox originated the interpolation (if it is one). 
 
 39 
 
[1933] APPOSITION 
 
 meant by "heaven," and "coming down." In xiv. 16, 26, xv. 26, 
 emphasis is laid on the Paraclete, or Advocate, as not being one of 
 the ordinary kind — the kind that takes up a client's cause, good or 
 bad, and makes the best of it — but as being "holy" and — which is 
 twice repeated — "a Spirit of truth." 
 
 [1933] In the above quoted xii. 46 'T, light (eyw <£ws), have 
 come into the world," the appositional clause comes exceptionally 
 near the beginning of the sentence. It is not parallel to iii. 2 "From 
 God thou hast come a teacher 1 " because the emphasis in the former 
 lies on "/, light" but in the latter on "from God" (and the pronoun 
 "thou" is not expressed). It may mean, either, "I, though I am 
 and have been Light from the beginning, have come into this world 
 of darkness," or, "I, because I am Light, and because it is the mission 
 of Light to enlighten, have come into the world." The reader is 
 probably intended to thi?ik of both these meanings and to prefer the 
 latter, as being in harmony with the saying in the Prologue, "There 
 was the Light, the true Light, enlightening every human being — 
 coming [as it does continually] into the world." 
 
 [1934] In viii. 40, there is a very great difficulty fully appreciated 
 by Origen and Chrysostom, and by the translators of some Latin 
 versions. Our Lord is proving to the Jews that they are not true 
 children of Abraham : "If ye are children of Abraham, the deeds 
 of Abraham ye are doing (2078—9). But as it is ye are seeking 
 to kill me, (lit.) a human being (or man, avOpw-rrov), ivho have told you 
 the truth, which I heard from God"." On this Origen has frequent 
 comments, trying (2412 a) to explain the insertion of "human being" 
 on the ground that it refers to Christ's human nature, which alone 
 can be killed etc. 3 It is difficult to accept these explanations, and 
 Chrysostom dispenses with the need of them by dropping "human 
 being" thus: "Ye seek to kill me because (otl) I have told you the 
 truth." Also two Latin versions (ff and e) have "hominem qui 
 locutus est" ("a man that has" not "a man, me who have"). 
 Doubtless either Origen is right in thinking that "human being" has 
 some definite and emphatic meaning, or Chrysostom is right in 
 thinking that the text must he altered. 
 
 1 1935] But the text may be retained and may receive a very 
 natural and beautiful meaning if we suppose that our Lord assumed 
 
 1 'Awo dtou tkrfhvdas 5i5d<rKa.\os. 
 
 - Xf'<' 8i iyiTtlri fxe airoKTitvai, avOpuirov 6s ttjv dXrjt)fiaf i'puv \t\d\tjKa. 
 
 J ( Irig. Hue! ii- 2()i A, 298 B, 41,5 ];, and comp. 297 A B, 363 B. 
 
 40 
 
APPOSITION [1936J 
 
 a connexion, in the minds of those whom He was addressing, 
 
 between "Abraham" and "man" (in the sense of "mankind" or 
 
 "human being"), and also between "Abraham" and "truth," so that 
 
 Jesus might be understood to say "You say you are Abraham's 
 
 children ; but you do not act like him. He loved men and loved 
 
 God's truth. I am a man, and I am telling you God's truth, and 
 
 you are seeking to kill me." Philo (ii. 30) speaks of Abraham's u love 
 
 of man (<£iA.ai'#pw7n.'a)'" as being the natural accompaniment of his 
 
 piety. Abraham also is the first of Biblical characters to use the 
 
 words ''brethren " and "men " together in a passage in which he sets 
 
 a precedent for peace-making. His words and his deeds all suggest 
 
 "humanity," 4>L\av8pwj7ia. Again, the first mention of the word 
 
 " truth " in the Bible is connected with God's manifestation of His 
 
 "kindness and truth " to Abraham 2 . Moreover the statement (made 
 
 a little later on) that the Patriarch '•'■saw the day" of the Messiah 
 
 "and rejoiced 3 ," implies — if at least the Messiah is the ideal of 
 
 humanity— that Abraham was the friend of man as well as the friend 
 
 of God. These considerations indicate the meaning of part of 
 
 this obscure passage to be, "Ye profess to be the children of 
 
 Abraham the friend of man, and yet ye desire to kill a man." 
 
 [1936] On xvii. 3, "And this is life eternal, that they should 
 know thee, the only true God, and [him] whom thou sentest — 
 Jesus Christ," AVestcott (ad loc.) says, "(1) The use of the name 
 'Jesus Christ' by the Lord Himself at this time is in the highest 
 degree unlikely... (2)... 'the only true God '...recalls 'the true God' 
 (1 Jn v. 20) and is not like any other phrase used by the Lord, 
 (3) the clauses, while perfectly natural as explanations, are most 
 strange if they are taken as substantial parts of the actual prayer." 
 These arguments demonstrate that this is one of the many 4 passages 
 where evangelistic explanation of a Logion or utterance of the Lord 
 has made its way into the Logion itself. But what distinguishes this 
 from other cases is, that the saying not only retains the second 
 person, but is also addressed to God. The Epistle says (1 Jn v. 20) 
 "...that we should know the true [One] and be in the true [One] in 
 
 1 [1935 a] Gen. xiii. 8 (Heb. and LXX) " Let there be no strife, I pray thee, 
 between me and thee... (lit. ) for men brethren [are] we" 8ti avOpwrroi dSeA^ot i]/xeis 
 etr/j.4i>. See Origen on Ps. lxii. 3 "a man" (2412a). 
 
 2 Gen. xxiv. 2-. 3 Jn viii. 56. 4 See Index, " Speech." 
 
 41 
 
[1937] APPOSITION 
 
 his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life." The 
 evangelist, or some editor, seems to have applied this definition of 
 " eternal life " to the explanation of words in the Prayer (xvii. 2) " that 
 all that thou hast given him — he may give to them eternal life " ; and, 
 in order to continue in the language of prayer, he perhaps changed 
 the "we" of the Epistle into "they," and "the true One" into "thee, 
 the only true God." 
 
 (iv) With Participle 
 
 [1937] Apposition between a noun and a participle with the 
 article may be ambiguous. For example, 6 xp<.o-t6s 6 kpyop.zvo'i 
 might mean either (1) "the Christ that is to come" (like Tennyson's 
 "the Christ that is to be"), or (2) "the Christ, He that is to come." 
 The former would not be true apposition but definition. Possibly 
 the first of the following instances may be of the nature of apposition, 
 although the participle has no article : i. 6 " There came into being 
 (eyevero) a man (avOpuyn-os) — [one] sent from God (a7reo-TaA.yu.eVos 7rapa. 
 deov)." Here (a) eyeVeTo seems to be contrasted with the previous 
 tjv in i. 1 ("In the beginning was {-qv) the Word"), (l>) aV0pw7ros, "a 
 man," with 6 Ao'yos, "the Word," and (possibly) (c) a7re0-TaA.yu.eVos 7rapa 
 "sent from the house of," with yv 7rpo's "was with " ("the Word was 
 with God "). 
 
 [1938] i. 18 "Only begotten, God, HE THAT IS in the bosom 
 of the Father — he (emph.) declared him (Movoyei'r/s, Qeo's, o con eis top 
 k6\ttov rov -7Tarp6<; — eVelVos i^rjytjcraTo)." The passage is one of great 
 difficulty: but it seems best to punctuate (differently from W. H.) as 
 though the Logos here receives three distinct titles. 'Ek€<Vos, i.e. 
 "He, and he alone," would be called an instance of apposition in 
 a classical author ; but, in John, it is the imitation of Hebrew idiom 
 for the purpose of emphasis (1920). In i. 29 "The lamb of God — (?) 
 he that taketh away the sin of the world (6 ap.ios row deov — 6 aipwv 
 ttjv d/xapTLav rov koV/xou)," theoretically the construction might be 
 non-appositional, "the lamb that," i.e. "among lambs offered in 
 sacrifice this is the one that taketh away sin." But practically the 
 evangelist's fondness for apposition almost decides that the con- 
 struction is appositional here, "the Lamb of God, He that taketh 
 away the sin of the world." 
 
 1 1939 1 ii. g "But the attendants knew — those that had drawn 
 
 42 
 
APPOSITION [1941] 
 
 the water (ot Se Zio.kovoi yjSeicrav, ot rfvTXrjKOTes to iJSojp)," probably 
 apposition, " — [that is to say, not exactly the attendants, but only] 
 the men that had drawn the water." Non-appositionally it would 
 mean (as W.H. punctuate) "the attendants that had drawn," i.e. 
 such of the attendants as had drawn. The meaning is the same 
 in both cases, but the way of putting things is different. If there 
 is apposition, it defines, or rather corrects, the larger and incorrect 
 statement ; and this corrective manner is a Johannine characteristic 
 (1925). Moreover, if the participle had been non-appositional it 
 would probably not have been separated from its noun by the 
 intervention of the verb. In iii. 29 " But the friend of the bride- 
 groom, [that is to say] he that standeth and hcarkeneth unto him 
 (6 §€ (/h'Aos tov vvfX(j>LOV, 6 earrjKws kcli clkovidv avrov)," the con- 
 struction is certainly appositional and W.H. punctuate it so. It 
 does not mean "That one of the bridegroom's friends whose task it 
 is to stand and hearken." "The 'friend' of the bridegroom" might 
 be expressed in modern English, "The bridegroom's 'best man." 
 In iv. 25, "I know that Messias cometh — he that is called Christ 
 (M. epxeTcu, 6 Xcyofxero'i XpicrTo's)," the appositional clause is clearly 
 an evangelistic addition. On iv. 23 "seeketh such — namely, those 
 that worship him [in such wise]," see 2398. 
 
 [1940] In iv. 26 "I am [Messiah] (2205)— he that talketh to 
 thee (eyaj elfii, 6 XaXCw aoi) " the appositional clause is added as a 
 repetition of a statement so startling that the Samaritan woman 
 might hardly believe that she heard it rightly : " When I say ' I,' 
 I mean 'he that talketh to thee.'" In vi. 14 "This is of a truth 
 the prophet (?) [he] that is to come into the world (6 irpo$r)Ty)<i (?) 
 6 epxo/Acvos)," W.H. place no comma after Trpo^rjT^. But John 
 has, previously (i. 21), "Art thou the prophet}" as though that were 
 a title by itself, familiar to the people ; and Matthew and Luke 
 both represent the Baptist as sending to say to Jesus (Mt. xi. 3, 
 Lk. vii. 19) "Art thou he that is to come (6 ep^o/Aevo?) ? " On the 
 whole, the evidence of Johannine usage (1635 — 9) favours apposition, 
 "the prophet, he that is to come." This applies also to xi. 27 
 "The Christ, the Son of God, he that is to come into the world." 
 
 [1941] In xi. 45 " Many therefore of (eV) the Jews, — those that 
 had come to Mary and beheld (jroWol ovv Ik tw 'IouScuW, 01 iX96i'Te<; 
 7rpo? ttjv Mapia/A Kal OeaadfxtvoL)...," A.V. has "the Jews which 
 came." R.V. inserts a comma, "the Jews, which came." Perhaps 
 neither version would be generally understood to mean what the 
 
 43 
 
[1942] APPOSITION 
 
 Greek means, namely, "Many therefore of the citizens of Jerusalem 1 
 — [by ' many,' I mean] those that had come to Mary' 1 .'" 
 
 [1942] The passage presents great difficulty. That John should 
 here use "Jews'" not in his usual hostile sense but apparently to 
 mean citizens of Jerusalem (as also seemingly in xi. 18, 19, 31 and 
 xii. 9) need not surprise us much : but the sense seems to demand, 
 after "Jews," the genitive t<3v eXdovrw, " Many therefore of the Jews 
 [I mean many] of those [Jews] that had come to Mary... believed, but 
 some of them [i.e. of those Jews that had come to Mary] gave informa- 
 tion to the Pharisees." This is actually the reading of D 3 . But 
 Origen, in a very long comment in which he mentions the phrase 
 "those that had come unto Mary" some seven or eight times, 
 gives express reasons why twv IkdovTw should not be read 4 . 
 Chrysostom does not commit himself to anything definite in his 
 brief statement, " Some marvelled ; but others went and carried word 
 to the Pharisees 3 ." 
 
 1 [1941 a] Jn uses 'lovSaioi to mean citizens of Jerusalem in xi. 18. 19, where 
 he says that, as Bethany was close to Jerusalem, " many of the Jews (apparently 
 meaning citizens) had come out to Martha and Mary to comfort them": so, too, 
 in xi. 31 and in xii. 9, "the common people therefore of the Jews." Elsewhere 
 (1702), the word "Jews," in Jn, is often almost synonymous with " Pharisees." 
 
 2 [1941 b\ " Many " is a relative term. It would probably mean a very much 
 larger number in (1) "A/any of the citizens died of the plague," than in (2) "Many 
 of the citizens used to come out to see us as our village was only a couple of miles 
 off." In xi. 45, there was need to define " many." It needed no definition in 
 xi. 18 — 19 where the context defined it. 
 
 [1941 r] The difficult question remains, Why does Jn repeat a phrase ("many 
 of the Jews") that meant one thing above (xi. 18—19), and would mean quite 
 a different thing here— unless he hastened to explain it ? The explanation may 
 be, that the original text presupposed some distinction between (xi. 19) those Jews 
 that "came to Martha and Mary," and those that came to (? SS "because of") 
 Mary at the tomb of Lazarus. Some may have remained in the house when Mary 
 went out of it. In that case, (1) "the Jews" in xi. 45 mean the Jews above 
 mentioned, who " came to Martha and Mary." (2) " Many of these [Jews] " had 
 " come to Mary " at the tomb of Lazarus and "believed." (3) " But some of these 
 [Jews]" did not come to Mary at the tomb, and these did not believe but gave 
 information to the Pharisees. 
 
 :; [1942rt I SS, quite altering the sentence, has " Many Jews thai came unto 
 Jesus because of Mary from that hour believed in [esus." 
 
 4 Orij4. Huet ii. 353. 
 
 '- [1942 /'] Cramer ad Joe, in an extract closely resembling Chrysostom's context, 
 has yfuonivov 5t toD Oav/xaTos, ol fxlv iirlvTevoav tQv deaffan^fui'. 01 5e iv^yyeiXav 
 to<s <J>ap«rcuots— which commits itself to the view that the informers had beheld 
 the miracle. 
 
 44 
 
APPOSITION [1944] 
 
 [1943] The impression left by Origen's long commentary is that 
 he distinguishes the Jews that followed Mary to the tomb from other 
 Jews that remained in the house. All had come to comfort the two 
 sisters ; but only those that followed Mary, in the belief that she was 
 going to weep at the tomb, were by her means drawn out of the 
 house so that they unexpectedly met Jesus and witnessed the miracle. 
 Concerning these one might say, in the words of SS, that " they 
 came unto Jesus because of Mary." Origen speaks of them as the 
 persons for whose sake the miracle was mainly wrought 1 . Perhaps 
 he regards them as a type of the Church or of the Jewish section 
 of it. 
 
 [1944] Justin Martyr and Irenaeus 2 regarded Rachel as the type 
 of the Church. Origen, according to an extract from Cramer, connects 
 Rachel with persons weeping for their children and not yet instructed 
 by the Resurrection of Christ, and says that she is a type of the 
 Church 3 . Whether Origen connected Rachel weeping for her 
 children with Mary weeping for Lazarus we do not know, as his 
 comment on the weeping is lost : but he compares the stone rolled 
 away by Jacob (for Rachel) with the stone rolled away from the 
 grave of Lazarus 4 . Origen censures Martha's want of faith. Justin 
 says that Leah, because she had weak eyes, was a type of the 
 Synagogue, and Irenaeus says that Rachel was a type of the Church 
 because she "had good eyes." By this is meant that Rachel could 
 discern the truth, which Leah could not. The Johannine narrative 
 does not justify anyone in drawing this marked distinction between 
 Martha and Mary ; but it certainly leaves on us the impression that 
 Mary was in some way superior to Martha, and that in very ancient 
 times, " those that came to Mary " were regarded as typical of those 
 Jews " who came to Jesus because of Mary," and that this coming 
 was associated with the message of Resurrection 5 . 
 
 1 [1943 a] Orig. Huet ii. 352 D. In what follows, he says that Jesus raised 
 Lazarus "that the majority of the Jews (oi ttoWoL, not iroWoi), having come to 
 Mary (dXddvres trpbs M., not oi i\$6vTes)... might believe in him." Then he adds, 
 " The language is somewhat ambiguous." 
 
 2 Iren. iv. 21. 3, Just. Mart. Tryph. 134. 
 
 3 Cramer on Mt. ii. 18. 4 Orig. Huet ii. 343 B. 
 
 5 [1944 a] This phrase (" those that came to Jesus because of Mary") might 
 come into use in connexion with the part played by Mary3Iagdalene as the first 
 announcer of Christ's Resurrection. A great deal remains to be explained about 
 the different Maries, about the sisters Maiy and Martha, and the household of 
 
 45 
 
[1945] APPOSITION 
 
 [1945] xii. 4 "Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples — he that was 
 destined to deliver him up (els twi/ /j.a6r]TMv avrov, 6 fxikXwv avrhv 
 7rapa8i8dvai)." Judas Iscariot has been previously mentioned in the 
 same connexion, vi. 71 "for he was destined (ejueAAei') to deliver him 
 tip— one, of the twelve": and now, reversing the clauses, John 
 repeats the statement, when explaining that the words xii. 5 " Why 
 was not this ointment sold?" were uttered, not (as Matthew says) 
 by "the disciples" or (as Mark says) by " certain persons," but by 
 "one of his disciples" namely, Judas Iscariot. It happens that Luke 
 omits, in his description of the Last Supper, the words of the Lord 
 reported by Mark and Matthew, " One of you shall deliver me up 1 ." 
 To these Mark alone adds " One of the twelve"." John follows Mark 
 and Matthew in the former statement, "One of you shall deliver me 
 up 3 "; and it is perhaps in view of this pathetic utterance of Jesus — 
 "one of you" or "one of the twelve" — that he prepared his readers 
 for it at the very first mention of Judas Iscariot, and now repeats it. 
 
 (v) Noun repeated in Apposition 
 
 [1946] A noun is repeated in apposition in i. 14 "And we beheld 
 his glory — glory as of [an] only begotten." This is perhaps intended 
 to suggest that the " glory " cannot be defined by such words as 
 "light," "splendour," "brightness," or by anything except repetition, 
 with some qualifying phrase to denote unique personality. 
 
 (vi) Of Pronoun with preceding subject 
 
 [1947] On the apposition, or quasi apposition, of a pronoun with 
 a preceding subject, as in i. 33 6 7r£/xi/'as....€K:ea'os, see 1920 and 
 2386. Bruder (Moulton) p. 678 gives this construction (of 6 with 
 participle etc. followed by demonstrative pronoun) as occurring 
 Mk (3), Mt. (6) (including Mt. iv. 16 where it is a transl. of the Heb. 
 idiom in Is. ix. 1), Lk. (1), Jn (17). On KtWyos thus used, see 2151. 
 
 Bethany. Besides many other variations, SS has the following in Jn xi. 5 — 45 
 " Now Jesus was loving to these three, the brother [and sisters] Mary, Martha, 
 
 Lazar (R.V. loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus) (19) that they might 
 
 comfort Martha and Mary (R.V. to M. and M. to console them concerning their 
 brother)... (45) And many fews that came unto Jesus because of Mary from that 
 hour believed in fesus (R.V. Many therefore of the Jews, which came to Mary and 
 beheld that which he did, believed on him)." 
 
 1 Mk xiv. [8, Mt. xxvi. 21. 
 
 - [1945<d Mk xiv. 20 "One of the twelve, he that dippeth with me in the 
 dish," Mt. xxvi. 23 "he that has dipped his hand with me in the dish," omitting 
 "one nf tlic twelve." 
 
 3 Jn xiii. 21. 
 
 46 
 
ARTICLE [1949] 
 
 Article 
 
 (i) Before Nouns in general 
 
 [1948] The Fourth Gospel, more than the Three, represents 
 Jesus as using the Article to denote (i) ideals such as the Good 
 Shepherd, the Way, the Truth, the Door, the Life, and (2) types, 
 such as " the wolf," " the porter," " the bridegroom," " the woman 
 [of the house]," i.e. the wife 1 , "the grain." In the last instance, 
 R.V. has xii. 24 "Except a grain of iv heat (6 kokkos tov ctltov) fall 
 into the earth," perhaps from a sense that in English, though we 
 can say "the seed," we could not say "the wheat-grain." But we 
 lose in this translation the recognition of the fact that "the grain" 
 (no less than "the sower," and "the earth"), was present before our 
 Lord as one of the familiar instruments, so to speak, in His Father's 
 hand. Somewhat similarly Mark alone speaks of "the candle," 
 where Matthew and Luke have dropped the article 2 . 
 
 (ii) Inserted, or omitted, before special Nouns 
 
 (1) "Fathers" 
 
 [1949] vi. 58 "Not as the fathers ate and died," vii. 22 "Not 
 that it [i.e. circumcision] is from Moses but from the fathers." 
 In vi. 58, "the fathers" must mean "the generation that re- 
 ceived the law and died in the wilderness." But, in the New 
 Testament generally, "the fathers" means "the patriarchs" (and 
 especially Abraham) regarded as the original receivers of the Promises 
 of God 3 ; and the language of the Epistle to the Hebrews, "God, 
 who... spake to the fathers in the prophets 4 ," is quite exceptional 
 (2553 e). Hence, in the Acts, when the people of Israel (and not 
 the Patriarchs) is denoted, "our" (or "your") is perhaps invariably 
 inserted 5 : and we should expect a Jew to speak and write "our 
 
 1 [1948 a] xvi. 21 17 yvur] orav 71*7-77, i.e. the married woman, not "a 
 woman." The meaning is " the woman \pfthe Aome]," or "housewife." Comp. 
 Ruth iv. 11 "Like Rachel and like Leah, which two did build the house of Israel." 
 Perh. there is allusion to this thought in the description of Jehovah as, so to speak, 
 building the builder, Gen. ii. 22 "he built the rib into a woman." See 1019. 
 
 - [1948 £] Mk iv. 21 6 \vxvos, Mt. v. 15, Lk. viii. 16 \vx"ov. A.V. has 
 even rendered 6 cireipuiv " a sower" (but R.V. "the") in Mk iv. 3, Mt. xiii. 3, 
 Lk. viii. 5. 3 Rom. ix. 5, xi. 28, xv. 8, Acts xiii. 32 (comp. 2 Pet. iii. 4). 
 
 4 Heb. i. 1. 
 
 5 [1949 a] Acts iii. 13, iii. 25 (vfxCov, marg. ti/muiv), v. 30, vii. (Stephen's speech) 
 11, 12, 15, 38, 39, 44, 45 [bis), 51 (vfiwv), 52 (fytw"). xiii. 17, xv. 10, xxii. 14, xxvi. 6, 
 xxviii. 25. Note that, amidst frequent repetitions of " our fathers " in the course 
 
 47 
 
[1950] ARTICLE 
 
 fathers" when mentioning his own people. The preceding words 
 are, "This is the bread that came down from heaven" whereas, in 
 this Gospel, Jesus is always (1952 — 8) represented as saying "from 
 the heaven." These facts suggest that vi. 58 may be an evangelistic 
 summary of the Doctrine of the Bread from Heaven. 
 
 [1950] In vii. 22 " For this cause Moses gave you circumcisioD — 
 not that it is from Moses but from the fathers — and on the sabbath 
 ye circumcise a man (1961)," the exact historic truth would 
 require, not " from the fathers," but " from Abraham." But " the 
 fathers," meaning "the patriarchs," might be loosely used to express 
 the fact that circumcision, beginning with the first of the Patriarchs, 
 was continued by the rest of them, and was thus passed on to Moses, 
 who, though he "gave," did not originate it. If John wrote vi. 58 
 in his own person, but vii. 22 in the person of Christ, it is compara- 
 tively easy to explain how " the fathers " might mean " Israel in the 
 Wilderness" in the former, and "the Patriarchs" in the latter 1 . It 
 is more in accordance with the Johannine method of expression that 
 our Lord should speak of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as " the 
 fathers " than that He should give this name to the generation that 
 wandered forty years in the wilderness. 
 
 (2) "Feast" 
 
 [1951] vii. 2 " Now there was at hand the [principal] feast of the 
 Jews, the feast of tabernacles (77 kopr-q rQv 'I. q o-K-qvoTr-qyia)." Josephus 
 calls this (Ant. viii. 4. 1) "by far the most holy and important feast 
 among the Hebrews," and (ib. xv. 3. 3) "most of all observed among 
 us." John's reason for calling attention to this is given in the 
 context. The brethren of Jesus urge Him to shew Himself in 
 
 of Stephen's speech, " the fathers" (according to W.H., following SBDj occurs 
 exceptionally thus, Acts vii. 19 "the same dealt subtilly with our race, and evil 
 entreated the fathers, that they should cast out their babes." Is this to be explained 
 from the special context, as meaning " the fathers of navly born children"! 
 Stephen calls the sons of Jacob " the patriarchs (oi TraTpiapxai) when they sell 
 Joseph, and " our fathers" when they are sent to buy corn, and subsequently 
 (Acts vii. 9, 12, 15). In Acts iii. 22 (A.V.) the words "unto the fathers" are an 
 interpolation. The title (in Sir. xliv.) "[The] Song of [the] Fathers," LXX v/xvos 
 Traripwv, is, in lick, " Praise of the Fathers of the World." 
 
 1 [1950(7] Note that Jesus, in replying to the Jews (vi. 31 " our fathers ate the 
 manna") has said vi. 49 "your fathers ate the manna. ..and died" (comp. Mt. 
 xxiii. 30 — 2 " Our fathers. ..your fathers"). An evangelist, commenting on this 
 in a Gospel for Greeks and Jews, not being able to say "your fathers," might 
 substitute "the fathers." 
 
 48 
 
ARTICLE [1954] 
 
 public, " Manifest thyself to the world," and this particular feast was 
 the best occasion for obtaining publicity 1 . 
 
 (3) " Heaven " 
 
 [1952] The article is always used by John (16 times) with 
 "heaven" except in i. 32 "I have beheld (Te0eapx<.) the Spirit 
 descending as a dove from heaven (Z$ ovpavov) " ; vi. 58 " This is the 
 bread that descended from heaven (6 e£ ovpavov Kcu-a/3as) — not as the 
 fathers ate and died — he that eateth this bread shall live for ever." 
 Of the sixteen instances of "heaven" with the article, thirteen occur 
 in the phrase "from the heaven 2 ." This makes the two exceptions 
 all the more remarkable. 
 
 [1953] As a rule, " the heaven " means heaven regarded as a place 
 distinct from " the earth," whereas "heaven " means what is heavenly 
 or divine as distinct from what is mortal or human. In the Synoptic 
 Tradition, "The doctrine of John, was it from heaven (e£ 6.) or from 
 men 3 ?," "from heaven' 1 '' means divinely inspired, but "from the 
 heaven" would have implied a suggestion of an angelic message, or 
 vision (Acts xi. 5) "sent down from the heaven." Different writers 
 might take different views of the Lord " hearing from heaven." 
 Solomon in the book of Kings uses the article, Nehemiah does not 4 . 
 But the same author may reasonably be expected to take the same 
 view, and not to use the phrase with and without the article 
 indiscriminately. 
 
 [1954] John habitually represents Jesus as asserting that He has 
 come down " from the heaven,'' using the noun metaphorically in 
 a spiritual sense like " the bosom of the Father," " the light of the 
 world," " the bread of life " etc. If he had used the phrase "from 
 heaven? it would have predicated about our Lord what might also 
 have been predicated — as we have seen above — concerning the 
 doctrine of John the Baptist. Therefore in the Fourth Gospel both 
 Christ and Christ's doctrine, the Bread of Life, are said as a rule to 
 
 1 [1951a] In v. 1, Mera ravra rjv iopri; tQv 'lovdaiojv, Tisch. reads 17 eopT-f). 
 But W.H. reject the article without alternative. SS has " a feast of the Jews." 
 
 2 [1952 a] All have £k, except vi. 38 &tt6. 
 
 3 [1953 a] Mk xi. 30, Mt. xxi. 25, Lk. xx. 4. 1 Cor. xv. 47 6 devrepos 
 dvdpwiros it; ovpavov, and 2 Cor. v. 2 to £% ovpavov imply " spiritual " as opposed to 
 "earthly," "fleshly." 
 
 4 [1953 f^] 1 K. viii. 32, 34, 36, 39, 43, 45, 49 eLo-a/coi'iay e/c tov 6., Nehem. ix. 13 
 i\a\-qoas irpos avrovs e£ 6., ix. 15 dprov e£ 6. £5w/cas avrols, ix. 27 i£ 6. o~ov -rjnovaas, 
 ix. 28 ei; 6. eiarjKovo-as. Contrast also Ps. liii. 2 6 deos e/c t. 6. oi^KV\pev with Ps. 
 cii. 19 Kvpios e£ 6. eirl ttjv 777c e7r^/3\et/<e. 
 
 A. VI. 49 4 
 
[1955] ARTICLE 
 
 have descended "from the heaven." Thus John reverses the usual 
 custom of speech. Most writers would speak of " the birds of the 
 heaven" and would describe a bird as coming down " from the 
 heaven" meaning "the sky," whereas they would say that a prophet's 
 message comes "from heaven, not from earth." But John prefers to 
 take " the heaven " as a materialistic term used by him always in 
 a metaphorical sense to imply that the Lord Jesus Christ, the Bread 
 of Life, was not merely of a heavenly origin but came down in 
 a unique manner from the abiding-place of the Eternal God. 
 
 [1955] What bearing has this on the first of the two above- 
 mentioned exceptions, i. 32 "I have beheld the Spirit descending as 
 a dove from heaven (£$ 6.)"? The answer is complicated by several 
 facts. (1) The Baptist is speaking, not our Lord, nor the 
 evangelist in his own person. (2) It is not clear whether " from 
 heaven" should be taken with " as a dove " or with "descending." 
 (3) Mark and Matthew in their parallel description of the descent of 
 the Spirit, mention " the heaven s " and "from the heavens" : but Luke 
 has " the heaven" and "from heaven." If John had written "from 
 the heaven," it might have been taken literally in connexion with 
 "dove," so as to mean "like a dove from the sky"; or it might 
 have been taken metaphorically, "from the very habitation of God." 
 Perhaps neither of these meanings is contemplated in the Fourth 
 Gospel. More probably John regarded the Baptist as speaking of a 
 vision that came "from heaven " and as using the ordinary phrase 
 about it. This phrase he places exceptionally in the Baptist's mouth 
 in order to distinguish it, on the one hand, from any bodily dove 
 visible to all, and, on the other hand, from those unique spiritual 
 descents concerning which Jesus spoke, which were from " the 
 heaven of heavens." See 685 — 724. 
 
 [1956] The other instance, vi. 58 "This is the bread that came 
 down from heaven " (outos icrriv 6 apros 6 it ovpavov KaTa/3as), 
 follows, in the same chapter, no less than eight instances of " bread 
 from the heaven " or " come down from the heaven" and, in particular, 
 vi. 50 — 1 "This is the bread that is [continually] coming do\vn/;vw 
 the heaven... I am the living bread that came down from the heaven." 
 The two challenge, as it were, comparison or contrast. So do their 
 several contexts: (a) vi. 58 "This is the bread that came down from 
 heaven — not as the fathers ate and died) he that feedeth on (rpwyuv) 
 this bread shall live for ever," (/>) vi. 49 — 51 " Your fathers ate in the 
 wilderness the manna and died. This is the bread that is continually 
 
 50 
 
ARTICLE [1957] 
 
 coming down from the heaven that anyone may eat thereof and not die 
 (dTruOdvrj) (or, be liable to death, aTroOvrjaKrj). I am the living bread 
 that came down from the heaven, //anyone eat of this bread he shall 
 live for ever.''' 
 
 [1957] The first point to be noted is that in (a) the passage 
 under discussion, the eaters of the manna are called " tfie fathers," 
 but in (/') "your fathers." This, as has been shewn above (1949), 
 may indicate that (b) is a saying of the Lord, while (a) is evangelistic 
 comment. The next point is that the anacoluthon, or breaking off", 
 implied in "not as (ov ku#ojs)," is paralleled by Westcott here to i Jn 
 iii. 12 " — not as Cain was of the evil one" ; and neither here nor in 
 the Epistle does Westcott refer to any other N.T. instance of such a 
 construction 1 . These two peculiarities of John himself, as distinct 
 from the words of Christ recorded by John, when combined with 
 "from heaven" '—instead of the phrase regularly assigned to Christ 
 ("from the heaven'') both here and elsewhere — indicate that the 
 evangelist is here speaking in his own person and summing up the 
 whole of the Eucharistic discourse. According to .this view, the 
 teaching of the Lord in the Synagogue at Capernaum concluded 
 with the words (vi. 57) " He that feedeth on me, he also shall live for 
 my sake." Then John himself thus sums up the doctrine and the 
 circumstances in which it is delivered : "This is 2 the bread that came 
 down from heaven \ not from men] — not as the fathers [of Israel] ate in 
 
 1 [1957 a] According to Bruder, 01) icaddis — apart from 2 Cor. viii. 5 ral ov 
 Kadvos r)\iricra./j,ev — is purely Johannine, occurring in Jn vi. 58, xiv. 27, 1 Jn iii. 12 : 
 in xiv. 27 (where it is in Christ's words) the construction is quite regular. 
 
 - [1957/i] "This is" both in (a) and (b) is ambiguous. It may mean, " This 
 [bread] is the bread that came down," or " This [man] is the bread that came 
 down (1974)." In Jn, Christ is never represented as saying ovtos ianv except 
 here, and in His lips it probably means " This [bread] is." But it is quite 
 characteristic of Jn that he should repeat the words of the Lord giving them their 
 inner sense " This [wan] is." The phrase occurs several times in testimony to 
 Christ, i. 30 (from the Baptist) " This is he about whom I said," i. 33 " This is 
 he that baptizeth," i. 34 "This is the Son (or, Chosen One) of Cod," iv. 42 (from the 
 Samaritans) " This is in truth the Saviour of the world," com p. vi. 14, vii. 40 
 " This is in truth the prophet," vii. 41 " This is the Christ." In some of these 
 passages, e.g. i. 34, iv. 42, it comes at the close of a narrative. In xxi. 24 it comes 
 near the close of the Gospel, " This is the disciple that testifieth these things." In 
 the Epistle it occurs thrice : ii. 22 " This is the antichrist," v. 6. " This is he that 
 came through water and blood," v. 20 " This is the true God and eternal life." 
 The phrase comes appropriately in Jn vi. 58 as part of an evangelistic utterance 
 testifying to the truth of Christ's Eucharistic doctrine. Comp. 2621—2. 
 
 51 4—2 
 
[1958] ARTICLE 
 
 the wilderness and died. He that feedeth on this bread shall live 
 for ever. These things he said in synagogue teaching in Caper- 
 naum." 
 
 [1958] In i. 51, "Ye shall see the heaven opened (perf.)," the 
 meaning is probably something quite different from a vision of 
 a "rending" in the sky such as might be inferred from Mark's use of 
 the word "rend" in the description of Christ's baptism. Taken in 
 conjunction with John's context about "angels ascending and 
 descending," the words (642) " promise a continuous revelation and 
 a permanent avenue opened up between heaven " — the spiritual 
 heaven — "and earth." The evangelistic use of the word with the 
 article in xii. 28 "There came therefore a voice from the heaven" and 
 in xvii. 1 " Having lifted up his eyes to the heaven" perhaps denotes 
 in both passages an outer and an inner meaning ; for non-believers, 
 that lower heaven which men call "the sky"; for believers, "the 
 heaven of heavens 1 ." 
 
 (4) " Man " 
 
 [1959] In the following passages, " the man " is used (like " the 
 dog," " the vine " etc.) to mean "man in general," "mankind," or 
 "human nature"; Jn ii. 24 — 5 " But Jesus himself (2374) would not 
 trust himself to them because he understood all [men] (-n-a^Tas) and 
 because he had no need that any one should testify about human 
 nature (lit. the man) because he himself (2374) could understand what 
 was in human nature (lit. the man)." Mark alone has (ii. 27) "the 
 sabbath was made for the man and not the man for the sabbath." 
 But Mk vii. 15 "There is nothing outside the man (i.e. man in 
 general) that, going into him, is able to defile him " is imitated 
 by Mt. xv. 11. In Genesis, vi. 5 "God saw that the wickedness 
 of the man, i.e. mankind, was great," viii. 21 "the imagination of the 
 heart of the man, i.e. mankind" LXX has 1st " the men," 2nd " the 
 man." Comp. Eccles. iii. 11 "so that the man cannot find out," 
 where LXX has "the man" but Aquila "man," and iii. 19 "theman 
 hath no preeminence above the beasts," where LXX and Theod. 
 have " the man," but Sym. "man" So 1 Cor. ii. 11 "Who among 
 men knows the things of the man?" i.e. the facts of human nature. 
 The Hebrew phrase is identical with "the Adam," so that the Pauline 
 phrases "the old man" and "the //era man," are equivalent severally 
 
 1 For "judgment-seat " with ami without the article, see 1745. 
 
 52 
 
ARTICLE [1960] 
 
 to (i) "the old Adam" or "first Adam," and (2) "the last Adam" or 
 "second man" who is said to be "from heaven." 
 
 [1960] In vii. 51, "the man" may very well refer to previous 
 context, which describes an attempt on the part of the Sanhedrin to 
 arrest Jesus. Nicodemus, a member of the Sanhedrin, pleads that 
 Jesus ought at all events to be heard: "Will (or, doth 1 ) our Law 
 judge the man except it first hear from him...? " i.e. the man you have 
 been trying to arrest. The term is perhaps slightly contemptuous, 
 and exhibits Nicodemus as affecting to speak from a detached and 
 superior position — in spite of the fact that he has visited Jesus 
 by night. Somewhat similarly, in Matthew, Peter detaches himself 
 under pressure of fear, and, when he is questioned about his Master, 
 says, " I do not know the man' 2 ." In classical Greek, 6 dvdpwiro'; 
 often means "the poor man," "the poor creature," and there is 
 probably a tinge of this mixture of pity and contempt in Pilate's 
 saying (xix. 5) " Behold the man," i.e. " Behold the poor creature — 
 whom you are persecuting, and who is surely beneath your 
 hostility !" But Pilate, like Caiaphas (xi. 50), may also be regarded 
 as speaking "not from himself," so that he unconsciously uses an 
 expression that may mean " Behold the man ! " i.e. the Man according 
 to God's Image, the ideal Man 3 . 
 
 1 [1960 a] The scribe that accented B gives Kpivel fut., which favours the view 
 taken above; Kpivei would favour the rendering "the man [from time to time 
 brought before the Law]." Comp. Lk. xix. 22 Kpivw— where W.H. (with most 
 Lat. vss.) have Kpivw but R.V. KpivQi. 
 
 2 [1960 3] Mt. xxvi. 72, 74 t'ov dvdpwTrov, Mk xiv. 71 top d. tovtov Sp 
 Xeyere. Lk. xxii. 58, 60 has &vdpwwe. Mk softens the harshness, Lk. gets 
 rid of it. 
 
 3 [1960 c] Epictetus' use of the term is worth considering here. He uses it to 
 mean "the ideal man," what Philo would call "the man according to the image 
 [of God]," St Paul "the new man," and some "the Son of man." It may be 
 briefly expressed by " The Man " in the following extracts : (ii. 9 title) " How 
 that, being unable to fulfil the promise implied in ' The Man ' (ttjp rod 'Avdpwirov 
 e7ra77eX/aj' TrXr]pu>o~ai) we take in addition to [it] (7rpoaXa/j.j3a.pop:ep) that of ' The 
 Philosopher,'" (ii. 9. 1 foil.) "Beware, then, lest thou do aught as a wild beast ! 
 Else, thou hast lost The Man (airuXeo-as top avdpwirov), thou hast not fulfilled the 
 promise. Beware, lest [thou do aught] as a sheep ! Else, thus also The Man is 
 destroyed (ambXeTo 6 avdpuiros).' 1 '' And again (Epict. ii. 10. 14) "But if, from 
 being a man, a creature mild and sociable, you have become a wild beast, noxious, 
 cunning at mischief, given to biting, have you lost (air oXdiXex as) nothing? \\ hat ! 
 Must you wait to lose the trash in your purse before you will confess to having 
 suffered damage (dXXa del ae Kepfxa ajroXecrat. iva I'rj/xLwOrjs) ? Is there no other loss 
 that damages 7"he Man (aXXov 5' ovdevbs a-n-uXeia i'T]/xioi top avdpwirov) ? " 
 
 53 
 
[1961] ARTICLE 
 
 [1961] In vii. 23 " If a man (dv6pwiro<;) receiveth circumcision 
 on the sabbath," W.H. have [6] dv6pu)Tro<;, and B inserts 6. But 
 the high authority of B is weakened as regards the article by the 
 fact that it makes frequent mistakes (2650 — 2) about o and the 
 similar letter c, e.g. v. 7 npoceMoy for rrpoeMoy, vi. 19 ooct&Aioyc 
 for cocctaAioyc, vii. 38 eie/v\e for eice/v\e, and even vii. 43 cxima. 
 for cxicma (where, as in vii. 23, the error of insertion or 
 omission could not arise from the juxtaposition of similar letters). 
 Possibly in vii. 23 the scribe of B may have referred to the previous 
 words (" and on the sabbath ye circumcise a man ") and he may 
 have supposed the text to proceed, "if the man {just mentioned]..." 
 In any case " man " is as emphatic here as it is in Mark's statement 
 " The man is not made for the sabbath " ; and the emphasis is 
 illustrated by vii. 22 "On the sabbath ye circumcise a man." "A 
 man " might have been omitted if emphasis had not required it. 
 But the argument is: "You do not hesitate to break the sabbath by 
 circumcising a human being. If human beings on the sabbath are 
 allowed to receive this partial purification, are ye angry with me for 
 having made a whole human being (6'Aov dvOpwirov) sound on the 
 sabbath ? " The plea is, in behalf of humanity, for a humane 
 judgment ("judge righteous judgment"). And the whole passage 
 illustrates the use of dvOpw-n-os alleged above (1934 — 5) to mean 
 "human being" in connexion with Abraham whose "love of men" 
 is eulogized by Philo. 
 
 (5) "Mountain" 
 
 [1962] In Genesis (xix. 17) (LXX) "Look not behind thee nor 
 stand in any of the surrounding country (rrj 7repi^ajpa)), escape into 
 the mountain," the context defines " the mountain " as the mountainous 
 country near Sodom. So in Mark, before the Choosing of the 
 Twelve, (iii. 13) "he goeth up into the mountain," is defined by the 
 previous mention of (iii. 7) "the sea" — presumably the sea of Galilee — 
 as being the mountainous country near the sea of Galilee 1 : but the 
 parallel Luke (vi. 12) "he went forth into the mountain to pray" is 
 not defined by anything — unless we suppose it to follow closely on 
 Christ's teaching in (vi. 6) "the synagogue," and assume this to 
 mean the synagogue of Capernaum, so that " the mountain " means 
 " the mountainous country " near that city. In Mark and Matthew 
 
 ' To 6pos means " the mountain," or l, the mountainous country," defined by 
 
 ."iiiriliin^ implied m ( -\]>n <■<!, like "///<• 1 1 is^hlands," " the Lakes." 
 
 54 
 
ARTICLE [1964] 
 
 Christ's going " into the mountain to pray," after the Feeding of the 
 Five Thousand, follows a previous mention of going in " a boat," 
 presumably on the sea of Galilee 1 . In the story of the Gerasene 
 demoniac, "the mountain" is also defined (in Mark and Luke) by 
 a previous mention of " the sea," or " sailing," as well as by 
 "GerasaV When the Transfiguration is described, Mark and 
 Matthew speak of "a high mountain 3 " (as also does Matthew in the 
 Temptation 4 ) but Luke has "He went up into the mountain to pray 5 ." 
 
 [1963] A review of the contexts of the passages in which Mark 
 mentions '■'the mountain" makes it probable that he uses the phrase 
 to mean the mountainous country in view of Capernaum — not that 
 which was actually nearest to the city on the west of the Lake, but 
 that which lay on the east of the Lake. The former, though near, 
 could not be seen by the citizens of Capernaum who lived under it, 
 so to speak : the latter, being constantly visible to them, might 
 naturally be called "the mountain." This is not always clear in the 
 Synoptists. But John defines the position thus in the only passages 
 in which "the mountain" is used by him absolutely, vi. i— 15 "Jesus 
 went away on the other side of the sea of Galilee.... Now Jesus came 
 up into the mountain.... .he withdrew again into the mountain." Luke 
 makes no mention of "the mountain" in connexion with the Feeding 
 of the Five Thousand, Mark and Matthew mention it once, John 
 mentions it twice. It is a case where Luke omits and John inter- 
 venes. 
 
 (6) " Only begotten " 
 
 [1964] i. 18 "No man hath seen God at any time. Only 
 begotten (Movoyevr}<;), God, he that is in the bosom of the Father, — 
 he hath declared him." Under the head of Apposition (1938) 
 reasons have been given for punctuating as above, and for regarding 
 "Only begotten," "God," and "he that is" (6 wv qualified by 
 "in the bosom of the Father") as three titles of the Logos. The 
 Greeks, and Philo (the Jewish interpreter of Greek philosophy) 
 called God " that which is," to ov, neuter. John adopts the Apoca- 
 lyptic phrase "He that is," 6 w 6 , so as to make God a Person, not 
 a thing. He then adds "in the bosom of the Father" to indicate 
 
 1 Mk vi. 46 " went away to pray," Mt. xiv. 23 " went up to pray," following 
 Mk vi. 32, Mt. xiv. 13. 
 
 3 Mk v. 11, Lk. viii. 32, following Mk v. 1, Lk. viii. 26. 
 
 3 Mk ix. 2, Mt. xvii. 1. 4 Mt. iv. 8. 5 Lk. ix. 28. 
 
 6 Rev. i. 4, 8 etc. 
 
 55 
 
[1965] ARTICLE 
 
 a Person, in whom the defining characteristic is not strength or 
 wisdom but filial union with a Father. Thus an expression 
 implying both paternal and filial love closes the list of titles 
 and descriptions of the Logos enumerated in the Prologue. In 
 the last three of these titles, the first place is given to " Only 
 begotten," which, both in Greek and Hebrew — owing to the con- 
 nexion between an only Son and a beloved son (803) — implied 
 "beloved Son." It is not likely that John meant us to render the 
 word "an only begotten," any more than to render Oeos, "a God." 
 As a Christian would not render Xpio-ros "an Anointed," but "the 
 Anointed," or " Christ," so John intends us to render Movoyevr/s, "the 
 only begotten," or else, as a proper name, Monogenes, i.e. " Only be- 
 gotten." The alterations of this text are numerous and natural as 
 Tohn has strained to the utmost the elastic Greek language to express 
 briefly the intensity of his conviction that the Father is known only 
 through the Son. 
 
 (7) "Prophet" 
 
 [1965] In i. 21 "Art thou the prophet}" A.V. has "that 
 prophet," apparently (unless "that" is " ille " as in 1 K. xviii. 7 
 (A.V.)) regarding it as a repetition of the previous question "Art 
 thou Elijah ?" Origen, with more probability, supposes it to refer to 
 the "prophet" mentioned in Deuteronomy xviii. 15, 18, whom the 
 Jews (825) seem not to have identified with the Messiah, although the 
 prophet is thus identified in Acts iii. 22. 
 
 (8) "Teacher [of Israel]" 
 
 [1966] iii. 10 "Thou art the teacher of Israel (6 S. tov 'I.) and 
 knowest not these things!" is probably ironical, meaning "the 
 \well-knoiun~\ teacher." That John would not indiscriminately insert 
 and omit the article in such phrases, may be inferred from his 
 general carefulness and subtlety in linguistic discrimination and, 
 in particular, from i. 49 " thou art the Son of God, thou art King 
 of Israel," the utterance of Nathanael, as compared with xii. 13 
 "the king of Israel," the utterance of the crowd, in the Entry into 
 Jerusalem. "The Son of God" reigns over, or is "king of" all the 
 nations of the earth including Israel. David, or Hezekiah, or a 
 merely Jewish Messiah, might naturally be called " the king of Israel" 
 i.e. the king for the time being. Nathanael is made to utter a con- 
 fession much more inclusive than that of "the great multitude 1 ." 
 
 [1966-/ 1 In classical Gk a distini tion is drawn between fiaaiXevs, i.e. " King' 
 
 56 
 
ARTICLE [1969] 
 
 (iii) Before Names 
 
 [1967] The article before a name may mean (i) "the [above- 
 mentioned]," (2) "the [well-known]." This leaves room for great 
 variety of usage in different writers, and even in the same writer 
 (when writing in different moods). Mark is singularly consistent 
 in his use of the article with the nominative, "Jesus." He omits 
 it in the first mention of the name (i. 9) but never again, except in 
 the phrase (x. 47) "Jesus the Nazarene " — where custom requires 
 its omission as the name is defined by "the Nazarene." Matthew 
 and Luke omit the article at first, but omit it also (with the non- 
 predicative nominative) in about five and eight instances, severally, 
 later on (besides the parallel to Mk x. 47). 
 
 [1968] In John — excluding such instances as "Jesus the Naza- 
 rene " and others where we might expect omission — we find the 
 article omitted about sixty-five times 1 . With Ae'yei, John, more often 
 than not, has 6 'lrja., but he has aireKpiOr) 'I770-. about twenty-two 
 times and dneKfnOy 6 'lrja. only once for certain' 2 . In phrases with 
 aTr€Kpt6ri and names, the LXX regularly omits the article. John 
 may have been influenced, in using this word, by LXX usage, while, 
 in the use of Aeyet, he follows Greek usage. With indeclinable 
 names, case-inflexions are sometimes indicated by the article for the 
 apparent purpose of clearness ; and perhaps it is sometimes inserted 
 in accordance with an unconscious sense of rhythm so as to avoid 
 monotony in the long dialogues that characterize the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 [1969] John's general rule is to introduce a personal name 
 
 uniquely, the name given to the sovereign of the East, and 6 j3aac\evs, "the king" 
 of ihis or that barbarous tribe. There is perhaps an inner evangelistic meaning in 
 the protest of the priests, xix. 21 "Write not, l the king of the Jews,' but that 
 'He said, I am kingoi the Jews QS. rwv I. ei/iL),' " besides some allusiveness to the 
 Synoptic differences concerning the inscription. See 2669. 
 
 1 [1968 a] The statistics are doubtful owing to the similarity of o to C and 
 the weakness of codex B on this point (1961 and 2650—2). But 65 is probably the 
 minimum. 
 
 ' 2 [1968<$] vi. 29. In iii. 5, xviii. 37, W.H. have [6]. On the other hand 
 where avrols is inserted after awcKpidr] we often find 6 or [6] before 'lijaovs. 
 Perhaps where avrols or avrw is inserted, referring back to the person spoken to, 
 a corresponding 6 is more often inserted to refer back to Jesus. 
 
 [1968 r] Johannine variations may be illustrated by the use of "John (the 
 Baptist)" which occurs with article (13), without (5), doubtful (1). Contrast i. 28 
 ev B....ottov i]v 6 'I. fiaTvrLguv (where there has been much said about John in 
 context) with x. 40 eh rbv rbtrov ottov rjv I. to irpuirov fiairrlfav. 
 
 57 
 
[1970] ARTICLE 
 
 without the article 1 , and there appear only three or four exceptions 
 to this. One is "Pilate" in xviii. 29 "There went out therefore 
 the [governor] Pilate," and this may be paralleled by Luke's first 
 mention of him in the Passion, " they led him to the [governor] 
 Pi/ate" where Mark has no article (" they delivered him up to 
 Pilate") and Matthew "they delivered him up to Pilate the 
 governor 2 ." 
 
 [1970] The other exceptions are indeclinable nouns : i. 43 — 5 
 " He findeth Philip... now the [aforesaid] Philip was from Bethsaida... 
 Philip findeth (lit.) the Nat 'hanael (rbv NaflavaifA.)." Here "Philip" 
 is introduced, according to rule, without the article; " Nathanael," 
 against the rule, with the article: i. 45 "We have found Jesus, (lit.) 
 a son of the Joseph ('I. vlbv rov 'Iohtt^)." Contrast this with vi. 42 
 "Is not this Jesus, the [well-known] son of Joseph ('I. 6 vlbs 
 'Iuxr?7<£)?" In iv. 5 "the well that Jacob gave to [the] Joseph his 
 son," the reading is doubtful, and W.H. bracket tw. 'Iwo-t^ is 
 shewn to be dative by vlu> airov, but the article conduces to 
 immediate clearness. If "Nathanael" were not indeclinable, we 
 might suppose the article to imply distinction such as is implied 
 in the words of the Lord (" Behold an Israelite indeed "), but can 
 this be the meaning of the article just afterwards ("a son of the 
 Joseph"), and does it seem likely that John would speak of anyone 
 as distinguished ("the [great] Nathanael") when describing his first 
 approach to Jesus 3 ? 
 
 1 [1969 a] "Solomon" (x. 23 iv Tjj aroq. rov 2.) could hardly be said to need 
 "introducing." In xviii. 40 "Not this man but the [great] Barabbas," it is the 
 crowd, not the evangelist, that speaks; and the same applies to xix. 12 " the 
 \great\ Caesar."' 
 
 ' 2 [1969 /d Jn xviii. 29, Lie. xxiii. 1, Mk xv. t, Mt. xxvii. 2. Mk subsequently 
 has 6 II. invariably, Mt. has it except in xxvii. 62 (pec). Lk. has it exc. in 
 xxiii. 6, 13, 24. Jn has 6 II. 19 times, and once, according to W.H. , (xviii. 31) 
 simply II. Probably W.I I. are wrong in following B here, especially as o may 
 have been omitted after the preceding c in &YTOIC (1961. 2650 — 2). 
 
 :i [1970'/ 1 Possibly i. 45 v'Cov rov 'lwa-q<p may shew traces of some tradition 
 about "the carpenter Joseph," and the evangelist may intend a contrast between 
 the beginning of the <i<>>pel (when Jesus was described as v. tov 'lw<rr)<p) and the 
 development of the Gospel (after which Jesus was described as 6 v. '\uart<j>). 
 
 [1970 />] The article before names of persons introduced for the first time is rare 
 in LXX ; but it occurs in 2 K. xxii. 3 to represent eth, the sign of the objective 
 case, before "Shaphan...the scribe." The parall. 2 Chr. xxxiv. 8 has eth, but 
 LXX omits t6v. For the article with names of places, see 2670 foil. 
 
 5* 
 
ARTICLE [1972] 
 
 (iv) With Participle and "is" or "are" 
 
 [1971] In the Synoptists, this construction is comparatively 
 rare, e.g. "Who is it that smote thee (tis io-rw 6 n-aicras o-e) 1 ?", 
 "These are they that were sown 2 " "These are the things that 
 defile (ravTa Icrrtv ra koivovvto.) the man 3 ," " Who is it [really] that 
 gave (tis €<ttiv o hov<;) thee this authority 4 ?" In the last instance, 
 the parallel Mark and Matthew have "Who gave thee?" The 
 construction with the article assumes the existence of some person 
 or thing defined as doing something. Isaiah writes, "There is at 
 hand one-justifying-me" LXX renders this, "There is at hand he that 
 justified me (o SiKcuwo-as p-e)." Isaiah proceeds, "Who will contend 
 against me ? " varying the construction. But LXX does not vary it, 
 " Who is he that contendeth with me (ti? 6 Kpivouevos jxoi) ? " The 
 Epistle to the Romans loosely follows LXX " God [is] he that 
 justifieth: who is he that shall condemn 5 }". In classical Greek it is 
 necessary to insert the article in representing the Hebrew " one 
 justifying me." If d were omitted above before SiKouwo-as, the meaning 
 of the Greek would be " he is at hand, having justified me 6 ." 
 
 [1972] Whereas Luke scarcely ever uses this construction in the 
 Words of the Lord 7 , John uses it frequently as follows (i) v. 31 — 2 
 " If I be testifying about myself my witness is not true. Another 
 is [really] he that testifieth (aAA.os etrrtv 6 paprvpuiv) concerning 
 
 1 Mt. xxvi. 68, Lk. xxii. 64, not in Mk (490—1). 
 
 2 [1971 a] Mk iv. 16 — 20, Mt. xiii. 19 — 23, comp. Lk. viii. 12, 14, the 
 explanation of the Sower. 
 
 3 [1971 £] Mt. xv. 20 (?Mk vii. 15), not in Lk. Mt. also has this construction 
 in iii. 3 ovtos ecrriv 6 prjOeis. 
 
 4 Lk. xx. 2 parall. Mk xi. 28, Mt. xxi. 23 tLs crot tdwKev; 
 
 5 Rom. viii. 34 (quoting Is. 1. 8) debs 6 diKaiQv, tis b koltclkplvuv; 
 
 6 [1971c] In Proverbs xi. 24 (lit.) "there exists one scattering and yet 
 increasing,"' the LXX paraphrases, "there are those who (elalv o'i), [while] 
 scattering, make things more," but Aq. and Sym. ian oKop-Ki<;uv, comp. Prov. xii. 
 18, xiii. 7. 
 
 [1971 d"\ In classical Greek prose it would probably be hard to find an 
 instance of eari and a participle, without 6, meaning e.g. "is scattering" — unless 
 the meaning were "is really scattering." The instances given by Jelf § 376. 4 are 
 mostly from poetry and not in the present. Plat. Legg. S60 E (and Demosth. 
 p. 853. 29) TavTa. ovtws %x 0VT & e<rTiv means "these things are irally so.'" 
 
 7 [1972 «] Lk. xx. 17 ti ovv iaTiv to yeypa^p.ivov is (apart from the Parable of 
 the Sower (1971 a)) the only exception, if it can be called one. Outside the words 
 of Christ, the constr. occurs (in Lk.) only in xxii. 64, xxiv. 21 oti clvt6s eanv b 
 /jl^Wuv \vTpovo~dai Tov'IcrparjX. 
 
 59 
 
[1973] ARTICLE 
 
 me...," and then Jesus goes on to say that this "Testifier" is not 
 the Baptist, nor even the works that He Himself does, but the 
 Father, invisible to those whom He is addressing. "AAAos 6 /xaprypviv 
 would have sufficed (like St Paul's Beos 6 SiKaiuv) if the meaning 
 of "is" were not intended to be emphatic. The meaning really is 
 twofold (i) "Another and distinct from myself is he that testifieth," 
 (2) "Another [really] exists [whose existence ye perceive not], namely, 
 he that testifieth." The first is expressed, the second is suggested. 
 "AAAos means "another [of the same kind] " (2675 — 7). 
 
 [1973] (2) v. 45 " Do not imagine that I (emph.) (iyw) will 
 accuse you to the Father. There is [indeed] {lariv) he that accuseth 
 you, [namely] Moses...," i.e. "The very person to whom you look 
 for testimony in your behalf (because you claim to be observing his 
 law) is all the while testifying against you 1 ." 
 
 [1974] (3) vi. 2>Z "For the bread of God is [not a thing of the 
 past but of the present] the [one] that is ever descending from heaven 
 and offering life to the world 2 ." Here comes into play the ambiguity 
 (comp. 1957/;) sometimes inherent in 6 with the participle, since 
 it may refer to the masculine noun last mentioned, namely "bread," 
 or "loaf," apros "the loaf of God is the [loaf] that is descending." 
 And this the Jews take to be the meaning, for they proceed to ask 
 "Give us evermore this bread." But Jesus replies "I am the bread 
 of life." 'Eo-tiV is not here so emphatic as in the last instance : but 
 the context indicates that stress is being laid on the difference 
 between the manna — a detail of the historic past — and the ever 
 present, ever descending, bread of life. It is probable that John 
 intends "the [one] that is ever descending" to mean the Man, 
 quite as much as the Bread, or, primarily, the Man, and secondarily, 
 the Man regarded as the Bread. 
 
 [1975] (4) vi. 63 "The spirit is that which giveth life (to TrveufiA 
 iani' to (wottoiovv), the flesh doth not profit at all 3 ." The words 
 
 1 [1973r/| Comp. viii. 50 Zoriv 6 i'rjrQv Kai KpLvuv, "There [really] exists he 
 /hut seeketh ..." This and other passages, and the Johannine love of apposition, 
 are against the rendering " He that accuseth you is Moses," or "Moses is he that 
 accuseth you." 
 
 - |1974,/| A.V. "the bread of God is he which," R.V. "that which," 6 yap 
 
 dpTOS TOV OfOV tOTlV 6 naTafiaivwv . 
 
 '■'■ 1 1975 </ 1 Here N omits "the," before "spirit," so as to moan "That which 
 giveth life is of a spiritual nature." SS il'.tuk. marg.) has "He is the Spirit that 
 giveth life to the body, bul ye ay 'The body nothing profiteth.'" 
 
 60 
 
ARTICLE [1976] 
 
 might mean : "The Spirit (i.e. the Holy Spirit) is [distinguished from 
 all other spirits by being] the [spirit] that giveth life," repeating 
 ■n-vevfxa after Iwottolovv : and it may be fairly argued that similarly 
 R.V. (against A.V.) has repeated apros in the passage last quoted 
 (•'the loaf is the [/oaf] that descends"). But in that instance there 
 was perhaps a deliberate ambiguity, and possibly the primary 
 meaning did not require the repetition. Here there is no question 
 of any distinction between one spirit and another, but only between 
 "the spirit " and " the flesh." 
 
 [1976] The words are of very great difficulty owing to the 
 different meanings that may be attached, not only to them (taken 
 by themselves) but also to their context (2210 foil.). One meaning 
 may be " It is the spiritual part of man that must give vitality to all 
 doctrine by receiving it spiritually," as St Paul says 1 , and this suits 
 the antithesis of "the flesh." But we have to bear in mind that (i) 
 the phrase "life-giving spirit" is rare, (2) it occurs here in connexion 
 with a preceding mention of " the Son of man ascending " and it is 
 followed by a mention of "words" that are "life," (3) in N.T. 
 elsewhere it occurs twice: "The letter killeth, the spirit giveth life' 1 " 
 " The last Adam [became] a life-giving spirit 3 " (4) the verb occurs 
 twice in John elsewhere concerning the Father, who '■'■giveth life" 
 and the Son who "giveth life' 1 ." In the light of these facts does it 
 seem likely that John would use the phrase "give life" concerning 
 the Spirit of man ? Would he not more probably use it of the Spirit 
 of Christ, " the last Adam," the Son of Man in heaven ? If so, the 
 meaning here would seem to be, " the Spirit [of the Son] is that 
 which giveth life 5 ." 
 
 1 1 Cor. ii. 13 — 14. 2 2 Cor. iii. 6. 
 
 3 1 Cor. xv. 45. 4 Jn v. 21 (his). 
 
 5 [1976a] Perhaps there is a play on the word "spirit" as meaning also 
 "breath" in Hebrew and Greek, that cannot well be reproduced in English. As 
 there is a spirit that gives life beneath the letter that killeth, so there is a spirit 
 that gives life beneath words that (taken literally) may "kill." The disciples of 
 Jesus have to go back beyond the sound of His uttered words to the breath, spirit, 
 or personality, that uttered them. Compared with the inner meaning, breath, or 
 "spirit," of a word, the outward meaning or sound may be called its "flesh." 
 "The words that I have spoken to you," says our Lord, "they are spirit and they 
 are life, because they have not been mere 'flesh words,' or external sounds, but 
 have passed, breathing life, into your spirits." And accordingly Peter says (vi. 68) 
 "Thou hast words of eternal life." 
 
 6l 
 
[1977] ARTICLE 
 
 [1977J Some such thought appears to have been in the mind of 
 the originator of the version in SS, " He [i.e. the Son of Man] is the 
 Spirit that giveth life to the body." He arrives at this by repeating 
 "Son of Man" as the subject of "is," by taking to jr. to £. as "the 
 Spirit that giveth life," and by altering the subsequent words. The 
 version may be of value as testifying to a very early interpretation 
 connecting "giving life" to the dead with "giving life" to words, 
 and both of these with the Son of man. 
 
 [1978] (5) viii. 50 — 1 "I honour my Father and ye dishonour 
 me. But I seek not my own glory; there is [indeed] he that see kef h 
 and judgeth (ea-Tiv 6 £,r)Twv kw KpiVwv)," i.e. as explained above 
 (1971 — 3) "there is, all the while, though ye know it not." And 
 the "judging" is regarded as going on (iii. 18) "already.'" Later 
 on it is said (xii. 48) " He that is rejecting me and not receiving my 
 words (prj/Acna. /xov) hath him that judgeth him (ex 61 TOV xpivovra 
 avrov)," where a clause in the future follows: "The word (Xoyos) 
 that I spake — that (ckcivos) shall judge him in the last day." The 
 Logos is judging now, and the judgment will be summed up 
 hereafter. 
 
 [1979] (6) viii. 54 " If I {ethph.) should glorify myself, my glory 
 is nothing. // is [indeed] my Father that is glorifying me, of whom 
 ye (emph.) say that he is your God, and [yet] ye have not recognised 
 him; but I know him 1 ." Here the context indicates that the 
 emphatic "is," expressed by arriv at the beginning of a sentence, 
 describes an action going on in the presence of men ignorant both 
 of the action and of the agent. The "glorifying" is manifested by 
 the works that the Son receives from the Father to do in the 
 presence of men. 
 
 [1980] (7) xiv. 21 "He that hath my commandments and 
 keepeth them, he it [realty'] is that loveth me (e/<eu'ds icmv 6 aya-n-wv 
 /xe)." This follows xiv. 15 "If ye be loving me ye will keep my 
 commandments," and it adds, in effect, " If ye keep them, then, and 
 
 1 [1979 n] 'Ecti' eyw So^daw ifxaxabv, r\ 56$a fxov ovSiv eartu. iariv 6 7rar?;p /xov 6 
 doi;a£wp fie 61/ vfiels \tyere 6Vt Oeos v/xuiv (marg. i]fj.wv) (<jtLi>, koI ovk eyvwxaTe avrdv, 
 iyu 5e oloa avrof. The (<ttlv al the end of the first sentence is quite unemphatic 
 and almost superfluous. But, if it were omitted, the following iartv mi^ht be 
 taken to be final instead oi initial. Moreover, the juxtaposition ol the two lays 
 mm u. il emphasis on the second. "// really is my Father." 
 
 62 
 
ARTICLE [1983] 
 
 only then, will ye be really loving me," or, in the third person, "He 
 that keeps them, he and he alone, is really loving me 1 ." 
 
 [1981] Besides occurring in the Words of Jesus, this construction 
 is found in the words of the Baptist and other speakers. Thus, 
 whereas the Synoptists represent the Baptist as saying concerning 
 the future Messiah " He shall baptize you," John gives the words as 
 11 He it is that is baptizing you"": and the Jews and others also 
 speak thus 3 . But the phrase appears to have commended itself 
 to the evangelist as especially suited to the Logos, who Himself 
 sees everything, and describes it to others, as it really is, going on 
 visibly before His eyes, though not before theirs. 
 
 (v) With Non = Possessive Adjectives 4 
 
 [1982] The reduplication of the article changing a noun-adjective 
 phrase, e.g. (i ) " the third day " to (2) " the day the third," adds weight 
 and emphasis to the adjective. In Christ's predictions of the 
 Resurrection Matthew always gives the former : Luke, in the 
 parallel to one of these, gives the latter. The latter is also used 
 in the formal and traditional enumeration of the appearances of 
 Christ after death in the First Epistle to the Corinthians 5 . The 
 Revelation has the former in speaking of " the third living creature," 
 or "the third angel"; but in more solemn phrases we find "he 
 opened the seal the third," "the woe the third cometh quickly 6 ." 
 
 [1983] In the Synoptists, the reduplication — apart from words 
 of Christ and the Voice from Heaven ("My Son my beloved") — 
 
 1 [1980 </] Other instances of 6 with the participle and ecrrt are iv. 10 "If thou 
 hadst known who it [realty] is that saith unto thee (ris €<ttlv 6 \eyuu crot)...," 
 iv. 37 aXAos (ffrlv 6 aTretpuv /cat aAXos 6 depifav where a aireipuv and 6 depifav are, 
 in effect, nouns. In ix. 37 /cat idipaKas avrbv /cat 6 XaXwv p.era aou iKelvos eariv, 
 the subject is 6 \a\wv, and e/ceiVos is not (as mostly) repetitive but means "that 
 very Son of Man about whom you ask ' Who is he?' as though he were far off." 
 
 2 Jn i. 5^, Mk i. 8, Mt. iii. n, Lk. iii. 16. 
 
 3 Jn v. 12 "Who is the man that said... ,?" v. 15 ''...that Jesus was (lit. is) he 
 that had made him whole," xxi. 20 " Who is he that is to deliver thee upV 
 
 4 [1982 a] This excludes noun-participle phrases, e.g. "the people that [was] 
 sitting (6 Xao? 6 Kadrifxevos)," "the miracles that [were] wrought (al dvvdfieis ai 
 yevo/j.evai)'" etc. For phrases with possessive adjectives see 1987 — 9. 
 
 5 [1982/5] Mt. xvi. 21, xvii. 23, xx. 19. The parall. Mk has fMera rpeh imepas, 
 Lk. ix. 22 has rrj r. rj/i. in a prediction of Christ, and also in his account of what 
 the Saviour said (xxiv. 46) after the Resurrection. But Lk. xviii. 33 (parall. to 
 Mt. xx. 19) has rrj tj/jl. rrj rp., the form used in 1 Cor. xv. 4. 
 
 6 [1982 e] Rev. iv. 7, vi. 5, viii. 10, contrasted with Rev. vi. 5, xi. 14. 
 
 63 
 
[1984] ARTICLE 
 
 is very rarely used, except in a few special phrases. Lk. ii. 7 has 
 "her Son her firstborn" ; Mark has often, and Luke twice (viii. 29, 
 ix. 42) "the spirit the unclean" ; Luke has (i. 26) "the month the 
 sixth" (ii. 26, iii. 22, also Mk iii. 29, xiii. n, Mt. xii. 32) "the 
 Spirit the Holy 1 ." 
 
 [1984] John, as a rule, reduplicates the article only in utterances 
 of the Lord or in weighty sayings about Him, as in the Prologue, 
 "This was the light, the true [light] 2 ." In the less weighty clauses 
 of the Lord's utterances he does not reduplicate it, as in "the true 
 worshippers 3 ," contrasted with " I am the Vine the true [vine] 4 ." 
 
 [1985] One or two perplexing instances of reduplication in John 
 may be perhaps explained by a desire to suggest to the reader some 
 latent thought, as when he says that Andrew " findeth first his 
 brother his own [brother] Simon 5 ." Here the evangelist is supposed 
 to mean that Andrew's unnamed companion also found his brother, 
 James the son of Zebedee, but not till Andrew had " first " found 
 Simon. Antithesis is certainly expressed elsewhere in "his name 
 his own [name] 6 ," "his glory his own [glory] 7 ." In "the day the 
 third [day] " at Cana — if the text is correct — there is perhaps a 
 mystical meaning 8 . In "the five loaves the barley [loaves] 9 " and 
 "the ear the right [ear]" of Malchus 10 , symbolism may be latent, 
 apart from the fact that (comp. 1983 a) John is adding details not 
 mentioned by Mark and Matthew 11 . 
 
 1 [1983 ,7] Mk v. 7, [Lk. viii. 28] assign to the demoniac the words, "Son of 
 the God the Highest"; Lk. vi. 6, xxii. 50 — -when adding facts unmentioned by 
 Mk-Mt., namely, that the "hand," and the "ear," severally, were "the right 
 one" — reduplicates the article. 
 
 2 i. 9. 
 
 8 [1984a] iv. 23 "The hour cometh when the true worshippers shall 
 
 worship the Father in spirit and truth." The italicised words do not predicate 
 anything about the Logos, and they are subordinate in emphasis to what follows. 
 
 4 xv. 1 . 5 i. 41. 6 v. 43. 
 
 7 vii. iS. 8 ii. 1. '■' vi. 13. 
 
 10 [1985<?] wiii. io. Luke may not have intended symbolism. The two 
 evangelist- must be judged in the light of their several Gospels, taken as wholes. 
 
 11 [1985/'] In wiii. 17, the person previously described as (xviii. in) '■'■She 
 that kept the door" is now called "the 'maid,'' she that kept the door." This is 
 probably not emphasis but afterthought ; the evangelist wishes to retain the old 
 Synoptic tradition that the Apostle was confused and abashed by a mere "maid,"' 
 whom he had previously described as "she that kept the door." The meaning, 
 then, is, " The maid, she [whom I described above as the one] that kept the door." 
 
 64 
 
ARTICLE [1987] 
 
 [1986] The following are the instances in Greek : 
 
 (a) i. 9 ^Hi' to c/>dk to lxXtjOlvov. Comp. VI. 32 tov aprov ck tov 
 ovpavov tov aXy]6ivov, XV. I ?; dpTreXos rj dX-qdLvn. Contrast iv. 23 01 
 akyjdivol -rrpoo-KwrjTai See above (1984). 
 
 (/3) i. 41 ivpidKU outos irpcoTOv tov abeXfpov ror l6lov %Lp.tova 
 (1985). Comp. v. 43 iv tw oydpciTi tu> ibia), vii. 18 ttjv 8o£av ttjv 
 18 Lav. In all these there is antithesis. Contrast iv. 44 iv ttj iSta 
 ■n-aTpi^L, x. 3 ra i.'8ta -n-po^aTa, where there is no expressed antithesis. 
 In the latter, there is no antithesis till x. 12. 
 
 (y) ii. 1 ttj Tjp.ipa txj TpLTij yd/xos iyevero, but marg. T-fj TpiVj/ 
 ■qfjiipa. (1982/;). 
 
 (8) In iii. 16, tov vlbv tov povoyevrj, "He gave his only begotten 
 son," the adj. is more emphatic than in iii. 18 to ovo/xa toC povoyevous 
 vlov tov 6eov, " because he hath not believed in the name of the only 
 begotten Sou of God," where " God " attracts much of the emphasis. 
 
 (e) iv. 9 r\ ywi] 1) Sa/xapetri? (the context lays stress on her 
 Samaritan origin, " from me being a woman that is a Samaritan "). 
 
 (£) vi. 13 ek tlov ttIvtc dpTiov tQ>v kplOlvlov, "from the five loaves — 
 that were, as I have said, of barley." This detail is not given by the 
 Synoptists (1985). 
 
 (77) x. 11, 140 iroLp,y)v 6 koAos (3 times). Contrast ii. 10 (bis) tov 
 KaXov olvov. 
 
 (6) xviii. 10 to wTupLov to SctioV (1985). 
 
 (1) xviii. 160 p,a8r)Tr)<i 6 a'AA.09 6 yvwcrTo? tov dpx- (? distinguished 
 from Peter, who was not " an acquaintance of the High Priest ")« 
 Contrast xx. 2, 3, 4, 8 d d'AAos p., xx. 25, xxi. 8 01 cIXXol p.. 
 
 (k) xviii. 17-7 7rcuSto-K?7 17 Ovpwpos (called previously (xviii. 16) 
 "the door-keeper" (fern.), and now, "the maid that [as I said] was 
 doorkeeper "). 
 
 (vi) With Possessive Adjectives 
 
 [1987] The adjective is frequently possessive, and, in that case, 
 is almost always accompanied by a reduplicated article. Instances 
 are given below in Greek. The student will find in almost every case 
 that the phrase with the reduplicated article, e.g. x. 26 — 7 "the sheep 
 that are my own (ra it. t<x ip.d) hearken to my voice," lays more stress 
 on the owner than is laid in the phrase with the possessive genitive 
 xxi. 16 — 17 "feed my sheep (t<x tt. p.ov)." The "love" of Christ is 
 to be regarded as unique, and the command to " love one another" 
 with that kind of love is a " new commandment," which our Lord 
 
 A. vi. 65 5 
 
[1988] ARTICLE 
 
 might call His own special commandment. Hence He says, xiv. 15, 
 " If ye love me, ye will keep my own [special] commandments (ras 
 e. Tas ep.a's)." But this is followed by an unemphatic repetition of the 
 clause because the emphasis is to be thrown on something else, 
 xiv. 21 "He that hath my commandments (tols i. /xov) and keepeth 
 them — he it is that really loveth me." So the emphatic is followed 
 by the unemphatic in xv. 9 — 10 "Abide in my [special] love (iv rfj d. 
 rfj ifx.fj)... If ye keep my commandments ye will abide in my love (iv 
 •j-77 a. fxov)," where the last words amount to little more than, "Ye 
 will do this." On the other hand, the unemphatic is followed by 
 the emphatic in xv. 10 — 12, "If ye keep my commandments (ras e. 
 /xov)... this is my [special] commandment (7} i. -q i/xrj) that ye love one 
 another even as I have loved you." Here, as often elsewhere, an 
 if-clause, being less emphatic than a predicate, expresses ownership 
 in the unemphatic form. 
 
 [1988] The following are the instances in Greek : 
 (a) iii. 29 avTTj ovv r\ ya-pa- ij epr/ 7re7rXr;pa)Tat. There is harmony, 
 not antithesis, between " my [own] joy " and "your joy " in xv. 1 1 
 
 iva tj \<xpd r\ ep?) iv vp.lv y kcll rj X a P°- ifiwv TrXrjpuyOrj. 'Yp-eVepos (1774) 
 
 is very rare. Comp. xvi. 22, 24, rrjv yapdv i/xiLv and xvii. 13 Iva e^cuo-iv 
 
 rrjv yapdv rrjv i[X7]V TreTrXr]pii)p.evrjv iv eavrois. 
 
 (/?) V. 30, viii. 16, rj Kpi(TL<i tj i/xr] Strata (dXrjB unrj) ccttu'. 
 
 (y) v. 30, vi. 38, to dek-q/xa to ifxov (antithesis in context). 
 
 (8) vii. 6 6 Katpos 6 e'pds...d de Kaipos d Operepos (antithesis). On 
 repetition the writer (1987) adopts the less emphatic form vii. 8 
 o epos Kcupos. 
 
 (e) viii. 17 /cal iv tu 1'dp.a) Se tw i5p.eTe'pu), "yea, and even in your 
 very own law." There is no antithesis but very strong emphasis. 
 Contrast vii. 51, x. 34, xviii. 31, d vdp,os vixwv (dju.wv). 
 
 (£) viii. 31 eav vixeis pen tjtc iv tw Aoyw tw epai, 370 Aoyos o epos 
 ov X 0) P € ^ * v u /"Vj 43 T0V Xoyov tov iixov, xvil. 17 o Aoyos o o-os. 
 Contrast v. 24 rov Adyov pov, viii. 51 tov ifibv Xoyov, 52 tov Xoyov 
 /xov, xiv. 23 tov Adyov ixov, 24 tovs Adyous fxov, xvii. 6 tov Aoyov aov, 
 J4 tov Ad-yov aov. 
 
 (77) viii. 43 Trjv AaAiav tt;v i/xrji'. Contrast iv. 42 TTJV o-rjv XaXidv 
 (marg. tt/v XaXidv o-ou). 
 
 ($) viii. 56 ttjv T/pe'pav tt/v i/xr/v, emphatic in a Messianic sense. 
 
 (1) x. 26, 27 to. rrpd/iaTa t« iixd emph. Contrast x.\i. 16, 17 rd 
 
 TTpOfSaTLOL fXOV. 
 
 (k) xii. 26 d Siaxovos d epos, " my own [true] minister." 
 
 66 
 
ARTICLE [1990] 
 
 (A.) XIV. 15 ras ii>To\d<; tol? epas, XV. \2 rj ivroXr) 77 cp?7. See 1987 
 
 and contrast xiv. 21, xv. 10 ras evToXa's yu.ou. 
 
 (p) XV. 9 /xeiVaTC eV T77 ayairi] rrj i/xfj, {lb. 10) /xevetTe iv rr} dydirr] 
 
 pov (see 1987). 
 
 (v) xvii. 24 rrjv $6£av ti]v i/xrjr. Contrast viii. 50, 54 vj 86£a pou. 
 
 (£) xviii. 35 to 6^i'os to crov (contemptuously emphatic on the 
 part of Pilate). 
 
 (o) xviii. 36 rj (3aa-iXeta r\ €p.rj (bis)... 01 VTvqpzTai ol epoi. There is 
 
 antithesis implied between "my own kingdom" and kingdoms 
 derived " from this world," and the same applies to " my own 
 officers (1388 a)." 
 
 [1989] The non-reduplicated article before a possessive adjective 
 is rare, but occurs as follows : iv. 42 oi Sia tt)v o-r/v AaAmv (marg. 
 tt]v Xakidv crov) fairly emphatic, being antithetic to an implied " be- 
 cause of our own hearing," v. 47 tois epois pijp.ao-iv, antithetic to toi? 
 eKeiVou ypdixixao-Lv. In vii. 8 6 ep.os /catpo's occurs after an emphatic 
 (vii. 6) 6 Katpos 6 epos. The non-reduplicated form (though more 
 emphatic than 6 Katpos p-ov would have been) is probably not so 
 emphatic as the reduplicated. In vii. 16 77 epr) SiSa^r) ovk Zo-tiv 
 ifjL-r], " that which is [in one sense] my teaching is [in another sense] 
 not [really] mine," the first ip.ij is moderately emphatic. In viii. 51 
 tov ip.6v Ao'yoi', "if anyone keep my word," the emphasis is moderate. 
 This construction seems to indicate an emphasis greater than that of 
 the possessive pronoun but less than that of the possessive adjective 
 with the reduplicated article. As regards xiv. 27 elp-rjvrjv ttjv epr/V, 
 which must be taken with its context, see 1993. 
 
 (vii) Omitted, or misplaced 
 
 [1990] In xi. 19 "Now many of the Jews had come to Martha 
 and Mary (7rpos ttjv MdpOav koL Mapiap.) to comfort them (am-as) 
 concerning their brother (7rept tou dSeXcpov)," we should have expected 
 T77V either to be omitted before MdpOav, or, if not, to be repeated 
 before Mapiap. D omits it before Map#av: A has u to the household 
 {irpb<i Tas 7repi') of M. and M.," and so too has C 3 (Trep-q): SS (Burk.) 
 has "went forth to Beth Ania that they might comfort Martha and 
 Mary," omitting " concerning their brother." The facts indicate that 
 " the Martha-and-Mary" was felt by some scribes to be a combina- 
 tion intended to mean lt the household" of the two sisters, and hence 
 they (perhaps influenced also by the proximity of [aij]Ta.9 7repi tov 
 d8e\(j>ov [Ptaken as an error for "the household oi the deceased brother, 
 
 67 5—2 
 
[1991] ARTICLE 
 
 t. 77. tot dSeX^o'i']) substituted ras we/oi for rqv. The reading of SS 
 suggests that the translator took [ai]-ras ircpl rov aSekcpov to mean 
 "Martha and Mary," as being "the household of the brother 
 (Lazarus)." "To Beth Ania" may have been supplied by SS for 
 sense or may be a further error arising out of " household," confused 
 by SS with "house," Beth. 
 
 [1991] The best Greek mss. have probably preserved the correct 
 text, the intention of the writer being to represent, by the unusual 
 omission of the article, that Martha and Mary now made up one 
 'household, of which Martha was the leader. Comp. i Thess. i. 7—8 
 iv rrj Molk. kou lv ttj 'Ax-.-.eV rfj M. Kol ' A x . (R.V.) "an ensample to 
 all that believe in M. and in A....no\ only in M. and A. but in every 
 place" (A.V. (Ins) "in M. and A.") — where the article is omitted in 
 the second clause, partly because one abbreviates in repetition, but 
 more because there is, in the second clause, an antithesis between 
 " M. and A." (as being one place) 1 , and "every [other] place." 
 
 [1992] xii. 9 — 12 (W.H.) Zyvu> ovv o 0x^.0? ttoXvs €k iw 'IouScuo.iv — 
 Trj iiravpiov 6 oxA-os ttoXl-s o i\6wv els rr/v ioprrjv is uncertain owing to 
 the variation of mss. But it has been suggested above (1739—40) 
 that it is written with allusion to Mk xii. 37 6 ttoXvs ox'W, and that 
 John took advantage of some irregular expression in ancient 
 tradition, in order to shew that he regards the phrase as meaning, 
 not " the illiterate rabble," but " the multitude in full force." 
 
 [1993] In xiv. 27 elprj\r)v acpLTj/JLi. vfiiv, elpr]i'r)i> rrjv c'/at/v Si'Su^u vp.iv, 
 if Jn had written, in the second clause, rrjv i. r. ifirjv, the article 
 would have suggested, for the moment, a reference to the I in the 
 first clause ("the peace just mentioned"). Instead of that, the 
 writer breaks off to indicate that it is something more than the 
 common kind of peace: "Peace I leave unto you. Peace [do I say? 
 nay, a new kind of peace] the [peace] that is mine I give you." In 
 this special context the phrase with the single article conveys even 
 more emphasis than the phrase with the article doubled. 
 
 [1994] In iv. 34 ipbv /3pw/xd hrriv iva ttoitJo-w... we ought not to 
 say that the article is omitted but rather that the predicate is placed 
 
 1 [1991 <i] When "the chief priests" are mentioned before " Pharisees," the 
 article is omitted before "Pharisees" where the two classes are regarded as forming 
 one council in vii. 45 " came to the thief priests and Pharisees." But the article is 
 tted before " Pharisees" where they are regarded as two distinct classes com- 
 bining in hostility against Jesus (vii. y. dTr^oreiXai', xi. 47 0-1^70701'. \i. 57 
 otdwKeiaav ^croXds). 
 
 68 
 
ASYNDETON [1996] 
 
 before the subject 1 . The words might have run otherwise, "To do 
 the will of the Father — that is food for me (or, my food)." But the 
 disciples were saying to themselves, in effect, " What is his food ? " 
 (" Hath any man brought him aught to eat?"). And Jesus answers 
 their implied question by putting it foremost in His reply, because 
 it is foremost in their thoughts: " My food, you ask: What is my 
 food? it is to do the Father's will." The subject of the sentence is 
 the subject of Christ's thought, namely, doing the Father's will". 
 
 (viii) With Infinitive 
 
 [1995] The Article with the Infinitive is almost non-occurrent in 
 John. Its rarity deserves notice as being in striking contrast with its 
 frequency in Luke, in whom alone there are more instances than in 
 the other three Gospels together 3 . 
 
 Asyndeton 
 
 (i) Johannine use of 
 
 [1996] A sentence in Greek is mostly connected with the pre- 
 ceding one by some conjunction. This has the disadvantage of 
 sometimes defining rather narrowly the relation between one thought 
 and another: and a foreigner, writing Greek without a native know- 
 ledge of its conjunctions, might define the relation wrongly. But it 
 has great advantages, especially for readers of an ancient Greek 
 ms. — written before punctuation had been introduced. For it often 
 helps us to discern the beginning of a sentence. From the want o{ 
 such a conjunction springs the ambiguity noted by R.V. marg. in 
 the words " Without him was not made anything. That which (o) 
 
 1 [1994 a] In i. i debs rjv 6 Xbyos, iv. 24 irvevixa 6 debs, the predicate comes first 
 for emphasis, and the subject, distinguished by the article, is placed last. It is very 
 rare to have a noun predicate thus before a noun subject. An adj. in such a posi- 
 tion is more freq., as vi. 60 <rK\rjpbs eariv 6 Xbyos ovtos, "hard [indeed] is this 
 saying," and iriarbs and evXoyrjTos are often thus placed (though not in Jn). 
 
 2 [1994 6] In Jn iv. 43 (R.V.) "after the two days," A.V. has omitted " the." 
 It refers to iv. 40 " they besought him to abide with them and he abode there two 
 days," and it means that He abode there those two days and no more. In Jn xviii. 3 
 (R.V.) "the band (marg. cohort)," A.V. ("a band") has missed the reference to 
 "the band " that regularly kept guard in the fortress called Antonia. 
 
 a [1995 a] Bruder (1880) gives to with inf., Mk c. 15, Mt. c. 24, Lk. c. 70, Jn 
 only 4, namely i. 48 irpb tov ae <f>. (pwvrjaai, xiii. 19 irpb tov yevicrdai, xvii. 5 irpb 
 tov tov Kbdfxov elvcu, ii. 24 Ota Tb ai'TOv yivucTKeLv. 
 
 69 
 
[1997] 
 
 ASYNDETON 
 
 hath been made," where many have taken the meaning to be (as 
 R.Y. text) "anything that hath been made 1 ." 
 
 [1997] The omission of the conjoining words commonly called 
 conjunctions is called "Asyndeton," i.e. "not fastened together." 
 John abounds in instances of asyndeton of the most varied and 
 unexpected kind, too numerous to quote, especially with an initial 
 verb ("[There] cometh Mary," "[There] findeth Philip Nathanael " 
 etc.); with any form of the pronoun "this"', with the conjunctions 
 "if" and "even as"; with an adverbial phrase ("in him was light"); 
 with a participle with the article ("he that believeth (6 -n-io-TevW')," 
 or sometimes " everyone that (7ras o) believeth "). Sentences fre- 
 quently begin abruptly with " noiv " or " already" or with the 
 emphatic "I" or "ye," expressed by Greek pronouns, which would 
 not be inserted if emphasis were not intended. There is hardly any 
 part of speech, or word, that might not come at the beginning of 
 a Johannine sentence without a conjunction, e.g. "Because I live ye 
 shall live also," "Excommunicated shall they make you 2 ." 
 
 [1998] The contrast in the use of asyndeton between the Fourth 
 Gospel and the Three is well illustrated by what the evangelists place 
 severally after the statement of the Baptist that he baptizes with 
 water : 
 
 Mk i. 8 
 
 " I baptized 
 you with water, 
 but he shall 
 baptize (5V)...." 
 
 Mt. iii. II 
 " I on the one 
 hand{\ikv) bap- 
 tize you in 
 water to re- 
 pentance, but 
 
 hethat(o8e)-" 
 
 Lk. iii. 16 
 " I on the one 
 /ia/uf(fiev)bap- 
 tize you with 
 water.^w/there 
 cometh (8 e ')...» 
 
 Jn i. 26 
 " I baptize in 
 water : midst 
 of you stand- 
 eth (/xe'cros vfxcov 
 o-Tr/Kei) one..." 
 
 [1999] Under the head of "Conjunctions, ko.6ws," instances will 
 be found where the absence of a ydp, Si, or /cat, makes it difficult to 
 tell whether xa#w's is to be taken as beginning a new sentence or 
 continuing a preceding one. Moreover, in the same sentence, the 
 absence of conjunctions makes it sometimes difficult to determine 
 which is the most prominent of two or three clauses in it, or whether 
 each clause is to be regarded as a separate sentence, e.g. "There 
 
 1 [1996</] (n i. 3—4. The meaning "That which..." would have been clearly 
 conveyed by 8 5^, or (if the writer disliked 8 5i as confusable with 68() by 6<ra 5t. 
 
 2 xiv. [9, xvi. 2. 
 
 70 
 
ASYNDETON [2002] 
 
 came into being (iyivero) [as distinct from rjv applied to the Logos] 
 a man (ai'#p<o7ros) [as distinct from #eds applied to the Logos] sent 
 from God. His name was John. This [man] came for witness 1 ...." 
 The presence of asyndeton is most remarkable in the Prologue of 
 the Gospel (i. i — 18) and in the Prayer to the Father (xvii. i — 26). 
 The absence of asyndeton is very remarkable in xvi. 2 — n (which 
 includes, as initial conjunctions, dAAd, /cat, dAAa, Se, 8e, dAA', dAA', 
 ydp, Se, «at, yneV, Se, 8e). 'AAAd, "nay," "but indeed," "but on the 
 contrary," often occurs in emotional utterances in Greek literature 
 generally. Both the presence and the absence of asyndeton appear 
 appropriate to the tenor of these two passages. 
 
 (ii) Classification of references 
 
 The following attempt at classification of instances of asyndeton 
 — according to the part of speech in connexion with which the 
 conjunction is omitted — may be of use to students investigating the 
 connexion between sentences in the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 [2000] (1) With Adverbs, or Adverbial Phrases : 
 
 (a) €<ds apTL, air dpn, vvv, ov/ceVi, r}8r), iv. 36, xii. 27, 31 (bis), 
 xiii. 19, xiv. 7, 30, xv. 3, 15, xvi. 24, 30, xvii. 7; en, xvi. 12; 
 fj.LKpbv kcli, xvi. 16. 
 
 (/?) eirfira, elra, xi. 7, xiii. 5, xx. 27 ; oi'tws, iii. S. 
 
 (y) T V bravpiov, i. 29, 35, 43, vi. 22, xii. 12. 
 
 (8) iv eKeivr] Tjj 7]p,€pa, xiv. 20, xvi. 26. 
 
 See also 2006 for Sid tovto, perd ravra etc. 
 
 [2001] (2) With Conjunctions : 
 
 (a) eaV, av, d, iii. 12, v. 31, 43, vi. 51, vii. 4, 17, 23, viii. 19, 46, 
 ix. ^3^ x - 2 4, 35> 37> xi - 9> 4§, xii. 26, xiii. 17, xiv. 7, 14, 15, 28, 
 xv. 6, 7, 10, 18, 19, 20 {bis), 22, 24, xviii. 36, xx. 23 (bis). 
 
 (f3) kolOws, and ov Ka6w% v. 30, vi. 57, x. 15, xiv. 27, xv. 4, 9, 
 xvii. 18, xx. 21. 
 
 (y) on, XIV. 19 otl iya> £di kcu {i/xets ^r/crere. 
 (8) oVtti', iv. 25, viii. 44, ix. 5, x. 4, xv. 26. 
 [2002] (3) With Imperatives : 
 
 ii. 16, iii. 7, v. 8, 28, v. 39 (?) Ipavvare ras ypa(pd<; (but see 2439 (i)), 
 v. 45, vi. 20, 27, vii. 24, 52, xii. 35, xiv. 1, 11, 27, 31, xv. 4. 
 (4) With Interrogatives : 
 V. 44 7Tws, vi. 42 7rws, vii. ig ov Mwdct^s, vii. 42 ou^ 17 ypacprj. 
 
 1 i. 6. 
 71 
 
[2003] ASYNDETON 
 
 (5) With Negatives : 
 
 i. 8, v. 30, v. 37 ovt€, vi. 44 ouSet'?, vii. 7, viii. 27, 29, xiii. 18, 
 xiv. 6 ovSet?, xiv. 18, xv. 16, xvii. 9, 15, xxi. 12 ovSets. 
 
 [2003] (6) With the Object : 
 
 (a) Object followed by Verb, vi. 68, viii. 26, 41, ix. 21, 25, 
 x. 18, xiii. 34, xiv. 27 {bis). 
 
 (/?) Object followed by Verb with Adverb or Clause intervening, 
 v. 41, xiii. 37. 
 
 (y) Object qualified by Relative or Participial Clause, xiv. 10, 
 
 XV. 2 ; or with Adj., xvi. 2 a7roo-waywyous TroLfj<rov(Tiv v/xa?, XV. 13 
 yu.et£om TavTi]<; ayaTrrjv ouSeis e'x et - 
 
 [2004] (7) With Participles : 
 
 (a) Participle without Article, i. 42 e^At'i^as avrai, xiii. 25 
 aj'a7T€ow ckcifos oiirius, XX. 1 6 <7Tpa(f)e2aa eKt/'vr/ Aeyci auraJ, xxi. 20 
 i7TL(TTpu<f>£l<; 6 IleVpos. 
 
 (/3) Participle preceded by Article (with or without intervening 
 Adverb or Adverbial Phrase), hi. 6, 18 {bis), 29, 31 {bis), 33, 36, 
 v - 2 3> vi - 35' 54, 58. vii. 18, 38, viii. 12, 47, xi. 26, xii. 25, 48, 
 xiv. 9, 21, 24, xv. 5, 23. 
 
 (y) Participle preceded by Article and 7rus, vi. 45, xviii. 37, 
 xix. 12. 
 
 (8) With Prepositions : 
 
 (a) Preposition and Noun, i. 1, 10, n, iv. 31, ix. 32, xiv. 2, 
 
 xvi. ^^ xvu - *6- 
 
 {(3) Preposition and Pronoun, v. 3, x. 9. See also 2006. 
 
 [2005] (9) With Pronouns: 
 
 (a) eyw (apart from eyoj el/ja) iv. 38, v. 43, vii. 8, 29, viii. 15, 23, 
 x. 10, 30, xii. 46, xiii. 18, xvi. 33, xvii. 4, 9, 14, xviii. 20, 37. 
 
 (/3) £yw dfxi vi. 48, 51, viii. 18, x. 9, n, 14, xv. 1, 5. 
 
 (y) 77/Aeis ix. 4 (accus.), ix. 24, 29; at beginning of speech 
 viii. 41, xii. 34, xix. 7 ; at beginning of clause iv. 22. 
 
 (S) (TV xxi. 17 (^ai/Tci crv oI8as, crv yu'wcrKCis). 
 
 (t) fyuls iv. 22, v. 33, vii. 8, viii. 15, 23, 41, 44, xiii. 13, xiv. 17, 
 xv. 14, xvi. 20. 
 
 (£) aAA.o(t) iv. 38, v. 32, vii. 41, ix. 9 {bis), x. 21, xii. 29. 
 (■q) ttvro's ix. 21, iii. 28 avTol v/xas 
 
 (0) e/ceu'os iii. 30, v. 35, viii. 44, ix. 9, xvi. 14, xx. 15. 
 
 (1) ovros (apart from ravra) i. 2, 7, 30, iii. 2, iv. 18, 47, v. 6, 
 vi. 50, 58, viii. 40, x. 3, xxi. 14, 24. 
 
 (k) TaSra i. 28, vi. 59, viii. 30, ix. 6, 22, xi. 11, xii. 16, 36, 
 
 72 
 
ASYNDETON [2008] 
 
 xii. 41, xiii. 21, xiv. 25, xv. 11, 17, xvi. 1, 25, 33, xvii. 1, xviii. 1, 
 XX. 14 (for /nerd ravra, see 2006). 
 
 (A) outos, TavTr;i', ravra etc. in agreement, ii. 11, viii. 20, x. 18, 
 X. 6, xv. 1 2 avrrj iarlv 77 ivroXrj ■>) ifxrj. 
 
 [2006] Forms of ovros with Prepositions : 
 
 (a) <ka tovto vii. 22, viii. 47, ix. 23, x. 17, xii. 39, xiii. 11, 
 xvi. 15, xix. n. 
 
 (/?) e/c rovrov vi. 66, xix. 12. 
 
 (y) iv toutu) xiii. 35, xv. 8, xvi. 30. 
 
 (8) fxerd tovto ii. 12, xix. 28. 
 
 (e) fxera ravra iii. 22, v. 1, 14, vi. 1, xxi. 1. 
 
 [2007] (10) With Relative clauses introduced by 2, oVou, ok, oVe : 
 
 i. 4, iii. 32, viii. 21, xii. ^6, xvii. 12. 
 
 (11) With the Subject: 
 
 (a) Subject followed immediately (or with intervening Adverb 
 or Adverbial Clause) by Verb 1 , i. 15, iii. 8, 35, iv. 20, vi. 49, 63, 
 vm - *3> 35> 5 2 > 5 6 > ix. 41, x. 10, 11, xviii. 35, xix. 29. (In xvii. 17 
 the verb is aA^eia kcrriv.) 
 
 (/?) Subject qualified by Relative Clause or by Participle, i. 18, 
 vi - 37, 63, x. 8, 12, 25, xii. 48". 
 
 [2008] (12) With the Verb (not including aVe*^, el™, or 
 
 Ae'yei) 3 : 
 
 (a) Verb absolute, or followed by Adverbial Phrase, iv. 30, 
 xiv. 1, xvi. 28 (bis, the second time preceded by irdXiv), xxi. 3. 
 
 (fi) Verb followed immediately by Subject or Predicate, i. 6, 
 9, 40, 41, 45- 47, ii- 17. iv. 7, 50, v. 15, vii. 32, viii. 50, 54, ix. 4, 35, 
 xi. 35, 44, xii. 22, xiii. 23, xvi. 25, xviii. 25, xx. 18, 26, xxi. 13. 
 
 (y) Verb followed thus, but with Adverb or Adverbial Phrase 
 intervening, x. 22, xiii. 22 ej3\€7rov eis d\\7]\ov<s oi fx., xxi. 2. 
 
 (S) Verb followed immediately by Object (with or without 
 intervening Adverb or Possessive Genitive), i. 42, vii. 34, ix. 13, 
 x. 30, xiii. 33, xvii. 6. 
 
 (e) Verb followed by oti, viii. 37, ix. 31, olSa and oiSafxev, 
 
 XIV. 28 rjKovcrare. 
 
 (£) To these add vi. 45 ecrriv yeypa/A/xeVov, ix. 40 rjKOvaav €K t<2v 
 
 <E>apio-a<W ravra, where e/< twv <i>. is the Subject. 
 
 1 In xvi. 21 i] YW77 orav rUrri, a conjunction intervenes. 
 
 2 Asyndeton is also found in i. 39, iv. 7, xix. 14 wpa yi>, and x. 22 x^ 1 ^" V u - 
 
 3 Asyndeton with these initial verbs is too frequent to permit or need a collec- 
 tion of all the references. 
 
 73 
 
[2009] CASES 
 
 CASES 
 
 I Accusative 
 
 (i) Adverbial 
 
 [2009] This occurs in Jn vi. 10 tov dptOjxov, viii. 25 rrjv apxWi on 
 which see 2154 — 6, xv. 25 Swpeai' (from Ps. lxix. 4) which needs no 
 comment. The present section will deal only with vi. 10 (R.V.) 
 "Make the people (tov<; dvOpioirovs) sit down... So the men (ol aj/Spes) 
 sat down in number about five thousand (tov dpiOfxor ws TrtvTa- 
 Kio-xtAioi)." A distinction is probably intended by R.V. between 
 " the people," i.e. the whole number, including women and children, 
 and the "men" who are described by Matthew as (xiv. 21) "about 
 five thousand men (avSpes) beside women and children." But, if this 
 distinction were insisted on in the R.V. of John, the meaning would 
 be that although the Lord commanded that all the "people" should 
 be made to sit down, including the women and children, yet, for 
 some reason or other, only "the men" sat down. We can however 
 retain a distinction between dvOputiroL and avSpes by dropping ol with 
 W.H. marg. "they sat down therefore, [being] men [exclusive of women] 
 to the number of five thousand 1 ." 
 
 [2010] "In number "is not inserted by the Three Synoptists in 
 the Five Thousand narrative, nor by the Two in the Four Thousand. 
 Cramer quotes a Greek commentator, " He numbers the me)i alone, 
 following the customs of the Law 2 "; and it is probable that John 
 means this. John may have considered that Matthew was right in 
 inferring, from some ancient phrase about the " numbering" that 
 "women and children" were not included: but if the old Tradition 
 did not mention "women and children," and Mark and Luke did 
 not mention them, John may have preferred to return to the exact 
 words, while suggesting the truth of Matthew's interpretation by the 
 contrast between "men" and "people." 
 
 [2011) The noun "number," apart from Lk. xxii. 3 "Judas... 
 being of the number of the twelve," and Rom. ix. 27 (Hos. i. 10) is 
 
 1 (2009 n] (W.II.) aviirtaav r ovv ol avopes^ tov dpt0/j.6v ws Trevraiuaxl^i-oi (marg. 
 01V, avdpes). Less probably, ovv, ol avdpes might be read, " they s;U down therefore 
 — the men {-were, or, being] five thousand." 
 
 1 [2010a] Cramer ii. 242 MapovcrCov 8t ywaiKuiv avv t^kvois /j.6vovs tovs avdpas 
 dpidfxt? reus Kara, rbv v6fxov o~vvrjdtiat.s clkoXovOQv. 
 
 74 
 
ACCUSATIVE [2013] 
 
 used only in Acts and Revelation. In the former, it is always (with 
 one exception) used to describe the growth of the Church 1 ; and it 
 is appropriate here in a narrative that is typical of that growth. In 
 the Pentateuch, it is frequently used in connexion with numbering 
 prescribed by the Law, and kclt dpiOfxor is frequent. But the 
 adverbial rbv api6p.6v rarely or never occurs in canon. LXX~. 
 
 (ii) Absolute, or suspensive 
 
 [2012] On vi. 39 iva irau . . . p,rj airoXecro) i£ avrov (where v. may 
 possibly, but not probably, be accus., see 1921 — 2), and on xv. 2 irav 
 
 K\rj/J.a....aipei avro... irav to Kapirbv cpepov KaOaipti avro, see 1920 — 2. 
 
 (iii) Denoting time, but not duration 
 
 [2013] iv. 52 — 3 '"Yesterday, \abouf\ the seventh hour (wpav 
 i(386fxr]i') the fever left him.' The father, therefore, recognised that [it 
 had left him] at that same hour (iKuvrj rfj u>pa) s ." The accus. is 
 freq. in LXX in the phrase Trjv wpav Tavrrjv avpiov, which was 
 apparently intended by the translators to mean "about this time 
 to-morrow" (but see Gesen. 453) representing the Hebrew "as the 
 time " or " at the like of the time " : and it occurs in Rev. iii. 3 " thou 
 shalt not know what hour (ttoio.v wpav) I will come against thee 4 ." 
 It is perhaps vernacular, like our " what time did it happen ? " If so, 
 the servants speak in the vernacular, as well as loosely, not knowing 
 that their master wanted to know the time exactly. Subsequently 
 the dative is used to denote the exact point of time. The father, 
 hearing the words "about the seventh hour," recognised the 
 coincidence between '•'■seventh''' and the exact hour when Jesus 
 pronounced the words " Thy son liveth." 
 
 1 Acts iv. 4, vi. 7, xi. 21, xvi. 5. The exception is v. 36. 
 
 2 [2011 a] It occurs in 2 Mace. viii. 16 oVras rbv (A oi?i.) a. e£a/acrxtX'ous, 
 3 Mace. v. 2 rotis i\^(pavras woTicrai outols rbv d. irevTaKoalovs, also in Susan. 30 of 
 the kinsfolk and attendants ocres rbv dpid/xov irevraKocnoi irapeyivovro (Theod. om.). 
 In classical Gk it is freq. e.g. Aristoph. Av. 1251. 
 
 3 [2013 a] Strictly, the sense demands " The father, therefore, inquired further 
 and ascertained that it was not only about, but precisely at, the time when....' 
 But the text is according to nature. The father — fastening on the word "seventh" 
 apart from its context — says " That was precisely the number." See 2025 — 6. 
 
 4 [2013(5] See Ex. ix. 18, 1 K. xix. 2, xx. 6. In Acts x. 3 wael irepl iipav 
 eva-TTiv r. T]/j.epas, D is wanting, and W.H. follow the best MSS. in inserting wept. 
 The accus. of duration in Jn is too frequent and regular to need comment. -Mk 
 xiii. 35 /xfcrovvKTiov is prob. an adverb (2678). 
 
 75 
 
[2014] CASES 
 
 (iv) Cognate 
 
 [2014] Such a cognate accusative as vii. 24 rrjv SlkuUv Kp[o-iv 
 k P lu€T€ requires no comment. But it is very unusual that this 
 construction should accompany an accusative of the person as in 
 xvii. 26 -q dya-n-q rjv rjydir-qo-ds fie, and it is surprising that (according 
 to Alford) no Greek uncial except D has substituted rj for ffv. It is 
 probably more than a mere coincidence that the only other such 
 combination of personal and cognate accusative is a similar phrase, 
 
 Ephesians ll. 4 01a ttjv Tro\\rji> dydir-qv avTov rjv r/yaVT/crcj' 77/xas. But 
 
 there the relative may have been attracted to the case of the 
 antecedent. Here no such explanation is possible, and the dative 
 might have been used as in iii. 29 x a pa x a W e h "rejoiceth with joy" 
 Possibly the evangelist, in these last and most solemn words of the 
 Son's Last Prayer, shrank from representing the love of God as 
 instrumental ("wherewith"). God, he says elsewhere, "is love," and 
 the love " wherewith " men would describe Him as loving, is really a 
 part of Himself, emanating from Himself. Therefore a cognate 
 accusative is preferred even though combined— uniquely in N.T. — 
 with an accusative of the personal object 1 . 
 
 (v) With special verbs 
 
 (a) 'Akoyoo 
 
 [2015] 'Akovw with accusative is sometimes to be distinguished 
 from a. with genitive, the former meaning "perceive by hearing," 
 "catch the sound of," while the latter means "understand by 
 hearing," "catch the meaning of." See 1614. 
 
 (/3) rey'oMAi 
 
 [2016] Tevofiat with accusative occurs in ii. 9 (R.V.) "And when 
 the ruler of the feast tasted the water now become wine (cos Se 
 eyeva-aro o a. to v8wp oh>ov yeyevqfxevov) and knew not whence it was 
 (but the servants which had drawn the water knew) the ruler of the 
 feast calleth the bridegroom...." A.V. has " the water that was made 
 wine," which would require to to be repeated after v8tap. R.V. marg. 
 has " tasted the water that it had become wine." This would explain 
 the construction here as parallel with that of yei'o/x«' meaning 
 
 1 [2014 r/] I have not found in classical Gk an instance of dyaTrav rwa with 
 &-yain)v. But comp. Otiyss. xv. 245 6v...<f>L\ei (i.e. e^lXei) TravToi^f 0i\<5T?/ra, and 
 Soph. Electra 1034 tovovtov ^^os ix^° Ll P' j} ff ' (yd. 
 
 7 6 
 
ACCUSATIVE [2017] 
 
 "taste and see that," in Hebrews " Having tasted [and seen that] the 
 word of God [is] good 1 ." But that construction is very rare. The 
 writer is there quoting from the Psalms, and perhaps erroneously, as 
 he differs both from the Greek and from the Hebrew. 
 
 [2017] In Jn viii. 52 "he shall not taste of death," the genitive 
 is used, and the question in ii. 9 is, whether the accusative is used 
 like the genitive to mean " taste of" or to mean " taste and perceive 
 that." Outside LXX yevofiat is rarely used with accusative : but in 
 LXX the accusative is fairly frequent 2 . In N.T., ycuopu is never 
 used with the accusative except in Hebrews as above mentioned and 
 here 3 . On the whole the grammatical evidence favours the view (of 
 R.V. marg.) that John would not have used the accusative if he had 
 not meant something different from " tasted of the water." But 
 there is great difficulty in harmonizing with the context the marginal 
 reading of R.V. "tasted the water that it had become wine." For 
 this is the first indication in the narrative that the water has become 
 wine, and we should expect — if the taster knew that the liquid had 
 recently been water — " tasted the water and found to his astonishment 
 that it had become wine." Besides, if John meant "taste and see 
 that," why did he use the accusative and not on as in Proverbs 
 (2016 a)? The context indicates that the taster knew nothing of 
 the conversion of the water to wine but simply pronounced the 
 wine unusually good. 
 
 1 [2016 a] Heb. vi. 5 kclXov yevcra/j.ei'ovs deov prj/J.a (the nearest approach to 
 which is Herod, vii. 46 yXvKvv yevaas rbv alQiva. " having made us taste, i.e. perceive, 
 life to be sweet ") is a free quotation from Ps. xxxiv. 8 " taste and see that (yevaaade 
 xal i'Sere on.) the Lord is good." In the context (Heb. vi. 4) yeuo/xcu occurs with 
 the ordinary genitive ("having tasted of the heavenly gift"). Tevo/xai means 
 " taste [and see] that (on) " " i.e. perceive that " in Prov. xxxi. 18. It also means 
 "discriminate the taste of" and governs accus. in Job xii. rr o-ira (parall. to 
 diaKpivei), xxxiv. 3 ppwaiv (parall. to ookl/jlo. j'et) , comp. Sir. xxxvi. 19 "As the 
 palate discriminates (yeverat) the flesh of beasts of the chase (0pui/j.aTa drjpas) so 
 doth the understanding heart [discriminate'] false words." 
 
 2 [2017a] Steph. quotes only Antig. Caryst., Leonid., and the dictum of 
 Suidas, yevopLdL, ainanKy. In LXX (besides the instances above mentioned) 
 yevofxai is found with (1 S. xiv. 29 — 43) fipaxv t. fieXiros TOVTov...j3paxu /J-eXi, (Tob. 
 vii. ir) ov8ei>, (Jon. iii. 7) fi-qSiu : but always with dprov (1 S. xiv. 24, 1 S. hi. $?, 
 1 Esdr. ix. 2). In LXX, the accus. with yevofxai is always neuter, except where it 
 is parall. (Job xxxiv. 3) to So/a/udfet. See 2016 a. 
 
 3 [2017 £] The instances with genit. are Mk ix. 1, Mt. xvi. 28, Lk. ix. 27 
 9a.va.Tov, Lk. xiv. 24 y. fxov r. deiirvov, Jn viii. 52 davarov, Acts xxiii. 14 jxi^oevos, 
 Heb. ii. 9 davarov, vi. 4 dwpeas. 
 
 77 
 
[2018] CASES 
 
 [2018] These facts are almost conclusive against R.V. margin. 
 The difficulty of R.V. text may be diminished by punctuating some 
 of the words as part of a parenthesis and by rendering yevofxat with 
 the accusative (as in Proverbs) " tasted " in the sense of "tested." 
 The writer speaks of "the water — [now] become wine," somewhat as 
 he speaks of the blind man of Siloam, when healed, in different 
 phrases — "the formerly blind," "the blind," "the man that had 
 recovered sight 1 ." So here, the wine might be called "the formerly 
 water" or "the now wine." The attendants brought it as "water," 
 the master of the feast tested it as " wine." The evangelist combines 
 the facts thus : " Now when the master of the feast tasted the water — 
 [now] become wine (and 2 (/<at) he knew not whence it was, but the 
 attendants knew, they that had drawn the water) — the master of the 
 feast called the bridegroom and said...." This is almost equivalent 
 to " Now when he tasted the water — [/say wafer, but] it had become 
 wine... 3 ." This brief and parenthetic statement of the first of 
 Christ's miracles — in which the reader is let into the secret in two 
 words ("become wine") while the master of the feast talks, outside 
 the secret, in twenty ("Every man — until now") is highly 
 characteristic of the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 (y) TTpOCKYNe'cO 
 
 [2019] Upoa-Kweoi in the following passage is used, first, with 
 dative, then with doubtful case, then again with dative, and then with 
 accusative : iv. 21 — 3 "Ye shall worship the Father (dat.) Ye worship 
 [that] which (?) ye know not, we worship [that] which (?) we know 4 ... 
 shall worship the Father (dat.)... the Father seeketh... those worship- 
 ping him (accus.). God is Spirit, and they that worship him (accus.) 
 must worship in spirit and truth." See 1640—51, where it is shewn 
 that (1) the dative is the regular form in LXX, but the accusative in 
 classical Greek ; (2) the dative emphasizes the notion of " prostrating 
 oneself to a person, idol, or God," while the accusative means 
 " adore " without this emphasis. Here, as between the Jews and the 
 Samaritans, Jesus uses the Hebrew construction " Neither in this 
 
 1 ix. 13, 17, 18. 
 
 - Possibly Kal means " and yet," or " but," see 2136—45. 
 
 '■* [2018 a] Codex a actually reads " aqua," but probably through scribal error: 
 "cum autem gustasset architriclinus aqua vinum factum " 
 
 4 [2019 n] In iv. 22 tt. 8 ovk oiSare 8 oidanev, the antecedent may be dat. or 
 
 accus. Heracleon (Orig. Conim. Iluet ii. 213 1! i)8e<ra.v rlvi wpocrKvvovai) took it to 
 be dative. 
 
 78 
 
DATIVE [2021] 
 
 mountain nor in Jerusalem shall ye bow yourselves clown to the 
 Father " ; and this is repeated : " They shall bow down to the Father 
 [not in any place but] in spirit and truth." But when the doctrine 
 proceeds to base this prediction on the general statement that God 
 is Spirit, and seeks such worshippers, the Greek phrase is used, 
 "those worshipping him (accus.)." 
 
 II Dative f 
 
 (i) Of instrument 
 
 [2020] xxi. 8 " But the other disciples came by the little boat 
 (tuj 7rAotapto) rjXOov)" appears to mean something different from 
 coming "in (iv) the boat," the phrase used by Mark 1 . In Mk vi. 32, 
 Tischendorf follows the authorities that omit iv 2 , and there the 
 meaning may be that Jesus avoided the multitude by departing 
 11 by boat," as distinct from " on foot" which is mentioned by Mark 
 in the context. Chrysostom here contrasts "coming by the boat" 
 with " swimming 3 ." 
 
 (ii) Of time (completion) 
 
 [2021] ii. 20 (R.V.) "Forty and six years was this temple in 
 
 building," Tea-a-epaKOVTa kou e£ crecrtv wKoSofxtjOr] 6 vads ovto<;, is 
 
 generally taken by modern commentators as referring to the Herodian 
 Temple, which, it is supposed, was still being built at the time when 
 the Jews uttered these words, so that they would mean, in effect, 
 " Forty-six years is it since the building of this Temple began [and 
 it is not yet finished]." This would practically give a " dative of 
 duration of time." Such a dative is found in late Gk, e.g. Joseph. 
 Ant. i. 3. 5 to iJSoj/d ^/xepats TecraapaKovTa o'Acu? Kare^e'peTO, Euseb. v. 1 
 7toAA.chs eTea- iv...o'<.aTpu//a<;, but always in passages where there is no 
 possibility of confusing the dative of duration with the dative of 
 
 t For the dative with special verbs, e.g. Triffrevw, rrpoaKvviu, see the special 
 verbs in Index. 
 
 1 Mk v. 21, vi. 32, with dicnrepdaavTos and dirTJXdov. Mt. xiv. 13 also has iv 
 ■n-Xoiip (but without the article) with dvex&priaev. 
 
 - [2020 a] In Mk vi. 32 dirrjXdov iv tu irXoiy W.H. ins. iv without alter- 
 native : the text there varies greatly. 
 
 3 [2020 fi] 'AW ovdi ovtws iKaprip-que ry ttXoIu) irpbs avrbv iXdetv a\\a vrjxb^tvos 
 Trapeyivero. 
 
 79 
 
[2022] CASES 
 
 completion, which is the natural construction here, " was built [and 
 completed^ in forty-six years 1 ." 
 
 [2022] Heracleon referred the words to Solomon's temple. 
 Origen points out that Solomon's temple was built in seven years, 
 and adds that there are no means of clearly connecting "forty-six 
 years" with Ezra's temple 2 . He takes it for granted that wkoSo/jltjOtj 
 means " was built " in past times, but appears to give up the problem. 
 The Herodian theory he does not so much as mention. The details 
 given by Josephus (Ant. xv. n. i foil, and elsewhere) make it clear 
 that a Jew would say about Herod's temple, "This work took from 
 eight to ten years to finish, and the completion was celebrated with 
 great splendour in Herod's lifetime." It is true that, after the great 
 fire in the reign of Archelaus and some sinking of the foundations, 
 the Temple constantly needed repairs : but, even if we could suppose 
 with probability that the Jews were referring to these repairs as 
 " building," the number of years would not suit the supposition. 
 For according to Lightfoot (B.E. p. 31) the Jews, at the time of 
 the Passover, might have said forty-seven years, and, according to 
 Westcott (ad toe.), forty-nine. It is against nature to suppose that 
 they would have definitely understated this as "■forty -six.''' Much 
 more probably they would have said " some fifty years." 
 
 1 [2021 a] E.g. there is no possibility of confusing Ezr. v. 16 d-rrb Tore 'ius rov 
 vvv uKodofirjOy] ical ovk eTeXiadrj, parall. 1 Esdr. vi. 19 dv ixelvov M^XP' T °u v *> v 
 oiKo5op.ovp.evos ovk £\a8e avvr^Xeiav. 
 
 - [2022 a] Westcott does not mention Origen's and Heracleon's views, and the 
 former is represented in Clark's transl. as saying "Someone else will say that the 
 temple. ..was. ..the temple built at the time of Ezra, with regard to which the forty- 
 six years can be shewn to be quite accurate." But Huet gives, for the words I have 
 italicised (ii. 188 e) wepl ov ovk ^x°/ a61 ' Tpavuss rbv tCiv TeaaapaKovra tcai ?§ iruiv 
 diroSu^ai dX-qdei'6/j.evov Xdyov, i.e. " with regard to which we are not able clearly to 
 demonstrate that the statement of forty-six years is truly stated " — implying that 
 Origen knew that there were arguments for it, but not such as were clearly 
 demonstrative. Clark proceeds, "But in this Maccabean period things were very 
 unsettled with regard to the people ami the temple, and I do not know if the 
 temple was really built in that number of years." But the words are, toim hk koX 
 Kara ret /xaKKaBaiKa woXXr) rts aKaraaraaia ytyovevai irepl rbv Xabv Kai rbv vabv Kai 
 ovk olda e£' iron ipKodopLrjOr] toctovtols ZreaLv vaos. Steph. gives fiaKKa.8a.iKd as 
 meaning "the hooks of the Maccabees" and ttot( appears to mean "ever" or "at 
 any rate" — " I do not know whether the temple was ever built in this number of 
 years." The Latin lias "tunc'' (reading rbre). Origen introduces all this with 
 the words (Huet ii. 1S7 E) "How the Jews [can] say they built the temple in 
 forty-six years we are not able to say if we are to follow the history exactly," wQs t. 
 k. I£ 'ireatv ipKoOop-TJo-aL (sic) <f>acri rbv vabv ol 'Iot'Satot Xtyovrai (marg. Xtytiv) ovk 
 ixoiitv ei ttj ioTopla. KaraKoXovO^aonev. 
 
 8(3 
 
DATIVE [2025] 
 
 [2023] But the definite " forty-six years" can be explained 
 as follows in accordance with Jewish feeling, with the views of 
 Heracleon, with the chronology of Eusebius, with the text of LXX, 
 and with the language of Josephus. It was an error relating to 
 the second temple, the temple of Ezra, which the Jews, among 
 themselves, would regard as merely repaired by Herod, not as rebuilt. 
 The edict for rebuilding was issued (Ezr. v. 13) "in the first year 
 of Cyrus king of Babylon" i.e. 538 B.C. But LXX omits "of 
 Babylon " having " Cyrus the king." And the Hebrew itself has 
 gone further in Ezra i. 1 " In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia" 
 But this is 559 B.C. Josephus {Ant. xi. 1. 1) says that the edict 
 was issued "in the first year of the reign of Cyrus" which is 
 ambiguous : he also says that the temple was completed in the 
 ninth year of Darius, i.e. B.C. 513. Now from 559 b.c. to 513 B.C. 
 gives " forty-six years," as is stated in the chronology of Eusebius 
 extracted from Syncellius (vol. ii. p. 81) "Now from the second 
 year of Darius until the sixth it [the temple] was fully completed... 
 within forty-six entire years from the first year of Cyrus 1 ." 
 
 [2024] When the Herodian temple was destroyed it was not 
 unnatural that Talmudic traditions should dwell upon its splendour : 
 but it is very unlikely that Jews born in the reign of Herod the 
 Idumaean would recognise him as a Builder like Solomon or Ezra. 
 Possibly when it fell into disrepair they would console themselves — 
 as with the proverb "Rome was not built in a day" — by reflecting 
 that the building of the Temple in former times lingered through 
 two reigns, and by repeating to one another that " In the days of 
 Cyrus and Darius this temple took forty-six whole years to build.'''' 
 Josephus, though his chronology may have led to this error, did not 
 himself commit the error : and possibly our evangelist did not. He 
 may have taken it as the mere chatter of the " Jews " whose ignorant 
 talk he elsewhere holds up to ridicule. But, in any case, no reliance 
 can be placed on " forty-six " as determining the date at which the 
 Jews were speaking, or as evidence of the evangelist's presence 
 as an ear-witness. He may have obtained this detail from books. 
 
 (iii) Of point of time 
 
 [2025] iv. 53 "The father therefore recognised that [it was] 
 at that same hour (on Ikwyj rfj wpa) in the course of which (iv ?y)..-." 
 
 1 'Atto 5e deurepov grovs Aapeiov ews sktov dvew\ijpd}0ri...ev p.S~' treatf 6'Aots dwo 
 rod TTpwrov Ztovs Ktipov. 
 
 A. VI. 81 6 
 
[2026] CASES 
 
 The majority of MSS. (Alford) insert iv before iKeivrj. Its omission 
 by the best mss. gives us "the dative of the point of time" : and this 
 exactness is more suitable to the contrast, indicated above (2013), 
 with the accusative in iv. 52 "about the seventh hour," which the 
 father interprets as " precisely at the seventh hour." 
 
 [2026] The phrase " in (iv) that same hour " occurs in Matthew's 
 account of the healing of the centurion's son or servant, where the 
 parallel Luke merely says that the messengers returned and found 
 the servant healed. So where Matthew says that the Syrophoenician's 
 daughter "was healed from (curd) that same hour" Mark merely says 
 that she returned and found her healed. These are the only two 
 instances of healing at a distance in the Synoptists. Evidential 
 proof needed an instance that should combine (1) "returning a?id 
 fnding" with (2) "at that same hour" John's single tradition of 
 healing at a distance — which has many points in common with 
 Matthew's and Luke's narrative — contains this combination. It 
 should be added that " at that same hour " is peculiar to this passage 
 of John'. 
 
 (iv) With irapd 
 
 [2027] The Synoptic 7rapa dew — in the phrases "possible with 
 God 2 ," "favour with God 3 ," "ye have no reward with your Father 
 which is in heaven" (A.V. (txt) "of your Father 4 ") — rather gives 
 the impression of meaning "in the sight of God." But the exact 
 meaning of the preposition is "by the side of"; and this may be 
 interpreted (in accordance with a frequent use of irapd in Greek 
 literature) as meaning "in the house of" John brings out this, which 
 one may call "the domestic meaning," much more clearly, via. 38 
 "That which I have seen in the house of the Father," xvii. 5 "And 
 now glorify thou me, O Father, in thine own house (irapa crcavrw) 
 with the glory that I had in thy house \yrapa croC\ before the world 
 was." The latter may be compared with the saying of Wisdom 
 about herself and the Creator, "Before his works of old... or ever 
 the earth was... I was by him (rjp-rjv trap aur<3) 5 ." Both here and 
 
 1 [2026 a] Luke has "in (iv) that same hour " once, vii. 21 "in that same 
 hour he healed many «>f diseases." Hut lie prefers ii. 38, xxiv. 33 avrrj 7-17 
 wpq. "at that very hour," x. 21, xii. 12, xiii. 31, xx. 19 iv avry r. u., "in that 
 very hour." 
 
 2 Mk x. 27, Mt. xix. 26, Lk. xviii. 27. :! Lk. i. 30, ii. 52. 
 4 Mt. vi. 1. s Prov. viii. 22 — 30. 
 
 82 
 
GENITIVE [2030] 
 
 in John, we might render irapd "by the side of" or "in the bosom 
 of." On the distinction between 7rapa tw -rrarpi and napa tov 
 7rarpos in Jn viii. 38, see 2355 — 7. 
 
 Ill Genitive 
 
 (i) Absolute 
 
 [2028] Mark uses this construction somewhat monotonously for 
 the most part to introduce the circumstances of a new narrative in 
 such phrases as "when it was late," "when he was going forth," 
 "while he was yet speaking" etc. In four of these instances the 
 parallel Matthew and Luke employ the same construction 1 . Mark 
 never uses it in Christ's words, except once in the Parable of 
 the Sower 2 . 
 
 [2029] Matthew, in the Triple Tradition, uses it freely, like 
 Mark, in the temporal clauses of narrative (often however with 8e 
 where Mark has kcu'). He introduces it thrice in Christ's words, 
 all in the Parable of the Sower and its explanation ; and one of 
 the three agrees with Mark 3 . As in Mark, the implied conjunction 
 is "when" or "while," with perhaps one exception 4 . 
 
 [2030] In the Triple Tradition, Luke introduces it twice into 
 Christ's Discourse on the Last Days in insertions peculiar to him- 
 self 5 , once in Christ's instructions for the preparation of the Passover 6 , 
 and once in the words of our Lord at His arrest 7 . Luke appears to 
 use it causally in xxiii. 44 — 5 "There came a darkness... the sun 
 failing, or, being eclipsed" and quasi-causally in xxii. 55 "Now as 
 they had lighted (irepia^avTuiv Se) a fire...," xxiv. 5 "Now as they 
 were terrified (e/x<^o'/3wi' Se yi.vop.ivwv)." Except in these three 
 
 1 [2028 a] Mk i. 32, ix. 9, xi. 27, xiv. 43, and parall. Mt.-Lk. The vb. is not 
 the same in all these cases. I have not noticed more than these four agreements 
 of Mt.-Lk. with Mk in about 30 instances of the genit. abs. in Mk. In Mk 
 the clause is almost always preceded by nai. 
 
 2 [2028(5] Mk iv. 17 elra. yevofxivrfs dXiipews, Mt. xiii. 21 yevoixivrjs 8e dXitpeus^ 
 Lk. viii. 13 kcu ev Kaipui ireLpa.criJ.ov. 
 
 3 Mt. xiii. 6, 19, 21. 
 
 4 [2029 a] Mt. xxvi. 60 /cat ou'x tvpov iroWQiv irpoo-e\dbvTiov ipevdofMapTvpuv. 
 
 5 Lk. xxi. 26 airoipvxovTuiv ai>dpd)irwi>, xxi. 28 dpxo/J^vuv Be tovtwv ylveaOai.. 
 
 6 Lk. xxii. 10 'I5oi> eiaeXddvTuv vp.Qv eh tt]v tt6\ii> (Mk xiv. 13, Mt. xxvi. 18 
 TTrayere els ttjv tt6\lv). 
 
 7 Lk. xxii. 53 Kad' i}p.ipau ovtos fiov (Mk xiv. 49 fifxi)v, Mt. xxvi. 55 
 eKa6e^6fj.T]v). 
 
 8s 6—2 
 
[2031] CASES 
 
 passages, Luke appears, like Matthew and Mark, to imply "when" 
 or " while." 
 
 [2031] /;/ no case does John use the genitive absolute in recording 
 Christ's words. Elsewhere he employs it with more elasticity of 
 meaning than is found in the Triple Tradition. A causal meaning 
 ("as'' or "because") is implied, probably or certainly, in ii. 3, v. 13, 
 vi. 17. " Though" is certainly implied in xii. 37, xxi. n, and 
 perhaps in xx. 19 "There cometh Jesus, the doors being shut, 
 i.e. (?) though the doors were shut 1 ." 
 
 (ii) Objective or subjective 
 
 [2032] In Greek, as in English, such a phrase as " the love of 
 God" may imply one of two propositions: — (1) "God (subject) 
 loves man, 1 ' (2) " Man loves God (object)." " Of God" if it implies 
 the former, is called a subjective genitive ; if the latter, an objective 
 genitive. "The love of God" occurs frequently in the Johannine 
 Epistle hut only once in the Gospel, v. 42 "But I know you, that 
 ye have not the love of God in you," dAAd eyvwKa v^as on T571' dyaVv/v 
 tov Otov ovk ex €T€ * v zavTols, where the question arises whether the 
 genitive is subjective or objective. The following considerations 
 make it probable that in the Gospel, as in the Epistle, it is sub- 
 jective, "the love that God gives to man." 
 
 [2033] In the first place, dyu7ny in N.T. is very rarely used with 
 objective genitive, perhaps only once or twice". It is never thus 
 
 1 [2031 a] The meaning " though " is necessitated by the context in xii. 37 
 " He having wrought so many signs they did not believe" that is, '■'though he 
 had wrought.'" This suggests that in Lk. xxii. 53 outos may be intended to 
 mean, " though I was [in the temple by day, ye did not lay hands on me]." 
 
 2 [2033 a] Westcott, on 1 Jn ii. 5, says that thegenit. with d>. "once marks the 
 object of love, 2 Thess. ii. 10 17 ay. r?)? dX?;tfei'aj." He omits Lk. xi. 42 
 7rap^px ecr ^ e T V V Kpicriv Kal rr}v aya^r/v rod deov. There it is possible that the words 
 mean "ye neglect God's judgment and God's love" i.e. the way in which God 
 judges and loves : " Ye neglect the things that God condemns and God loves, and 
 condemn the things He loves, and love the things He condemns." Hut Cyril 
 (Cramer) assumes the meaning to be dydirri 17 e/s debv (Winer and Alford are 
 silent) and most people would probably take the meaning to be " [just] judgment 
 and love toward God." 
 
 |2033/'] In 1 Thess. iii. 5 "And [may] the Lord guide your heart safe 
 (KaTevdi'vat vfiQu r. Kapdlav) into the love of God " the regular Pauline usage would 
 of itself suffice to make it almost certain that it means " the love of God [toward 
 men | " (like " the peace of God ") sometimes regarded (Rom. v. 5) as a gift of God 
 .shed forth in man's heart, but here regarded as a goal or haven. This is confirmed 
 
 84 
 
 
GENITIVE [2035] 
 
 used by St Paul, who always regards "the love of God," and "the 
 love of Christ," as, so to speak, divine inmates in man's heart, sent 
 from God. As " the peace of God " constrains a man to be peaceful, 
 and " the [social] fellowship of the Holy Spirit " constrains him 
 to be social, so "the love of God" constrains him to be loving, 
 both to God his Father and to men the children of the Father. 
 Thus " the love of God" for man causes " the love of God" iti man, 
 i.e. causes man to love God. But this consequent love of man for 
 God or for Christ is not what St Paul primarily means when he says, 
 "the love of Christ constraineth us." He means Christ's love as 
 a divine fire in the heart, driving out the fires of "this world." This 
 is invariably the meaning of the phrase in the Pauline Epistles. 
 
 [2034] And this, almost (if not quite) always, holds good in the 
 very numerous instances in which the Johannine Epistle mentions 
 " the love of God." The writer thinks of it as a gift, spirit, or germ, 
 that comes from God not from ourselves ("Not that we loved God 
 but that He loved us "). It enables us to love, as the light of the sun 
 enables us to see ; but, as the latter remains " the light of the sun," 
 so the former remains "the love of God." "The love of God" in 
 our heart, like any other vital germ, needs to be (i Jn ii. 5) 
 "perfected" by responsive human action, and it cannot grow and 
 expand without pushing out the love of the world 1 . 
 
 [2035] Greek scholars, familiar with ■>} dyd-n-r] meaning "the 
 [feeling of] love," may sometimes think that John uses the article 
 thus. But apparently he never does. The context always indicates 
 that he uses " the love" (as Jews used " the Name " and " the Will ") 
 to mean "///<? love of God revealed to men in Christ," or "the real 
 love as distinct from love so called by the world," or "the love 
 wherewith the Son loved us and bade us love one another." This 
 seems to be the meaning in 1 Jn iii. 16 "Herein know we the love 
 
 by the use of Karevduvu in Lk i. 79 "guide safely into the way of peace' 1 '' and by 
 general Greek usage (Steph.), especially by that of Clem. Alex. 654 (Steph., but ? 
 ref.) "guide the ship safe" and by Ps. cxli. 2 (LXX) " Let my prayer^ straight 
 [to heaven] as incense before thee (KaTevdwd-qru) " quoted by Clem. Alex. 857. In 
 the Pauline Epistles, both " the love of God " and " the love of Christ " always 
 mean the love of God, or of Christ, for its. 
 
 1 [2034a] But the writer does not speak of "the love of the world" as an 
 entity in the same way in which he speaks of "the love of God." He prefers the 
 verb, thus (1 Jn ii. 15) "if any man love the world the love of the Father is not 
 in him." It is the Epistle of St James that speaks of (iv. 4) " the friendship 
 of the world." 
 
 85 
 
[2036] CASES 
 
 [revealed by the Son of God] because he laid down his life for us," 
 and in i Jn iii. 23 — iv. 10 "Let us love one another as he gave 
 commandment to us.... Let us love one another, because the love 
 
 [wherewith he commanded us to love one another] is from God 
 
 Herein the love of God was manifested in us because he hath sent his 
 
 only begotten Son herein is the lone [of God], not because we 
 
 have loved God, but because he loved us." Unloving conduct on 
 the part of a Christian is a proof that this divine entity is not in his 
 soul, 1 Jn iii. 17 "Whoso shutteth up his heart... how abideth the 
 love of God in him ? " 
 
 [2036] These statements about "the [real] love" or "the love 
 [of God] " as an entity given to men and abiding in men, reach 
 a climax in the doctrine that God Himself is " love," and that " the 
 love of God " has the power of expelling fear if only it is allowed 
 scope so as to be perfected. The writer begins by saying " And as 
 for us, our whole knowledge, yea, our whole faith, consists in the love 
 that God hath in us'." That is to say, as we are in the sunlight even 
 
 1 [2036 a] 1 Jn iv. 16 ko.1 jj^eh iyv<±n<afiev /ecu TTeiriaTevKaixev tt\v dydwrjv rjv ?x eL 
 6 8e6s iv irjixiv. The writer seems to have begun with the intention of saying " We 
 have a full knowledge of the love." Then it occurs to him that not only our 
 knowledge, but our faith is wrapped up in this "love." To have used the dative 
 "we fully trust to the love of God " would not have expressed the meaning, which 
 is that, as we maybe said to "love [with] love" (cogn. accus. dycnrdv dydnrfv 
 (2014)), so we may be said to " trust [with] trust " (iricrTevaai irloriv), or rather to 
 trust with something more than trust — to "trust [with] love (wLUTevaai dydwrjv). ,: 
 Love is the atmosphere breathed by faith as well as the object of knowledge. 
 
 [2036/^] As to 1 Jn iv. 16 ttjv dydirriv y\v £x el ° ^ e ° s 6 " ^/""i Westcott gives 
 several instances of d.7. ^x €lv Dl U none of d.7. e r x e "' %" Tlvl except Jn xiii. 35 idv dy. 
 %XV T€ & d\\r)\oLs, where iv dMiyXcus — a phrase capable of being applied to inter- 
 course hostile as well as friendly (Aesch. Prom. 200 ordcris r ev d\\r)\oi<riv : but 
 mostly friendly, Mk ix. 50 elprpreAere iv d. , Rom. xv. 5 rd avrb (ppovetv iv d.) — 
 appears to be disconnected from ix elv an d to mean " in your dealings with one 
 another." Perhaps "keep love" is intended to come as a climax : xiii. 34 — 5 
 
 "Love one another as I loved you, love one another thus shall men know 
 
 you to be my disciples if ye keep love among one another." In Phil. ii. 1 — 2, 
 "Comfort in Christ. ..consolation of love... fellowship of the Spirit... having 
 the same love" the meaning seems to be that the Philippians are to '■'■keep" in 
 their hearts one and "the same" quickening, consoling and comforting " love [of 
 Christ]" as also the same " Spirit [of Christ]." In 1 Pet. iv. 8 ttjv els iavrovs dy. 
 inTevrj e'x " 7 " 65 the meaning is, " keeping constantly in the full tension of exercise 
 and practice, not letting it become slack." By analogy— until there can be found 
 some instances where dy. £x w & ff °L means " I have love for thee " — we must take 
 1 |n iv. 16 "the love that God hath in us" to mean "the spark, or spirit, or 
 vitalising power, of love, which God keeps in our hearts as His representative and 
 as our comforter." 
 
 86 
 
GENITIVE [2037] 
 
 while the sunlight is in us, so it is with love. Then he proceeds, 
 " God is love, and he that abideth in the love [of God] abideth in 
 God, and God [abideth] in him. Herein hath the love [of God] been 
 perfected [working in our souls] along with us... Fear hath no 
 existence in the love [of God], but the perfected love [of God] ' casteth 
 
 out fear We (emph.) are loving [now, simply] because he first 
 
 loved us 2 ." 
 
 [2037] In the following passage, however, the objective genitive 
 seems at first sight intended, i Jn v. 2 — 3 " Herein know we that we 
 are loving the children of God when we are loving God and doing 
 his commandments. For this is the love of God (lit.) in order that 
 (tra) we should be keeping his commandments...." Here some 
 might suggest the following paraphrase : " Hereby we know that we 
 are loving God's children, not selfishly as our playthings or amuse- 
 ments, but genuinely as our brethren, when we are loving God Him- 
 self and doing His will : for ' Our love of God can only be shewn in 
 the effort to fulfil His 7vill 3 .'" But the "effort," or purpose, may, in 
 this passage, be divine, not human. For (1) it will be shewn (2093 foil.) 
 that, when our Lord says "This is my commandment in order that ye 
 may love one another," an "effort," or " object," is implied on the part 
 of the Son for the good of men, and (2) the Johannine phrase avrrj kariv 
 77 regularly introduces the definition of something that comes not from 
 man, but from God (2396 — 7). Hence we may with more probability 
 paraphrase 1 Jn v. 2 — 3 as follows : " Hereby know we that we are 
 loving the children of God [with the real love] when we are loving 
 God in our hearts and doing His will with our hands :—for this is the 
 meaning and purpose of the love of God [His gift in our hearts, 
 namely] that we should be keeping His commandments...." This 
 agrees with what is said elsewhere, " If a man does not do God's will, 
 how dwelleth the love of God in him?" So here, "What is the 
 object of the love of God in you except that you should do His 
 will?" 
 
 1 1 Jn iv. 16—18 7? reXei'a dydir-q, i.e. perfected, or fullgrown, in us, corre- 
 sponding to (iv. 17) TeTeXeiw/xevr). 
 
 2 [2036 c~\ 1 Jn iv. 19 77/ieis dyawuifxev, on avrbs irpwros T)ydirt)aev raid's. I have 
 quoted 1 Jn ii. 5 — iv. 19 fully, because Lightfoot (2 Thess. iii. 5) refers to these 
 passages as indicating that " it is very seldom possible... to separate " the meaning 
 "love of God for us" from the meaning "our love for God"— a conclusion 
 different from the one maintained above. 
 
 3 The words italicised are Westcott's paraphrase of airn] ydp icnv 17 dydin] rou 
 deov iva ras evrokds avrou T7]pu/j.ev. 
 
 §7 
 
[2038] CASES 
 
 [2038] We return to the single mention of " the love of God " in 
 the Gospel. It follows the Healing on the Sabbath. Jesus charges 
 the Jews with rejecting Him on account of this act of kindness and 
 with refusing the testimony of His works: v. 37 — 42 "The Father 
 that sent me, he hath borne witness to me. ..ye have not his word 
 (A.0'701/) abiding in you (iv vfilv //.eWra), [I say this] because him 
 
 whom he sent ye believe not ye desire not to come to me that ye 
 
 may have life I know you that ye have not the love of God in 
 
 yourselves (rrjv ay. t. Qeov ovk e^ere iv iavrois)." Theoretically, and 
 taken by themselves apart from N.T. and Johannine usage, these 
 last italicised words might mean, "Ye have no love for God," but 
 that this is not the case is probable for the two following reasons. 
 
 [2039] (1) Whenever this writer describes a believer as '•having" 
 or "to have" something "in himself" he always means " having in 
 his heart some vitalising germ placed there by God." Unstable 
 believers are described by Mark as " having no root in themselves" 
 and Matthew follows Mark. Luke omits " in themselves 1 ." Perhaps 
 Luke thought that "the root" of a Christian life is in God. There 
 is a difficulty in defining how far the divine seed in the heart of man 
 is still God's, and how far it is now man's, when it takes root there. 
 But John, though he rarely uses the metaphor of a seed, habitually 
 regards the life-giving entity as a gift from God: iv. 14 "the water 
 that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water," 
 v. 26 "as the Father hath life in himself "so also to the Son gave he to 
 have life in himself" vi. 53 "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son 
 of man and drink his blood ye have not life in yourselves." So in the 
 Epistle (iii. 15) "no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him (marg. 
 in himself)" In one passage, the fountain of life is described not as 
 "in" the believer but as gushing forth from him (vii. 37 — 8) in 
 "rivers." But in every case the evangelist, while insisting that each 
 
 believer must have this vitalising source "in his very self" for that 
 
 is the meaning of iv eaurw — always regards it as the gift of God, not 
 as the thought of man. 
 
 [2040] (2) The second reason is the parallelism between "Ye 
 have not in yourselves the love of God" and the preceding "Ye have 
 
 1 [2039^] In the explanation of the Parable of the Sower, Mk iv. 17 ovk 
 Zxoi'O-tv pi^av iv eavroh, Alt. xiii. 21 ovk i'x" 5e plfav iv tavrw, Lk. viii. 1 ; simply 
 filfav ovk ^»wi". [So Mark alone has (ix. 50) "Have salt in yours, Ires (iv 
 iavroh) and he at peace with one another (to dU^Xou)."] 
 
 88 
 
GENITIVE [2042] 
 
 not abiding in you his Logos," i.e. " the Logos that proceeds from God.'" 
 The writer assumes here (as in the Prologue) that even before 
 the Logos came to "his own," bringing Light into the world, all men 
 had some affinity to the Logos and some glimmerings of the Light, 
 But some stifled the sound of the Logos and shut out the Light, so 
 that when the crisis came — the moment for accepting or rejecting the 
 incarnate Logos — they had not a trace of the Logos in them, nor a 
 trace of the Love of God, that might have helped their hearts to go 
 forth responsively to meet the Love incarnate. In accordance with 
 this parallelism, " the love of God " would mean " the love that 
 proceeds from God": and this rendering agrees with the Johannine 
 usage elsewhere and also with the contextual phrase " have in 
 yourselves." 
 
 (iii) Partitive 
 
 [2041] In partitive phrases with ttoXvs, John never uses 
 Matthew's and Luke's expression 7roAAoi Twr..., "many of the...'." 
 But he sometimes uses a modified form of it, interposing a verb or 
 participle, e.g. " Many therefore having heard it [many L mean] of his 
 disciples, said...." In such cases, the genitive is sometimes preceded 
 by the Hebraic e« 2 : iv. 39 £k 8e rrj<; 7rdAew9 £i<eLvr]<; 7roAAoi iirio-rtvo-av 
 eis avrov rwv 2., VI. 60 iroWol ovv aKovaavres £k twi' uaOrjrwv avrov 
 eLTTav, xil. 1 1 ttoWol oi avrov virrjyov twv 'IouSattov, xix. 20 TOVTOV ovv 
 rov tltXov ttoXXoX dveyvwcrav rwv 'IowSatW. Comp. vii. 44 rives 8c 
 7}8e\ov e£ avrwv indcrai avrov. 
 
 [2042] A construction almost if not quite peculiar to John is the 
 partitive genitive, with or without «c, (a) before the governing word, 
 or (b) with no governing word. In (b), £k t<Zv <&apio-aiMv means ''from 
 the Pharisees [some]." Obviously, with a verb of motion in the 
 context this may create ambiguity, because the meaning may be 
 (1) "Some of the Pharisees came, were sent etc.," (2) "They came, 
 were sent etc. from the Pharisees." This ambiguity (on which see 
 Ellipsis, 2213 — 5) occurs in the first of the instances quoted below : — 
 
 1 [2041 a] IloWol rQv does not occur at all in Mk (Bruder) but is in Mt. iii. 7, 
 Lk. i. 16, Acts iv. 4, viii. 7, xiii. 43 etc., also in Rev. viii. 11. 
 
 " [2041^] The Hebraic " many from (Ik)" '"some from (4k)," which is also 
 used by the Synoptists (though very rarely by Mark) is fairly frequent in In, 
 especially in the Raising of Lazarus, e.g. xi. 19, 37, 45, 46. It is quite distinct 
 from the selective e/c in classical Gk, e.g. dpurroi e/c. 
 
 89 
 
[2043] CASES 
 
 1. 24 (?) Kai a.Tre<TTa\fJi£voi rjcrav €K Twf Qapio-aiiov, i. 35 lo"nr]KeL 'I. 
 Ka.L £k tcoV ixaOrjTwv avrov 8vo, vi. 1 1 (?) 6/U.ot'tos kcu zk rtov ovjapioiv ocrov 
 r/OeXov, vi. 64 aXAa ctovv e£ vfiOv -rive? 01, vi. 70 kgu e£ vfx.iav els 
 otapoA.os etTTtv, vii. 31 ck tow ayAoi; 8c 7roA.A.oi eTno-revaav €is avroV, 
 VII. 40 €K tov o%\ov ovv aKovcravrzs rwv A.oyajv rovrwv cAeyoi', 
 IX. 16 lAeyov ow ck Ttov <Pa.pLcra.iiDi> tivcs, ix. 40 ^Koucxav ex twv 
 <£>apicrautiv Tavra 01 par avrov 6Vt€S, xii. 42 o/xws p.£vroi kol €/c tcov 
 ap^oi'rwj/ 71-0A.A.01 €7rt(TTeuo"av eis auToV, XVI. I 7 €t7rai' ovv Ik rdv paO-qrwi' 
 avrov Trpos d\Xt]\ov<;, xviii. 9 ou'k a7TtoA.€cra ef auVw ouSeVa. 
 
 (iv) Before Nouns 
 
 [2043] The Synoptists place the possessive airov mostly after its 
 noun, e.g. rbv lp.dvra avrov. John frequently places it before the 
 article and its noun, e.g. avrov rbv l/xdvra 1 — somewhat like the Latin 
 dative "loose for him the shoe-latchet": this throws the emphasis 
 from the pronoun on the noun. See 2558 foil. 
 
 (v) Special passages 
 
 (a) With npooTOC and npdoTON 
 
 [2044] i. 15, 30 7rpwTo's p-ov rjv, XV. 18 ip.e irpiorov vp.tov p.ep.1- 
 o-qKev, see 1896 — 1901 and 2665 — 7, where it is maintained that the 
 latter means "me your chief" and that vp.G>v is a possessive genitive. 
 
 (J3) TiBepiaAoc 
 
 [2045] In vi. 1 " Beyond the sea of Galilee [i.e. the sea] of 
 Tiberias" the apparently superfluous genitive (Tifieptdb'os) has been 
 thought by some to be corrupt. But it is probably to be explained 
 as one of the many instances of Johannine intervention coincident 
 with, or consequent on, Luke's deviation from the Synoptists. Mark 
 and Matthew always have "the sea of Galilee," Luke calls it "the 
 lake [of] Gennesaret," and afterwards "the Lake 2 ." But Mark and 
 Matthew speak of Gennesaret as a place at which the disciples 
 disembark 3 . John mediates, as it were, between the two names, 
 but inclines towards the ancient tradition "sea of Galilee," only 
 explaining it by a name more familiar to his readers. Perhaps 
 variations in the application of the term Galilee induced Luke 
 
 1 Mk i. 7, Lk. iii. 16, Jn i. 27. Top avrov [pavra would emphasize atVou. 
 - Lk. v. 1, 2, viii. 22, 23, 33. :t Mk vi. 53, Mt. \iv. 34. 
 
 90 
 
GENITIVE [2046] 
 
 to substitute Gennesaret 1 . But "Gennesaret" was supplanted by 
 "Tiberias" in Talmudic Tradition and the latter (which was also 
 used by Pliny) was preferred by John, who, later on, makes (xxi. i) 
 "the sea of Tiberias" the scene of Christ's last manifestation to His 
 disciples. T7/3epia8os in vi. i is a genitive of possession ("belonging 
 to ")- governed by " sea" which must be understood as appositionally 
 repeated. 
 
 (7) 'H AiAcnopA toon 'EaAh'noon 
 
 [2046] This phrase occurs in vii. 35 " Will he go to the 
 Dispersion of the Greeks (tt/v Siaa-n-opav twv 'EWrjvwv) and teach 
 the Greeks ? " In LXX, we find " the Dispersion of Israel" and 
 "the Dispersions of Israel*," as one might speak of "the church, or 
 churches, of the Christians." But this phrase might be followed 
 by another genitive describing the city or country to which the 
 Dispersion belonged : " the Dispersion of Israel of, i.e. belonging to, 
 Egypt, Pontus, Cappadocia etc." Then "of Israel" might be 
 assumed, and dropped for brevity, and so we might get (1 Pet. i. 1) 
 "to the elect sojourners of the Dispersion of Pontus, Galatia etc.," 
 and here " the Dispersion of the Greeks" meaning, "the Dispersion 
 belonging to the Greek-speaking countries." It may be asked why 
 the sentence does not proceed thus, "and teach the Dispersion of 
 the Greeks"? One answer may be, "For brevity." But another 
 answer, and a more satisfactory one, is that the words are intended 
 to represent the Jews as unconsciously predicting the manner in 
 which the Spirit of the risen Saviour, travelling abroad in His 
 disciples, would teach, first, the Dispersion among the Greeks, 
 and then the Greeks themselves (2645) 4 . 
 
 1 [2045 a] " Gennesar," or " Gennesaris," is used mostly by Josephus, and is 
 also recognised as the popular name for the Lake by Pliny (v. 15) " Plures Gene- 
 saram vocant." 
 
 2 [2045^] Wetstein (Jn vi. t) quotes Erachin 32 a "Tiberiadi mare murus 
 est." Hot: Heb. i. 14.2 says that the lake called in O.T. " the sea of Chinnereth " 
 is called " in the Targumists ' the sea of Genesar, Genesor, Ginosar," 1 it is the same 
 also in the Talmudists, but most frequently ' the sea of Tibe?-iah.' " 
 
 ;! [2046 a] Is. xlix. 6 rr\v 5. rod 'I<rpar)\, Ps. cxlvii. 2 rots 5. (Aq. and Sym. tovs 
 ^wa/j.ei>ovs) toO 'loparfk. Wetst. ad toe. quotes Paralipom . feremiae MS. 6 di Bapovx 
 airiaTeiXev et's rrp/ Siaawopav tGiv iOvCiv. 
 
 4 [2046(5] In xii. 20, " Greeks " means Greek proselytes to the Jewish faith. 
 The congregations of the Dispersion would contain a large admixture of these: and 
 so the name "Greeks" might be given contemptuously to congregations of Jews 
 in Alexandria, Antioch etc. 
 
 91 
 
[2047] CASES 
 
 (8) Ta BaIA TCON (bOINIKOON 
 
 [2047] The difficulty about this phrase xii. 13 to. fiata t<2v 
 <f>oLviKwv is that both fiata and ^>otVt«es, separately, may mean " palm- 
 branches" (though the latter may also mean "palm-trees") 1 , so that 
 the phrase might mean "palm-branches of palm-branches." One 
 word (it would seem) might have sufficed. The LXX, with various 
 readings and accents, has fiaiwv, jScuv, /3aeoiv etc., and sometimes 
 d>oivi£, but never /?aia <poiviK<tiv, except as an anonymous rendering 
 in Lev. xxiii. 40 " branches of palm-trees." Possibly fiaia. may have 
 been loosely used for " bunches of twigs " of any sort used in festal 
 processions. The parallel Synoptists mention no palm-branches 
 taken in the hands, but Mark xi. 8 mentions o-TtfidSas " bed-litter." 
 Matthew has the common word kX<x.8ov<; for " branches," and these 
 (like Mark's " bed-litter ") are supposed to be strewn in the road. 
 Luke omits all mention of " branches." In Mark, A, C, and Origen, 
 have aToif3a8a<;, where SS omits the clause, D has eor-n/foSas 2 , and 
 some inferior authorities crrei/UaSa? and o-Ti>/3a8as. John's rare word 
 (3aia has different forms, /3atva§, /3ata§, /3aeis, and possibly one of 
 these has been corrupted by Mark into o-ti/?u'<W If so, it is a case 
 where Mark errs, Luke omits, and John intervenes. This hypothesis 
 would also explain why John took special pains to define the fid'ca 
 as belonging to <£oiVi/ces. 
 
 (e) TlApACKeYH TOY TTACXA 
 
 [2048] xix. 14 rjv Sc Trapao-Kevr) tov Trda-\a does not present any 
 grammatical difficulty. If the phrase were used consciously as 
 meaning "preparing the Passover" it would be objective genitive. 
 More probably it is possessive — the word " Preparation " having 
 come to mean "the eve [of]," and being applied to any feast but 
 most frequently to the sabbath, so that it is used in the second 
 century absolutely to mean {Didach. viii. 1 and Mart. Polyc. vii. 1) 
 " Friday." But what makes the phrase interesting is that John's 
 insertion of tov irdcrxa- differentiates his use of irapacrKivij from that 
 of the Synoptists, two of whom connect it with the sabbath, and 
 
 1 See Wetstein ad loc. and 1 Mace. xiii. 51, 2 Mace. x. 7, xiv. 4 (comp. 
 1 Mace. xiii. 37). 
 
 2 [2047 a] If an early (lurk Gospel used (Jelf § 817) Ian 5' oi for ciWoi 5<f, 
 "and others [carried] palms," ea-nSoi/iruas, it might explain the readings of Origen 
 and 1 ». Hafa (p. may be illustrated by L. S. on \vyos and /j.6(rxot(ri Ktiyouri. 
 
 92 
 
NOMINATIVE [2049] 
 
 none with (2087 — 8) the passover. Mark xv. 42 is most definite, rjv 
 Trapao-Kevr] o ecrrtv TrpocrdfSfSaTov. If that "sabbath" happened also 
 to be the first day of Unleavened Bread, Mark's statement, though 
 true, might be misleading. Hence John might intervene in three 
 ways, (a) by defining the Preparation here, (b) by stating (xviii. 28) 
 that the paschal lamb had not yet been "eaten," and also (c) by 
 saying (xix. 31) that the approaching "sabbath" was "a great day." 
 Thus the genitive in xix. 14 may illustrate — not grammatically but 
 as a specimen of Johannine methods of dealing with Synoptic 
 tradition — -the genitive just discussed (xii. 13 to. fiaia twv cpoivtKwv) 1 . 
 
 IV Nominative 
 
 (i) Special passage 
 
 (a) '0 Kypidc moy 
 
 [2049] On the Nominative used suspensively see 1920 foil. 
 Only one passage needs separate discussion, xx. 27 — 8 "'...and 
 be not unbelieving but believing.' Thomas answered and said to 
 him, i My Lord and (?) my God' (6 Kvpios fiov koL 6 #eds /xov)." 
 Here the nominatives are said to be vocatives by Wetstein, who 
 alleges (1) the LXX use of d to represent the vocative, (2) classical 
 Greek usage of nominative for vocative. But (1) Wetstein alleges 
 no LXX instance (except one, explicable by special context) of 6 
 Kvpios thus used, although there are many LXX instances of 6 0ed?, 
 and also of Kvpiz 6 0e6<; rjfx<2v (which is the regular rendering of " O 
 Lord our God 2 "). (2) In classical Greek, the instances of quasi-vocative 
 with 6 are (a) accompanied by ovtos, or <rv, or they are like our "Mr" 
 in vernacular speech ("you, Mr cricketer, Mr Yorkshireman etc."); 
 (3) or else, as in u> cp[\os, they are found (Steph. " metri causa ") only 
 in poetry. (4) The one instance of the combined quasi-vocatives 
 quoted by Wetstein is Epict. ii. 16. 13 Kvpu 6 0eds which tells 
 against him, shewing that, although Epictetus could use d #cds 
 
 1 For the genit. gov. by aKotw, see 1614, gov. by yevo/xai, see 2017. 
 
 2 [2049 a] 2 K. xix. 19, 1 Chr. xxix. 16, 2 Chr. xiv. 11, Ps. xcix. 8 etc. The 
 exception is Ps. xxxv. 23 " My God and my Lord (Adonai)," LXX 6 6e6s /nov ko.1 
 6 Kvpi6s ixov. In the preceding verse, " my Lord (Adonai)" is rendered Kvpie as it 
 is regularly in LXX when applied to God (see Gesen. n a ref. to Gen. xx. 4, 
 Ex. xv. 17 etc.). But here, as it follows the nominatival form of the vocative, 
 6 6e6s fxov, it is rendered for conformity 6 Kvpids fiov. In Jn, 6 nvpios precedes 
 o 6e6s. Steph. 876 c gives many instances of voc. (pl\os but all from poetry. 
 
 93 
 
[2050] CASES 
 
 vocatively, he could not use 6 kv P lo<; thus. The Egyptian Papyri 
 use Kvpie freely, but never, so far as alleged, 6 kv P lo<; vocatively. 
 Thus, a great mass of evidence from all extant Greek shews that, had 
 the vocative been intended, Kvpie would have been employed. This 
 is confirmed by the Latin versions, which have "dominus." 
 
 [2050] What then is the meaning? "Lord" certainly cannot 
 mean "Jehovah/' "My Jehovah" would be an unheard of mon- 
 strosity. But "my Lord" might mean "my dear Lord," or "my 
 dear Master" as the term is used by Mary Magdalene 1 . And it 
 would be appropriate that this almost unique appellation should 
 be used by Thomas, as by Mary, in connexion with a manifestation 
 of the risen Saviour 2 . If it is so used here, is " my Master " subject 
 or predicate? If it were predicate we should have to supply " Thou 
 art," or "It is," which is inserted in xxi. 7 "it is the Lord (d kv/ho's 
 io-TLv)." But could i<TTLv have been omitted there ? In any case it 
 could hardly be omitted here, since the meaning required would be 
 "it is indeed my Lord," so that it would be emphatic 3 . But if we 
 take " My [dear] Lord " as subject, we may readily imagine a pause 
 after it, while the speaker, overwhelmed with amazement and joy, is 
 attempting to express his feeling about the Lord. He might have 
 added "has indeed risen from the dead" or "has been indeed 
 restored to me," but he means a great deal more than that. When 
 he has uttered "my Lord," he feels that "there is none in heaven" 
 whom he could "desire in comparison" with this "Lord 4 ." In 
 effect, his Lord has become to him one with his God, so that he 
 may say " My Lord is also my God." 
 
 [2051] This accords well with the frequency of the emphatic 
 Ko.1 in John. As for the omission of eWt, it undoubtedly causes some 
 obscurity; but might not this seem to the evangelist to have the merit 
 of forcing his readers to think out the full meaning of this confession 
 — which is, as it were, wrung from the Apostle in a moment of 
 
 1 Jn xx. 13, comp. Phil. iii. 8. 
 
 - [2050a] "My Lord" occurs in O.T., like the French "monsieur," with the 
 third person, in respectful address, Josh. v. r 4 " What saith my Lord(hvA not LXX) 
 unto his servant," Dan. x. 19 " Let my Lord speak." But perhaps here affection 
 is predominant over respect, and Thomas speaks about his Master in the act of 
 replying to his Master. 
 
 8 [2050 />] See Jn i. 49 av d...<rv...d, "thou art the Son of God, thou art King 
 of Israel." 
 
 4 I's. lxxiii. 25. 
 
 94 
 
NOMINATIVE [2051] 
 
 inspired conviction 1 ? Thomas, logically speaking, had no more 
 right to say to the risen Saviour that He was " his God " than a Jew 
 would have to say the same thing to Enoch or Elijah, in the event 
 of their being manifested to men on earth. But Thomas, spiritually 
 speaking, might feel (justified is not the right word but) necessitated 
 to say what he said. His Master — he suddenly found — was, at all 
 events, "his God," the equal of whom did not exist for him in heaven 
 or earth as claiming his worship. We are not, then, to suppose that 
 Thomas argued, like St Paul, that Jesus was "defined to be Son of 
 God by the resurrection from the dead 2 ." There may have been no 
 arguing in the matter. According to the view taken above, Thomas, 
 regaining Jesus of Nazareth from the dead, was instantaneously 
 possessed with the conviction that his Lord was also his God, and 
 the conviction forced its way out in utterance 3 . 
 
 1 [2051 a] In N.T. the rule is that 6 Kvpios means " the Lord [Jesus]," and the 
 article before Kvpios differentiates this confession from Hos. ii. 23 "Thou [art] my 
 God," Kijpios 6 deds fxov el <rv, Zech. xiii. 9 "the Lord [is] my God," tctipios 6 6e6s 
 fjLov, where some copies (Field) insert " thou art " (Kvpios el). At the same time it 
 was hardly possible for John to write down the Greek words "my Lord and my 
 God" without considering their association in LXX to express "Jehovah our God": 
 and he probably desired to convey to his readers an impression of the providential 
 way in which the most unbelieving of the Twelve was led on by the intensity of 
 affection for his regained Master to utter words that suggested the highest Biblical 
 expression of belief in His divine nature. Both in Hosea and in Zechariah, the 
 confession comes from penitents, who had gone astray. 
 
 2 [2051 b] Rom. i. 4 "defined as the Son of God with power, according to the 
 spirit of holiness by the resurrection of the dead." The mention of "holiness," 
 however, distinguishes the "defining" from any merely miraculous revivification. 
 
 [2051 c\ Among many instances of Kvpie and 6 deos in Boeckh Inscr. 91 10 foil, 
 with avarravaov, viro/jivijaov etc., there is 9124 ("lapis in marginibus valde corrosus") 
 ^.]7;[j't] Ilaeti'ft] la. '0 K(vpi)os dvd[Tr]avuov. But the usual abbreviation for Kvpios 
 is not KOC but KC Moreover, after the month, and before avairavaov, it is usual 
 (though not invariable) to insert inA i.e. lv5{lktiGivo%) with a number. Possibly 
 this has been corrupted into OKOC, and avawavaov is used here (as it often is) with- 
 out Kijpie or 6 6ebs. The corroded condition of the stone and the exceptional form 
 OKOC make it probable that some error underlies OKOC It might be simply an 
 error for the very frequent o 6c, i.e. 6 6e6s. 
 
 3 [2051^] But this is not quite satisfactory. For xiii. 13 (puveiri jxe 6 5i5a- 
 (T/caXos ko.1 6 Kvpios, and Rev. iv. 1 1 <x£ios el, 6 Ktjpcos /cat 6 9eos tiixwv, ought to have 
 been mentioned above. For these, and for further remarks on the vocative use of 
 6, indicating that Jn may have used it here exceptionally, see 2679 foil. 
 
 95 
 
[2052] CASES 
 
 V Vocative 1 
 
 (i) Special passages 
 
 (a) TTath'p 
 
 [2052] According to W.H. 2 , the word irar-qp is used vocatively by 
 our Lord (a) in the regular form Trdrep, in the Raising of Lazarus, xi. 41 
 '■'■Father, I thank thee," {b) after the Voice from Heaven, and xii. 27 — 8 
 "What (2512/; — c) should I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? 
 ...Father, glorify thy name," and (c) thrice in the Last Prayer, xvii. 
 1 — 11 "Father, the hour hath come — glorify thou me, Father,... holy 
 Father (Trarep ayie), keep them in thy name." In all these cases 7raT€p 
 is used. But, towards the conclusion of the Last Prayer, when the Son 
 prays for the unity of the Church that is to be, He thrice uses the 
 form 7raTv;p: xvii. 21 — 5 "that all [of them] may be one even as 
 thou, Father, in me... Father, that which thou hast given me I will 
 that where I am they also may he... Righteous Father (iva.ry]p oY/<aie)...." 
 The final instance is a remarkable contrast with Wrep ayie (if 
 7rarep is the correct reading), the form and place of the adjective 
 being the same in both, but the form of the noun different. 
 
 [2053] It will be found that the Johannine Last Prayer, in its 
 earlier portion, down to the words (xvii. 15) "Keep them from the 
 evil [one]," follows the lines of the Lord's Prayer in which the form 
 •n-arep is used by Matthew and Luke. Possibly John desired to 
 draw a distinction between that part of the Prayer, which was merely 
 for the present Disciples, and the latter part which was for the whole 
 Church 3 . 
 
 1 In xx. 28, 6 Kupids /xov is probably not vocatively used, see 2049 — 51. 
 
 " See 2053 c, where attention is called to the readings of B, which have, in one 
 instance, been incorrectly given by Teschendorf. 
 
 :t [2053(?j 'O -rrarrip occurs in Mk xiv. 36, Mt. xi. 26, Lk. x. 21, and is the 
 regular Hebraic vocative; but Alford and Steph. give no instance that I can find 
 of TrarTjp thus used, without the article. 
 
 [2053 /'] In xvii. 21, saOws av, irar-qp, ev Ifioi, might mean "even as thou [being] 
 Father, art in me [as being Son]." And xvii. 24 irar-qp, 6 d^dwK&s /jloi may be 
 compared with X. 29 6 war-rip /xov 8 dtdwutv fioi. If x. 29. is to be rendered "that 
 which the Father hath given me," may not xvii. 24 mean "that which thou, being 
 Father, hast given me"? Theoretically, it would be possible to take the hi--! two 
 instances as appositional, at the end of the sentence xvii. 23 Katfws (fie T)yair-ri<ras — 
 TraTrjp, xvii. 24 6Vt -r/ydTTTjcrds fie irpb /cara/3o\^s k6ct/j.ov — var-qp. But though |ohn 
 is extremely fond both of apposition and of abruptness, these instances would perhaps 
 go beyond his limits. All we can say is that he has some definite and distinctive 
 
 Q6 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2056] 
 
 Conjunctions (1894*) 
 
 (i) Johannine use of 
 
 [2054] The most remarkable characteristic of John, in his use of 
 certain conjunctions that take the subjunctive mood, is, that he 
 makes very subtle distinctions between the tenses with which they 
 are used. This is especially the case with eaV and 6Vav which will 
 therefore be discussed under "Tense" and not under "Conjunction." 
 For the Johannine omission of conjunctions see 1996 — 2008. For 
 his use of the participle in their place, see 2271 — 3, and 2031. 
 
 (ii) 'A\\a 
 
 (a) 'AaAa = contrariety, "not this but that, or, something more" 
 [2055] 'AAAa is used by John more frequently than by Matthew 
 and Luke taken together (1708). One reason for this, is that it is 
 the appropriate conjunction for such phrases as "not this but that," 
 or "this but not that," and John (2598) is fond of stating a truth in 
 its negative and positive aspects. Theoretically, d\\d implies 
 difference, or contrariety, not the mere negation of presence or 
 absence. Nevertheless, in most instances, a negative is expressed 
 or implied in the context of a Johannine a'AXa. 
 
 [2056] In vi. 9, the negative ("this is true but not that") is 
 implied by a question, " There is a lad here with five barley loaves... 
 but 1 what are they...?" i.e. but they are not anything to the purpose. 
 In vi. 34 — 6, the Jews say "give us this bread," and Jesus replies, 
 "I am the bread. ..he that cometh to me shall not hunger. ..But 
 I said unto you that ye have seen me, yet believe not." Here the 
 meaning seems to be, " Ye have the bread visibly before you, but (as 
 
 meaning in the threefold use of irar-qp, following the threefold use of irarep, in the 
 Lord's last prayer. 
 
 [2053 c\ The question is complicated by the readings of B in the Voice from 
 Heaven as well as the Last Prayer. In xii. 27 — 28 (W.H.) rl eilirw; irarep, awaov 
 /j.e...raiJTr)v. irarep, Sb^aahv aov to ovop.0., the photograph of B has, most distinctly, 
 first 7rarep in the rejected prayer, and then var-qp in the accepted prayer. [Tisch.'s 
 txt of B neither reproduces irarijp (2653) — though it reproduces B's reading /xov to 
 ovo/xa for croi/ r. 0. — nor comments on it as an error. Alford does not mention 
 irar-qp. W.H. do not give it as an alternative.] This confirms the view that the 
 scribe of B in both passages is recognising some distinction that goes beyond the 
 province of grammar. Perhaps both he and the evangelist reserved the nomi- 
 native form as best suited to the most exalted utterance (2679 foil.). Codex D, in 
 xvii. 1 — 25, has irarep throughout, except where cv precedes the noun, xvii. 5, 21. 
 
 1 [2056 a] Here and elsewhere in this section, " but" = &W&. 
 
 A. VI. 97 7 
 
[2057] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 I said) ye do not accept it because ye do not believe." But, as the 
 writer proceeds, the thought " as I said " becomes more and more 
 prominent, and passes from an implied parenthesis into an expressed 
 adversative statement 1 . 
 
 [2057] In vii. 26 " Can it possibly be that (/j.y wort.) it was 
 recognised by (eypoxrav) the rulers that this [man] is the Christ? 
 Nay, but [as for] this man ('AAAd tovtov) we know his origin...": 
 here dAAd implies something quite different from that which has 
 been suggested by the preceding context, and might be rendered by 
 our exclamatory " Why/" which often means "Why ask such a 
 question ? " In vii. 48 " Can it be said that a single one {firj ns) of the 
 rulers has believed in him, or a single one of the Pharisees? But (dAAd) 
 this rabble... are accursed," there is a reference to an implied negation : 
 "Not a single Pharisee has believed in him : but the rabble are ready 
 to believe anything." The next instance resembles the last two, 
 though the question is not asked by yu.77, (" Could I possibly say (/xrj 
 €t7rw)?") but by Tt ("What should I say (ti ct7ra))?") (for the various 
 renderings of this see 2512^ — c) xii. 27 "What should I say (ri elirw)? 
 ' Father, save me from this hour ' ? Nay, but (dAAd) for this cause 
 came I, to [meet] this hour." 'AAAd implies the negation, or 
 opposite, of a prayer that is merely put forward as an impossible one 
 for the Saviour to utter. 
 
 (/3) ' A AAa = difference, "nevertheless" 
 
 [2058] Passing over other instances (far too numerous to quote) 
 where dAAd is used with an expressed or implied negative in the 
 sense (1) "[not this] but [the opposite]" or (2) ["not this] but 
 [something more]," we come to those where, without a negative in 
 the context, it introduces something different from the past, some- 
 thing for which the past has not prepared us, but which nevertheless 
 will take place, e.g. xi. 42 " I knew that thou hearest me always, but 
 [nevertheless] for the sake of the multitude I said it," xvi. 20 "Ye shall 
 sorrow, but [nevertheless] your sorrow shall become joy," xvi. 33 "In 
 the world ye have tribulation, but [nevertheless] be of good cheer." 
 
 [2059] It is sometimes difficult to decide whether dAAd means 
 "nevertheless" or "on the contrary," e.g. xv. 20 — 1 "If they perse- 
 cuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they 
 
 1 [2056/;] Comp. vi. 0^—4 "The words. ..are life. But there are some of 
 you that lielieve not," where there is a contrast between the offering of a precious 
 L;ift and the non-acceptance of it. 
 
 98 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2061] 
 
 will keep yours also. But all these things will they do unto you 
 because of my name because they know not him that sent me." Does 
 this mean " If they kept my word they would keep yours : but on the 
 contrary, instead of doing this, they will persecute you " ? Or do the 
 italicised words point back to the earlier part of the section (xv. 18 
 foil.) so that the d\\d does not refer to what immediately precedes, 
 but to the tenor of the section, which is, to prepare the disciples for 
 persecution? In that case, the meaning is "Nevertheless [take 
 courage from the thought that] they will do all this to you for my sake 
 and because they know not God." In view of the above quoted 
 instances (xvi. 20, 33) where dAAd means "nevertheless" in Christ's 
 utterances of consolation, this meaning becomes all the more 
 probable here. 
 
 (7) Special passages 
 
 [2060] 'AAAd means, at first, "not this bat more" in xvi. 1 — 7 
 " These [warnings about persecution] I have spoken unto you that ye 
 may not be caused to stumble. Out of the synagogues will they 
 cast you, nay, more (dAAd), there cometh a time when everyone that 
 killeth you will think he is offering service [thereby] to God." But 
 in the following verses, dAAd (1) first means "but, though it cannot 
 be avoided," "but nevertheless," or "but at all events"; (2) then it 
 means "but," as usual, after a negative; (3) then, again, it means 
 "but nevertheless" (or "but still"): — -xvi. 3 — 7 "And these things 
 will they do because they have not known the Father nor me. But 
 at all events [though actions arising from such ignorance cannot be 
 hindered] I have spoken these things to you that when their time 
 shall come ye may remember that I said [these things] to you... And 
 (Se) now I go to him that sent me : and none of you asketh me, 
 Whither departest thou? but (dAA'), because I have spoken these 
 things to you, the grief thereof hath filled your heart. But still 
 (dAA') I tell you the truth, it is profitable for you that I should 
 depart." In the last sentence, it is not clear whether the writer 
 means " I cannot expect you to believe me, but still I tell you the 
 truth," or whether the real contrast is between "grief" and "profit- 
 able," so that the meaning is, " Sorrow hath filled your heart, but still 
 it is for your profit (as I have truly told you) that I should depart." 
 
 [2061] The use of dXXd in the following passage seems in- 
 explicable as it stands, iv. 21 — 3, "Believe me, woman, that there is 
 coming a time when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem shall 
 
 99 7— 2 
 
[2062] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 ye worship the Father. [ Ye worship that which ye know not, we 
 worship that which we know, because salvation is from the Jews.'] But 
 there cometh a time and now is, when the true worshippers shall 
 worship the Father in spirit and truth 1 ." 
 
 It has been shewn elsewhere (1702, 1713 m) that "Jews" in the 
 Fourth Gospel is almost always used in a bad sense, and that for this 
 and other reasons (1649 — 51), the italicised and bracketed words 
 should perhaps be transposed and assigned to the Samaritan woman 
 as her account of what the Rabbis say. Then our Lord's words 
 would be to this effect : " Not in Jerusalem or in Gerizim, but in 
 spirit and truth shall the Father be worshipped." 
 
 [2062] It is hard to find a satisfactory explanation of viii. 26 
 " I have many things concerning you to say and to judge. But he 
 that sent me is true, and [as for me] the things that I have heard 
 from him these do I speak unto the world." Perhaps the meaning is, 
 "But, though there is much to judge, the judgment must wait till 
 the time appointed by the Father. He is .the Truth. His word, 
 which I utter (xii. 48), will be the judge 2 ." 
 
 (8) 'AAA' INA 
 
 [2063] Where dAA' tVa is preceded by another parallel Iva 
 (expressed or implied) the verb in the first Iva clause may sometimes 
 be regarded as repeated in the second Iva clause, as in i. 7 — 8 " he 
 came in order that (iva) he might bear witness concerning the 
 
 1 [2061a] Westcott explains u But" thus: "The old differences of more and 
 less perfect knowledge were to be done away." He apparently means that the 
 preceding sentence describes "more and less perfect knowledge" and that "but" 
 introduces the perfect knowledge. But do the preceding words describe " more 
 and less perfect knowledge"? Concerning the Samaritans it is said il ye know 
 not"; concerning the Jews, u 7ve know." Is not this rather the "difference" 
 between knowledge and ignorance? On 1 Jn ii. 19 ££ rifiCov e^ijXOav, dX\' ovk -qaav 
 (!; rj/J-wv, where the meaning of d\\d may be affected by the meaning of ei;rj\t>av. 
 see 2110. 
 
 - [2062a] Westcott explains "but" by a paraphrase differently thus: "The 
 utterance of these judgments will widen the chasm between us. But they must be 
 spoken at all cost; they are part of my divine charge; he that sent mc is true..." 
 
 [2062/5] Chrys. says "I have many things both to say and to judge, yea, and 
 not only to convict but also to punish, but He that sent me, i.e. the Father, doth 
 no) desire this (a\X' 6 irifiipas /ue, tovt£<jtiv, 6 \\a.jr\p, ov jiovXerai. toOto)." Theod. 
 of I leraclea (Cramer) says "Even if yc do not take into your minds at present the 
 day of judgment, yet He that sent me is true, and He hath decreed the day of 
 requital (k<ii> els vovv fxr) XapL^dv-qre rbv tt)s Kplcrews Kaipbv, d\\' 6 irifxipas yuf, (pTjalv, 
 dXrjdris {cttiv, 6s aipicre rbv rrjs diroobaiws Koupdf)." This is the view taken above. 
 
 IOO 
 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2065] 
 
 light... : he was not the light, but [? came] in order that {akX Iva) he 
 might bear witness concerning the light." This, then, is perhaps 
 a case of ellipsis supplied from context, called below (2204 — 5) "con- 
 textual" ellipsis as distinct from "idiomatic" (2213). Even where 
 there is no preceding parallel Iva, a preceding verb may sometimes 
 perhaps be supplied as, possibly, in ix. 3 " Neither this man sinned 
 nor his parents ; but [he was born blind] in order that the works of 
 God might be manifested in him" — where "he was born blind "is 
 regarded by some as repeated from the question of the disciples 
 "Who sinned, that he was born blind?" But there (ix. 3) it is 
 perhaps better to take dAA' Iva as meaning " but [it was ordained] 
 in order that." And even in i. 7 — 8 dAA' Iva might have that 
 meaning. 
 
 [2064] The ellipsis is certainly sometimes not contextual but 
 idiomatic 1 . Instances must be considered separately, but generally 
 it may be said that dAA' Iva, even where it is a contextual ellipsis, 
 conveys a notion of divine ordinance. In i. 31, the best rendering 
 is, "And I knew him not, but [all things concerning him — whether 
 I knew them or not — were ordained] in order that he should be 
 manifested to Israel. For this cause came I baptizing in water." 
 This has the advantage of keeping " for this cause " at the 
 beginning of the sentence, where in John, it is almost invariably 
 placed (see 2006 and 2387). 
 
 (iii) Tdp 
 
 (a) Synoptic and Johannine use 
 
 [2065] In Matthew and Luke (when both are independent of 
 Mark) ydp is hardly ever used in strict narrative", but almost always 
 in the words of Christ and other speakers. Out of Matthew's twelve 
 instances in strict narrative, nine ("/or they were fishers," "for he 
 was teaching them," "for she said... If I touch...," "for Herod 
 having seized John," "for John repeatedly said to him," "for the 
 wind was contrary," "for he was one that had great possessions," 
 "for their eyes were weighed down," "for he knew that through 
 envy they had delivered him up ") agree verbatim, or nearly so, with 
 
 1 E-g. xiii. 18 eyw ol5a...d\\' 'iva i] ypacpr) irXypwOrj, xv. 24 — 5 vvv 5e kolI 
 ewpanaaiv /ecu p.e /xuxrj k a aiv .. .dXX' 'iva irXijpwOrj 6 X670S See 2105 — 12. 
 
 - [2065 a] "Strict narrative" excludes the words of the Baptist, the disciples, 
 the Pharisees etc., which are included generally in the term "nan-.," as distinct 
 from "Chri." (1672*). 
 
 IOI 
 
[2066] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 Mark 1 . Tap is used by Luke altogether about a hundred times, 
 and by Matthew still more frequently, but almost always in Christ's 
 words (and in the words of other speakers). In strict narrative Luke 
 uses it only eleven times ; and in three of the eleven he agrees 
 substantially with Mark 2 . Mark uses yap altogether about seventy 
 times, and, of these, as many as thirty or more are in strict narrative. 
 The use of yap, therefore, in strict narrative, is characteristic of Mark 
 (as distinct from Matthew and Luke), and the fact that Matthew and 
 Luke agree with Mark in so large a proportion of the few instances 
 in which they use "strict narrative" yap indicates that they have 
 copied these clauses from Mark. 
 
 [2066] John uses yap about twenty-seven times in Christ's 
 words — exclusive of its use (about nine times) in the words of other 
 speakers — and about twenty-seven times in strict narrative, so that 
 he agrees (roughly) with Mark's usage. But there is this difference, 
 that John's " strict narrative " includes what would commonly be 
 called evangelistic comment, e.g. iii. 15 foil, "...that whosoever 
 believeth may in him have eternal life. For God so loved the 
 world that he gave... For God sent not the Son... and men loved 
 the darkness rather than the light, for their works were evil. For 
 every one that doeth ill hateth the light...." This use creates 
 ambiguity. Many commentators have taken iii. 16 — 21 as Christ's 
 words. Similarly Chrysostom 3 appears to assign to the Samaritan 
 woman the words, iv. 9 "For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans," 
 
 1 [2065/'] Mt. iv. 18, vii. 29, ix. 21, xiv. 3, 4, 24, xix. 22, xxvi. 43. xxvii. 18. 
 The exceptional instances are Mt. xxviii. 2 dyyc\os yap Kvpiov, which finds no 
 apparent parallel in Mk xvi. 4 r/i> yap fieyas <r<p68pa, and Mt ii. 5 ovtus yap 
 ytypawTai..., iii. 3 ovros yap icriv 6 pijdds.... 
 
 2 [2065 f] Lk. viii. 29, xviii. 23, xx. 19. Lk. uses yap twice in the short 
 account, peculiar to his Gospel, of the mocking of Christ by Herod Antipas 
 (Lk. xxiii. 8, 12) and once in the Miraculous Draught (Lk. v. 9). 
 
 [2066«] Chrys. ad lor. TloSvi}yvrfj...'\£yei,ILus<rv'I. u>u Za/iape/rcus... 
 
 Kai wodev . . .ivop.i'i'ev . . .Ov yap iIttiv on "Z. rols I. ov airyxpuivrai d\.V 'Ioroalot IHa/xa- 
 peiras ov Trpoaievrai, i.e. "For she did not say that Samaritans have do dealings 
 with the Jews hut Jews repudiate Samaritans.'' Apparently Chrysostom thinks 
 that ov o-vyxpuvrat means what his hearer> would render ov irpoo-UvTai, which is a 
 litth- stronger (-re Steph.). 
 
 [2066/;] In other passages, the abundance of yap ought not to be ignored as a 
 ible indication of evangelistic origin, e.g. v. 21, 22, 26. Here Ciairep yap 
 
 Iwiet . uo-wcp is not elsewhere found in John, and it would he possible to 
 
 regard v. 21 — 3, and v. 26—7 a- comment 011 the clauses addressed to the fews in 
 the second person. 
 
 I02 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2068] 
 
 which are regarded by many modern commentators as a comment 
 of the evangelist, if not an interpolation. 
 
 (/3) Special passages 
 
 [2067] Different interpretations have been given to iv. 43 — 4 
 "But after the two days he went forth thence to Galilee : for (yap) 
 Jesus himself testified that a prophet in his own country hath no 
 honour." Some have interpreted this (1), "He went to Galilee from 
 His own country, Judiea, because He had not been honoured in the 
 latter." A second interpretation might be (2), "After having acquired 
 honour in Judaea, which was not His own country, He went to 
 Galilee His own country, because He did not desire to gain honour 
 at the expense of the Baptist, and He had testified that a prophet 
 in his own country does not gain honour." The decision rests on 
 several considerations that need separate discussion in a comparison 
 of the Four Gospels : but the differences illustrate the vagueness of 
 the inferences deducible from the mere statement of a motive 
 with "for." 
 
 [2068] In vii. 41—2 "Others said, 'This is the Christ'; but 
 others again said, l For can it be that (fxrj yap) the Christ is to come 
 from Galilee?'" we must supply "No" before "for." Or, more 
 accurately, the rule in such cases is that the preceding words 
 should be mentally repeated in some phrase (expressing astonishment) 
 equivalent to a statement, after which " for " follows, introducing the 
 reason for this implied statement. ["This the Christ ! Impossible !] 
 for...." The same explanation applies to ix. 29 — 30 — after the 
 Pharisees have said concerning Jesus " But as for this [man] we 
 know not whence he is " — where the man cured of blindness by 
 Jesus replies "For herein is the wonder of wonders (iv tovto> yap 
 to davfxao-Tov) because ye (emph.) know not whence he is and [yet] 
 he opened my eyes." The man repeats the words of the Pharisees 
 "[Ye 'know not whence he is ' ! A wonderful confession !] for herein 
 is the wonder... 1 ." But the text is doubtful. See 2393, 2683. 
 
 1 [2068rt] So in Mk xv. 14, Mt. xxvii. 23, Lk. xxiii. 21 Pilate's reply " For 
 what evil has he done?" coming as a reply to the demand "Crucify him !" may 
 be explained "[An amazing request!] For what evil has he done?" Comp. 
 Demosth. 43 Xeyerai tl ko.iv6v ; [An amazing question !] yevono yap &i> tl /cat- 
 vorepov ; Soph. Ajax 1125 — 6 aw okj... [An amazing statement !] diKaia yap...; 
 where Kaivov and 8Lkt) are, practically, repeated. So ttQs yap (or, yap ov) ; means 
 " [A surprising question !] For how could it be so [or, otherwise]? " 
 
[2069] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 la) Consecutive or a . ve 
 
 '2069" In classical Greek. o«f. calling attention to the second of 
 two things, may mean ( i ) " in the next p. i . ; ■ on the other he 
 somewhat as our English word ' ; other" may mean ;i another | of the 
 same h'nd]'' or in hind]," i.e. Eferent, opposite. The former 
 
 may be called " narrative oe " because it is frequently used to 
 ribe the sequence of events in a story. But in I s sense John, 
 as compared with Matthew ike, very rarely ses it 
 
 the phn~ - - when He uses it much more fit 
 
 the latter sense, though not nearly so often as Matt - 
 
 "2070" But there r sense in which John 
 
 introduce that which comes second not in point of time but 
 of thought, as being the next point to note, thus : " His r. -aith 
 
 untc - -ever he saith unto you. do it. Nt - 
 
 next point to note is that] there a rm ■ -. six wa bs .Jesus 
 
 saith unto them, Fill the waterpot- Similarly in the Feeding of 
 the Five Thousand, after recording the command, i; Mak I _ men 
 lie down," John add-. "Now \the note is that I was 
 
 much grass in the pla: And this . may occasionci 
 
 introduce something of the r A an epigram. .-y cried 
 
 out. ..'Not this m Barabbas." Nt i I : next point ft 
 
 that - /:arabbas was a robbe: — thus implying . :on- 
 
 nation (amplified in the .'-. : :he preference of a "rot 
 
 to the Prince of Life. This parenthetic or supplemc i 
 
 to introduce to the reader the for him to notk . 
 
 hardly found in t" 
 
 "2071" I: is sometimes difficult to decide whether -. hn is 
 
 adversative or consecutiv _ s garments and r. 
 
 four portion^, for each soldier a portion, and the tonic 
 the tunic w - - without a seam"'." where the r. 
 
 1 [2069 
 
 6 etc. Br - ■ gives tc 
 
 ! 
 especial The 
 
 IO. 4.O. . • \ : 
 
 IO4 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2073] 
 
 may be either "But the tunic on tht other hand [as of; the 
 
 cloak]," or ••Now [the point to be here noted is that] the tunic was 
 seamless. In any case it would be an error to suppose that the 
 events introduced with this particle are of secondary importance. 
 For r/r 6e is used to introduce Nicodemus \ w there was a nun 
 of the Pharisees"), the man cured at Bethesda (or Bethsaida), 
 Lazarus, and perhaps the "nobleman" whose son is cured near 
 Cana 1 . On o 8c in John, see 2684. 
 
 2072] The uses of o«, adversative and consecutive, may be 
 illustrated by the only two instances in which it occurs in the 
 body of Luke's Gospel after 'Itjo-ows without the article. The 
 introduces '-Jesus" as representing a new character entering on the 
 si ge of public life* j the second represents contrast between Judas 
 and Jesus 8 . The first of John's only two instances appears to be 
 adversative, "They therefore took up at him. But 
 
 Jesus ('I. oc) was hidden from them and went forth from the Temple 4 ." 
 The second introduces Christ's last public words, and follows an 
 evangelistic comment on the national rejection of the Light. W.H. 
 place a space between the tv. . for they loved the glory of men 
 rather than the glory of God. But Jesus ('I. Se) cried and said... 
 It is not clear whether this merely introduces a new subject, and 
 marks an interval (perhaps of time) or whether, as in the previous 
 case, it implies a contrast between the rejection of the Lig I and 
 Christ's protest against the rejection. 
 
 2073] When Se is used, without the article, after other 
 names, there is a somewhat similar doubt. Probably however con- 
 tract is intended — Mary being distinguished from the two disci; 
 who had entered the tomb of the Saviour and had retur: -.heir 
 
 homes, one at least believing — in the words " But Mary (M. i i -tood 
 near the tomb outside weepii _ S tilarly the words, - But 
 
 Tho; - . contrast Thomas, who had not seen the I 
 
 1 [2071 a] iii. i, v. 5, xi. 1, and iv. 46 (marg.). In some of th 3 }n 
 
 specifies time ("after these things," -'after the two days" etc.) an I place, and then 
 introduces persons and circumstances. In ix. 14 " Now it was (r/v Se) the sabbath" 
 introduces a point essential to the comprehension of what follow -. 
 
 - [2072 a] Lk. iv. 1 'I. Se TrXrjp^s irvevnaros iylov briarpe •/'«'.... This 
 the genea'i :+ 38) which is preceded by iii. 23 ko.1 otVij t\v 'I. apxop.evo$.... 
 The nom. (as subject) has previously occurred without the article in Lk. ii. 43 
 VTrefieivev 'I. 6 ttous, ii. 52 /cat 'I. irpoeKowrev..., iii. 23 /cat ai'ros tjv 'I. dpxou-fvoi 
 
 3 Lk. xxii. 48 'Iti<joCs Se tlrer aiV£, 'lovSa. . 
 
 4 viii. 59. 5 xii. 44. .11. " x.\. 24. 
 
 I05 
 
[2074] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 with the rest of the disciples, who had seen Him. In both cases, 
 the particle introduces a new event and one of the deepest interest. 
 And this, as a rule, is characteristic of John's use of Se' : it draws 
 attention, sometimes to the beginning of a manifestly great event, 
 sometimes to a detail, not manifestly, but really, important — either 
 in itself or because of some latent symbolism. 
 
 (/3) Ae, third word, or later, in its clause 
 
 [2074] The instances are as follows, vi. 51 koI 6 dpTos Se 6V eyw 
 
 otocrco rj crdp£ /jlov ecrTtv..., vii. 31 « tov d^Aou Se 7roA.A.ot e7rio~Tevo~av eis 
 avrov, viil. 16 /cat iav Kpivto Se eyw, viii. 1 7 Kat ev tw vofjuo Se t<5 
 t'tterepu) yiypairrai (comp. 1 Jn i. 3 /cat iq /coivouvta Se 77 rjp,erepa), 
 XV. 27 e/cetvos fJLapTvpyjaei 7repi ip,ov- /cat i!>u€is Se ttap-rvpeiTe, xvi. 9 — 10 
 7rept d/xaprtas p.ev...7rept StKatocrw?7s Se', xvii. 20 or 7rept toijtwi' Se 
 
 epwrco p.oi'ov, xxi. 23 ov/c et7T€v Se avra) 6 'Iyycrovs . . . These may be 
 classified according as Se' (1) is not, or (2) is, preceded by /cat. 
 
 [2075] (1) In vii. 31, e/c Se tov d^Aou was perhaps avoided as it 
 would lay too much stress on the preposition, which here means (in 
 effect) "some of" and is so closely connected with tov d^Aou that 
 e/c tov ox^ov might be regarded as almost a compound noun. In 
 xvi. 9 — 10, per and Se' are placed third after preposition and noun 
 as is frequently the case. In xvii. 20 ov Se' would have been against 
 the rules of Greek. Compare 1 Jn ii. 2 7rept tw dpaprttui' yp-uiv, oi 
 
 7repi twv T^aeTepaH/ Se p.6vov, dAAd Kat' But, in both, the unusual 
 
 position of Se probably calls rather more attention to the context as 
 worthy to be noted. In xxi. 23, A, D, and a, l>, ^,/etc. read Kat ovk 
 €?7T€i' for ovk etTrev 8c. The weight of NBC 33 and Origen is so 
 great that we must accept Se', as representing the earliest Greek 
 text. But, on the other hand, Kat — where we should naturally 
 expect dAAd or iteWot — -is so difficult that it can hardly be a mere 
 correction for regularity's sake. So far as regards difficulty, it would 
 be more likely that the difficult Kat would be corrected by a marginal 
 Se'. When scribes began to transfer this to the text as a substitute 
 for Km they could not place Se' after ovk, so they would place it after 
 ovk et7rev. Possibly this very ancient tradition about the oldest of 
 the Apostles may have been current in the Galilaean Church in 
 a form in which the Hebraic " and " was used for "and yet." As 
 it stands, ovk et7rei' Se is perhaps without parallel in Johannine Greek 1 . 
 
 1 [2075 a 1 Ae is irregularly used in x. 41 'Iwdv-qs ntv ffrjixeiov ewoirjo-ev ovdtv, 
 Tr&VTO. 5t oca dirtv 'I. Trepl tovtov aWrjVij r)v. But there the irregularity arises from 
 
 IO6 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2078] 
 
 [2076] (2) In the combination of Kai and Se', since ko.L would 
 have sufficed to express mere addition, Se' seems to be devoted to the 
 expression of emphasis, so that ko.1...8z probably means " and... what 
 is more," in the sense "and... what is to be specially noted." Winer- 
 Moulton (§ 53 p. 553) indicates two opinions as to koL Se': — (1) that Kai 
 = " also," (2) that Kai = " and." If Kai meant " also," emphasizing the 
 following word, Mt. xvi. 18 Kayw Se' 0-01 Ae'yw would mean " I also," 
 or "Even I"; and, in Jn vi. 51 Kai 6 ap-ros would mean "even the 
 bread" or "the bread also" — not likely interpretations. There are 
 cases where initial Kai is shewn by some special preceding context to 
 be, not "and," but "also" or "even." But, as a rule, Kai standing 
 first in a sentence is to be assumed to mean "and." Kai in viii. 16, 
 Kai lav Kpiv<n Se' might possibly be emphatic (not connective) "Even 
 if" ; but, if so, the best course would be to treat both Kai and Se' as 
 contributing to emphasis, "Yea, even if I should judge." 
 
 (7) MeN...Ae 
 
 [2077] In Johannine Words of the Lord, ftcv occurs only twice, 
 and there Se' follows. Both instances occur in the chapter containing 
 Christ's last words to the disciples : (1) xvi. 9 — n 7repi a/xaprtas /*eV 
 ...7repi 8iKaLoo"vvr}<; 84. ..7repi Se Kptcrews, (2) xvi. 22 Kai vfxeU ovv vvv fxev 
 \v7rrjv e'^ere* 7raA.1i' Se oij/o/xai v/jlols. In xvi. II, 7rep<. KpiaeiDS Se' 
 
 would have corresponded so exactly with the two previous 7rept 
 clauses as to produce an artificial effect : and perhaps the writer 
 wishes to call special attention to the clause "about judgment" 
 and effects this by a slight variation of order. MeV...Se' nowhere 
 occurs in the Epistle. 
 
 (v) El 
 
 (a) Ei, corresponding to aim, in Words of the Lord 
 [2078] Mark (followed by Matthew) only once attributes to 
 our Lord a saying about what "would have happened 1 ," and 
 such sayings are rare in Matthew and Luke 2 . But in John they 
 
 the position of ixiv. Ylavra dt would have corresponded to ly-q/xe'cov /xev. Or we 
 might have expected dWd or /xeVroi following 'I. without /xeV. 
 
 1 [2078 a] Mk xiii. 20 (Mt. xxiv. 12) "If the Lord had not shortened those 
 days no flesh would have been saved." 
 
 - [2078/0 Mt. xi. 21—3, Lk. x. 13 "If in Tyre...," also Mt. xii. 7 (pec.) "If 
 ye had known. ..ye would not have condemned," Mt. xxiii. 30 (pec.) "Ye say, If 
 we had been in the days of our fathers," Mt. xxiv. 43, Lk. xii. 39, " If the master 
 
 IO; 
 
[2079] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 occur more often than in all the Synoptists together 1 . The only 
 passage that requires comment is one in which W.H. omit aV, 
 viii. 39 " If ve are children of Abraham, then ye are doing (woteiTe) 
 the deeds of Abraham. But as it is (jw 8e) ye are seeking to 
 kill me 2 ." 
 
 [2079] Here B alone has iroievre, and a scribe (possibly the 
 first hand) has added c in smaller characters, so as to make e-oien-e 
 
 (without av). L reads 67roieiT«: av, D eTroieirc, N eirouvrai, corr. adds 
 av. The inferior mss. have "If ye were (^re)...ye would be doing 
 (iiroielTe av)." SS renders iroulre imperatively, " If ve are... do ye 
 the deeds of Abraham " : but no instance occurs in John of an 
 imperative preceding vvv oe, "but as it is," which requires before 
 it either "ye would be doing" or something equivalent to it 3 . We 
 therefore have probably to choose between ttoicTtc indicative and 
 liroieurz. The former would be a vivid and almost ironical way of 
 saying "in that case you are doing," or "of course you are doing," 
 the works of Abraham. The latter would be for iiroieire av. Omis- 
 sions of av are found in John elsewhere 4 : but they are always with a 
 negative. IIoietTc is therefore to be preferred here. In a similarly 
 irregular passage, Lk. xvii. 6 ei exerc 7rarriv...eA.eyeTe av, many MSS. 
 alter the present tx €Te ' m ° the imperfect ; and the tendency to do 
 the same here would naturally be strong. If Codex B had been 
 lost and only a fair copy of it preserved, writing e noieiTe as enoieiTe, 
 not a single Greek uncial MS. would now preserve what appears to 
 be the correct reading 5 . 
 
 of the house had known..." Lk. xvii. 6 has el ?x eTe frhmv...iX4yeTe &v, where 
 Mk xi. 23 (Pparall.) has ^x €Te tt'iotlv, Mt. xxi. 21 iav ^x r ) Te ttI<ttiv, followed by 
 future. In Lk. xix. 42 " If thou hadst known," the apodosis is dropped. 
 
 1 [2078r] iv. 10, v. 46, viii. 19, ? viii. 39, ix. 41, xiv. 7, 28, xv. 19, 
 xviii. 36; also with el fx-q in xv. 22, 24, xix. n. In these last three instances 
 &v is omitted. 
 
 - El T€Kva tou A. iare, to. Zpya tov "A. 71-oten-e (marg. etroielTe). vvv dt ^rjTeiri ne 
 iiroKreivat. 
 
 3 [2079 a] ix. 41, xv. 22, 24, xviii. 36. In all these cases, the sense is, " If so- 
 
 and-so had happened things would have been different but as it is {vvv oe)...." 
 
 In xvi. 5, xvii. 13, the meaning is, "Things were different once but m it is 
 
 (vvv 64)...." 
 
 [2079/'] ix. ^t„ xv. 22, 24, xix. 11 el firf in every case, ix. 33 is not a saying 
 of Christ's. On &v omitted with indie, see 2213 ,1 and 2698. 
 
 •' [2079 ^ J Origen's present text, when he is not expressly commenting on the 
 ige, uses (Huet i. 72, ii. 96) the reading of the inferior mss. But in his 
 comment on the passage he agrees about six times (Huet ii. »86, 294 6) with 
 W.H. txl, twice (i/>. ii. 290, 293) with W.H. marg., comp. 2659 c. 
 
 108 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2082] 
 
 (/3) Ei Ae mh 
 
 [2080] Et 8e fnj, without a verb, in LXX, almost always follows 
 an expressed or implied imperative 1 . Apart from John, in N.T. 
 (sometimes as d oe /^'ye) it follows (i) description of what ought 
 to be done, (2) precept, (3) an if-clause 2 . In John, where it occurs 
 twice, it follows an imperative in xiv. n" Believe me (p.01) that 
 I [am] in the Father and the Father in me. But if not (d. Se fx.i]), 
 because of the mere works believe," i.e. if ye cannot believe me 
 on the ground of my personality and the words that I utter, then 
 believe because of the signs that I perform." This is according 
 to rule. But the other instance, which comes earlier in the same 
 chapter, is not according to rule — not, at least, as translated in the 
 text of R.V., thus xiv. 1 — 3 "Let not your heart be troubled: ye 
 believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many 
 mansions ; if it were not so (d Be p,rj) I would have told you ; for 
 (6'rt) I go (TTopf.vop.ai) to prepare a place for you. And if I go 
 (TTopevOio) and prepare a place for you, I come again, and will 
 receive you unto myself; that, where I am, [there] ye may be also. 
 And whither I go (vTrdyo>) ye know the way." 
 
 [2081] (1) The first point to be noted about this difficult 
 passage is that €i Se prj in this second instance— as in the first, 
 though here at a somewhat longer interval — follows an imperative, 
 and the imperative of the same verb as above ("believe"). Ac- 
 cording to the analogy of the first instance, and of all Biblical usage, 
 endeavouring to connect d Se /irj with the imperative "believe," 
 we must suppose the clause about " mansions " to be parenthetical ; 
 and the meaning will be, " Ye believe (or, Believe) in God. Believe 
 [similarly] in me... hit, if [you can] not [rise to this] — then,...." 
 
 [2082] (2) The next point to be noted is that R.V. has failed 
 to represent a distinction drawn by our Lord here between "going 
 on a journey" (Tropf.vop.ai) and "going back, or home" (virdyw) 
 (1652 — 64). Earlier in the Gospel, the Jews themselves are dramati- 
 cally described by John as failing in much the same way when Jesus 
 says (vii. ^t,) " I go back (vTrdyw) to him that sent me," and they 
 say (vii. 35) "Where doth he purpose to go (TropeveaOai) i.e. journey?," 
 
 1 [2080 a] The exceptions are Gen. xviii. 21, Job xxiv. 25, xxxii. 2 3. In Sir. 
 xxix. 6 ei oe /j.tj follows eiw iax^' a V- I n 2 S. .xiiiL 6 jcoiriafl^v . . .d 5e /x-q, the verb 
 may be intended to imply an imperative, "let us do." 
 
 2 Mk ii . 21, 22, Mt. ix. 17, Lk. v. 36^7 ; Mt. vi. 1, Lk. x. 6, xiii. 9, xiv. 32, 
 1 Cor. xi. 16, Rev. ii. 5,~ToT 
 
 IO9 
 
[2083] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 adding "Doth he purpose to go to the Dispersion of the Greeks?" 
 It is also noteworthy that, up to this point (xiv. i) in the Gospel, 
 Jesus has repeatedly described Himself as "going home, or back 
 (vTrdyu>) " to the Father, but never, spiritually, as "going [on a 
 journey (7ropeuo/u.cu)." In the preceding context He has just said 
 to the disciples twice (xiii. 33, 36) " Where I go home (virdyu>) ye 
 cannot come," and they have been perplexed and troubled, not 
 being able to realise the Lord's "going home " and treating it simply 
 as a separation. At this point Jesus Himself begins to speak of 
 Himself as "going (7rop€t'o/Mcu)," and the context suggests that He 
 does this in order to adapt His language to the understanding of 
 the disciples 1 . 
 
 [2083] (3) A third point is, that eiTrov av ip-lv on Tropevo/xat, 
 
 according to Greek usage in general as well as Johannine usage 
 in particular, would naturally mean — unless some very clear prefixed 
 context prevented the meaning — " I should have said to you that 
 I am going." SS takes it thus. Chrysostom and many other 
 authorities do the same, but omit on (" I should have said to you, 
 ' I am going ' "). On this point, see 2185 — 6. 
 
 [2084] (4) Another consideration is that " If it were not so 
 [as I have said] " would imply a supposition that Christ had stated 
 an error ; and this — even in the form of a supposition at once 
 dismissed as impossible — is hardly in accordance with Johannine 
 thought. There results a considerable negative probability, that 
 ct Se firj does not mean d 8e ^ ovrws rjv ("but if it were not so"). 
 There is also a positive probability, if the text is not corrupt, that 
 it relates to the imperative "believe" and means "otherwise," i.e. 
 " if ye cannot do this." 
 
 [2085] According to this view, the disciples have been unable 
 to realise all that was implied in the Son's "going home" to the 
 Father. It meant that He could take His friends thither, and that 
 the Father would find room for them all. It was not a strange 
 place, or an inn, to which it was necessary that the Son should 
 go first, to make preparations for the disciples. Nevertheless, if 
 the disciples could not understand the unity of the Son with the 
 Father and could not trust unreservedly in the Son's power without 
 detailed assurances, He was willing to lower His language to their 
 
 1 On vir&yw (not in Pap. Index, but colloquial, so that it has passed into modern 
 1 I and Troptvofxai, see 1652—64. Jn carefully distinguishes them. 
 
 no 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2087] 
 
 level and to ask them to trust in a special assurance. We may 
 perhaps suppose Him to repeat, in thought, the precept "believe 
 me " somewhat to this effect ; " Ye believe (or Believe) in God ? 
 Believe also [similarly] in me — in my Father's house are many 
 abiding places — : but if not [i.e. if ye cannot believe in me to this 
 full extent, then believe me at least to this extent.] — I could have 
 said to you [instead of speaking about ' going home '] that I was 
 going on a journey to prepare a place for you." 
 
 [2086] This is not wholly satisfactory. For, strictly speaking, 
 cTttov av means " I should have said," not " I could have said." But 
 the whole passage is surcharged with emotion, and Christ may be 
 represented as having two thoughts in His mind, (i) "If I had 
 known your weakness I should have spoken differently," (2) "If you 
 are so weak, believe me, I could have put things for you differently." 
 From the objective point of view, the Son does not "go to prepare 
 a place for the disciples " because the places are already (Mk x. 40) 
 "prepared" (Mt. xx. 23) "by my Father." But, adapting His 
 language to the weakness of their faith, Christ proceeds to say, 
 " And if — to use the language suited to you — even if I should 
 1 go and prepare a place for you,' yet I come again...." Literally, the 
 Lord can hardly be said to "go to prepare a place," like a courier 
 engaging rooms in an inn; and Jesus seems to have implied this 
 by His previous mention of "many abiding-places," as if He had 
 said, " We shall be in my home — your home, large enough to 
 hold all." 
 
 (vi) "Eirei 
 
 (a) 'Enei TTApACKeyi-i hn 
 
 [2087] This conjunction did not appear in Johannine Vocabu- 
 lary because it occurs, though rarely, in each of the Gospels 1 , and 
 there is nothing grammatically remarkable in the two Johannine 
 instances of it. But historically it is remarkable that Mark's only 
 use of it is in connexion with the Preparation for the Passover, and 
 that one of John's two instances is similarly connected. The Gospels 
 all mention the Preparation, but differently: — (1) Mk xv. 42 "since 
 (iirec) it was the Preparation, which is 'eve of the sabbath,' there 
 came Joseph of Arimathaea," (2) Mt. xxvii. 62 "But on the morrow, 
 
 1 [2087 a\ Mk only once (xv. 42 eirel r/v TrapaaKevrj, 6 (<xtlv Trpo<rd[3(3aTov), 
 Mt. (3), Lk. (1 + 1 marg.), Jn xiii. 29 iwel to y\waa. elx e " '!•> x ' x - 3 1 ^ 7r ^ 
 wapacrKevT] r\v. 
 
 II I 
 
[2088] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 which is [the day] after the Preparation, there were gathered together 
 the chief priests and the Pharisees to Pilate," to ask him to guard 
 the tomb, (3) Lk. xxiii. 53—4 "he placed him in the tomb. ..where 
 no man had yet lain : and it was the day of the Preparation and 
 the sabbath was dawning." 
 
 [2088] 'E7ret means "when," as well as "since," and is inter- 
 changed with €7rei8>7, "when," in Daniel, Luke, and Acts 1 . Matthew 
 and Luke, who omit hcu above, may have supposed that here it meant 
 simply " when," not perceiving that it stated the cause for the 
 coming of Joseph. John intervenes, at great length. Whereas Mark 
 and Luke, in different ways, connect the day with " [he Sabbath," 
 John, in the first mention of it, says (xix. 14) "it was the Preparation 
 of the Passover." He adds that the Jews desired the bodies of the 
 crucified to be taken away (xix. 31) "since it was the Preparation," 
 and that Joseph of Arimathea came hereupon and took the body 
 of Jesus, and also that the body was buried as it was (apparently 
 meaning buried in haste) " because of the Preparation." Thus he 
 repeatedly brings out the causal meaning of Mark's eirei, which is not 
 represented in Matthew and Luke. 
 
 (vii) "Etos 
 
 (a) Not confused with (he 
 
 [2089] "Ews, with the present indicative, occurs perhaps once in 
 Mark 2 , but nowhere else in N.T. except 1 Tim. iv. 13 ecu? Ip^o/xat 
 "white I am [still'] coming [and not yet present]," and thrice in John, 
 ix. 4 "we must work... while (ews, marg. ws) (SS "while yet") it is 
 day" and xxi. 22—3 (bis) "while I am [still] coming." The 
 Thesaurus gives many such phrases as " While (cws) there is [still] 
 opportunity," " While he [still] has breath and power 3 ," and — with 
 "still (en)" inserted and verb omitted—" While the sea [is] still 
 navigable," "while [there is] still hope" etc. J SS therefore 
 expresses the sense in adding "yet." The importance of these facts 
 consists in their indication that, when John uses ws later on in \ii. 35 
 ois to <t>ws «X€T£, he means something different from "while" (2201). 
 
 1 [20SS<i] Dan. iii. 22, Lk. vii. 1 (v. r.), Acts xiii. 46 (v. r.). 1 Esdr. vi. 14 
 iird is paraJl. to Ezr. v. 12 &<p' ore, R.V. "after that," marg. "because that." 
 
 2 [2089 a] In Mk vi. 45 (W.H. <xtto\v€l) KBL have &>S ai'rds (L euVoi's) 
 diroXvtL, where D has avrbs St d-rrokiu and the other MSS. curoXvcrei or -crij : the 
 parall. Mt. xiv. 22 has ewj ov diroKvari. 
 
 3 [2089/'] Dem. 15- 5. Syncs. Epist. 44. 'Earl is om. in Plat. [.egg. 7S0 E rb 
 yevbfitvov bt TrXdrreiv ?ws iiypbv. 
 
 4 Time. vii. 47, viii. 40, also Xen. Cyrop. vii. I. 18 £ws tn aoi ax^- 
 
 I 12 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2092] 
 
 (viii) "H and r^p 
 (a) "H 
 
 [2090] In the Synoptists, rj, "or," is frequently used in Christ's 
 words for rhetorical fulness or impressiveness ("tribulation or perse- 
 cution," "under the bushel or under the bed" etc.) 1 . In John, 
 where it seldom occurs, it is mostly outside Christ's words. In 
 Christ's words it occurs only thrice 2 . Once it introduces a direct 
 question as follows : — xviii. 34 " Sayest thou this from thyself, or (rj) 
 did others say [it] to thee concerning me ? " 
 
 [2091] This is our Lord's answer to Pilate's words, "Thou art 
 [it seems] the king of the Jews ! " which are probably (2234, 2236 
 foil.) to be read as a contemptuous exclamation expressed in an 
 interrogative tone. It is clear that, as Chrysostom says, our Lord's 
 reply is not a request for information. Pilate obviously did not say 
 this from himself. Others had said it to him. In Greek questions, 
 an absurdity is often put before the reality, thus: "When horses are 
 injured do they become better, or worse?" "In states, are rulers 
 without error, or liable to error ? " " Do you permit [a bad ruler\ to 
 rule, or do you appoint another 3 ?" There is nothing in the literal 
 English rendering of our Lord's reply to indicate the meaning 
 conveyed by this Greek usage. But the meaning might be fairly 
 paraphrased as " Will you venture to assert that you say this from 
 yourself, or will you admit, as you must be conscious, that you were 
 prompted by others ? " 
 
 08) "Hnep 
 
 [2092] "Rirep occurs only once in N.T., namely in Jn xii. 43 
 "They loved the glory of men rather than (rj-n-ep) (marg. uVe'p) the 
 glory of God." Chrysostom, in his comment, quotes (v. 44) " How 
 can ye believe... since ye seek not the glory that is from the only 
 God ?" And perhaps this is almost the meaning here : — " the glory of 
 men and not the glory of God." Compare 2 Mace. xiv. 42 
 
 1 [2090 a] In the Sermon on the Mount alone, it occurs about ten times. 
 
 2 [2090 />] Two of these contain indirect questions, vii. 17 "He shall know... 
 whether it is from God or I speak from myself," viii. 14 "Ye know not whence I 
 come or where I return." 
 
 3 [2091a] Steph. quoting Plato 335 B, 339 B, Xen. Cyrop. iii. 1. 12 (to which 
 add ib. " Do you let him [i.e. the bad ruler] retain his wealth, or do you reduce 
 him to poverty ? "). 
 
 a. vi. m 8 
 
[2093] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 "desiring [rather] to die nobly than [i.e. and not]... to be subjected 
 (OiXuw airoOavelv rjTrep. . .wo^etpio? yeveaOai)," and the variously inter- 
 preted Iliad 1. 117 fSovXo/j. eyoj Aaov (roov efxp.eiai 7* u7roA.e'o-#ai, where 
 
 77 (Eustathius says) was explained as being "for rj-n-ep," so as to 
 mean emphatically "than," not "or." According to this distinction, 
 whereas (i) fxaXXov rj might have meant that they loved the glory of 
 God somewhat but the glory of men more, (2) fxaWov rj-rrep suggests 
 that they loved the glory of men, and the glory of God they loved 
 not at all. Compare the only other passage where John uses p.a\Xov rj, 
 iii. 19 "The light hath come into the world and men loved rather 
 the darkness than the light (/xaAAov to o-ko'to? r} to <£ws)." The likeness, 
 and the unlikeness, are remarkable. The evangelist appears to con- 
 demn both "the world" and "the rulers," but the latter more 
 severely. The "world" had perhaps some love for the light: the 
 " rulers " had no love at all for the glory of God 1 . See 2685. 
 
 (ix) "Iva 
 
 (a) "Ina, in John, expresses, or implies, purpose 
 
 [2093] The frequency of Iva in John (2686) illustrates in part his 
 preference for colloquial as distinct from literary Greek, but in part 
 also the tendency of his Gospel to lay stress on purpose, e.g. on the 
 purpose of the Baptist's birth and mission 2 , on the purpose of the Son's 
 mission 3 , on the purpose of His actions and words 4 , and on the 
 Father's purpose in appointing for Him these actions*, which purpose 
 may also be described as the Father's will"'. John's view is that 
 actions are appointed for men in order that, in doing them, they may 
 do the will of their Father ; and the essence of the action consists in the 
 motive, namely, to do that will. In English, "to do " often means 
 "doing," having quite lost its old notion of "to doing," i.e. "toward 
 doing," i.e. purpose: but in John — whatever may be the case in 
 other writers — iva seems always to retain some notion, or suggestion, 
 of purpose, or motive, as being the essence of action 7 . 
 
 1 [2092rt] "Uwtp ("than") differs from r) ("or" or "than") in being nun- 
 ambiguous and emphatic. 'TWp, v.r. for riirtp, substitutes a common for an 
 uncommon word and weakens the sense. 
 
 2 i. 7, S 'iva /AapTvp-qar), comp. i. 31 iVa cpavepwdy. 
 
 ■■ iii. 17 etc. 4 v. 34. 8 v. 23, 36. 
 
 " vi. 40 tovto yap ianv to OtXrina t. warpds p-ov 'iva — 
 
 7 [2093 <?1 |n does not use the infinitive of purpose with tov, or irpds t6, so that 
 a priori we might expect him to use Iva as a substitute. Hinder gives the article 
 
 114 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2095] 
 
 <s 
 
 (/9) "Ina, in John, never merely appositional 
 
 [2094] If iva were merely appositional like our English " to," 
 N.T. writers would be able to employ iva, like " to " — irrespective of 
 good or evil, of positive or negative — in such sentences as " It is 
 good, or evil, for thee to do this," " I command, or forbid, thee to do 
 this." But iva can only be used with "good" and "command," not 
 with "evil" and "forbid." The reason is that "goodness" and 
 " command " suggest a positive object to be attained or a positive object 
 in commanding; and object suggests purpose 1 . "Evil" and "forbid" 
 do not — or at least not to the same extent. In xiii. 34, R.V. marg. 
 has "A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love (Iva 
 ayaTrare) one another ; even as I loved you, that ye also may love 
 (iva Kal v. dyawaTt) one another," apparently taking the first 'iva 
 as introducing the substance of the command (" that ye love"), and 
 the second as introducing its purpose "that ye may love." It seems 
 better to give the same rendering in both cases, the second being an 
 emphatic and much more definite repetition of the first. The 
 meaning is, in both cases, " My command is, and my purpose is, that 
 ye love one another." But in the second clause the kind of love 
 is defined (" Even as I loved you "). 
 
 [2095] Similarly in xv. 13 "Greater love hath no man than this 
 (fj.ci£ova Taxnr]% dydirrjv ov8el<s e'x ei ) — 'that a man lay down his life (iva 
 Ti? rrjv if/vxyv avrov Or)) for his friends," the iva clause (in view of the 
 frequency of Johannine apposition) is best taken as being in 
 
 and the inf. as occurring Mk (15), Mt. (24), Lk. (c. 70), Jn (4) (thrice irpb tov, 
 once Sid r6). "Iva occurs in Jn almost as often (1726) as in all the Synoptists 
 together. 
 
 [2093/'] In xii. 40 " in order that (iva) they may not see with their eyes" 
 represents the divine purpose of " blinding" those who do not wish to see: and 
 this phrase, derived loosely from Isaiah (vi. to), is quoted by Mark (iv. 12) and 
 Luke (via. 10), but not in the parallel Matthew who avoids it (xiii. 13 8ri...oti 
 /3Xe7roi/i7i, supplemented by xiii. 14 ov /ni] idrjTe). When once the stupendous 
 admission is made that evil in some sense may be decreed by God, there ceases to 
 be any difficulty in xvi. 2, "The hour cometh [decreed] in order that whosoever 
 killeth you shall think (56^) he doeth God service." If persecution is "decreed," 
 it must be decreed that some shall persecute ; and the evil is not always made worse 
 by the fact that a man persecutes, thinking that "he doeth God service." 
 In v. 7, Iva depends on Ztoi/ulov implied in e^u "I have no one [ready]." 
 1 [2094 a] In the following, there is a notion of some standard of excellence to 
 be attained, something desired or needed, some customary privilege that is prized 
 and asked for, i. 27 "I am not worthy that I should loose the shoe latchet," ii. 25 
 "He had no need that anyone should testify," xviii. 39 "There is a custom 
 [established] for you that I should release...." See 2104a. 
 
 115 8—2 
 
[2096] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 apposition to Taurus [rrj<; a.], but tVa rt? Orj is not the same as 
 tov Bilvai. For the love is, not "the laying down of life" but the 
 spirit that prompts the laying down or stimulates one man that he may 
 lay dozvn his life for another. And this suggestion of motive or effort 
 is latent in tva. So, too, iv. 34 " My meat is in order that I may do 
 (tva Tonjcrw) the will of him that sent me " implies that the " meat " 
 consists in the will to do His will. Comp. xvii. 3 "This is eternal 
 life, in order that they may know thee," which perhaps combines 
 (1) "the effort to know thee," (2) " given to men that they may know 
 thee." 
 
 [2096] In answer to the question of the Jews, " What are we to 
 do in order that we may work the works of God ? " Jesus replies 
 (vi. 29) "This is the work of God [namely] in order that ye may 
 believe," which appears to mean that the " works " are not of the 
 nature assumed by the questioners (e.g. sabbath-keeping, alms-giving 
 etc.) but of the nature of motive or purpose : and if they are to do 
 the works it will be because they take into their hearts God's purpose 
 and will, which is an effort to make them believe, literally, an effort 
 "in order that ye may believe." Similarly vi. 40 "For this is the 
 will of my Father [and His purpose and effort] in order that every- 
 one that beholdeth the Son. ..may have life eternal," and xv. 12 
 (comp. xiii. 34) "This is my commandment [and purpose] in order 
 that ye may love one another." The following passages shew that 
 John, differing from Epictetus and others, never uses Ivo. exactly for 
 on or ware (2697). 
 
 (y) Special passages 
 
 [2097] In viii. 56 "Abraham, your father, rejoiced that he might 
 see my day," the meaning is that Abraham, receiving the promise of 
 the son in whom all the nations of the world were to be blessed, 
 (Gen. xvii. 17) " laughed" for joy, being strengthened by God with 
 hopeful faith, in order that, under God's providence, he might thus 
 fulfil the overruling will of God working for the salvation of " the 
 nations." Philo (i. 602 — 3) compares the" laughing" of Abraham 
 to the " laughing " of the day in anticipation of the early dawn : and, 
 playing on the meaning of the name of Isaac (i.e. "laughter") who 
 was not yet born, he declares that " Abraham, so to speak, laughed 
 before laughter existed, as the soul, through hope, rejoices before joy 
 and delights before delight." The meaning is, that Abraham, being 
 helped by God, performed a "work of God," namely, "believing" 
 
 116 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2101] 
 
 and "rejoicing," in order that he might fulfil a purpose of God, 
 namely, might see the day of the Messiah 1 . See also 2688 — 9. 
 
 [2098] ix. 2 " Rabbi, who sinned, this [man] or his parents, in 
 order that he might be born blind?" is answered by Jesus in language 
 that does not deny purpose but calls attention to an ulterior purpose : 
 " Neither did this [man] sin, nor his parents, but [it came to pass] in 
 order that the works of God might be manifested in him." 
 
 [2099] In xi. 14 — 15 "Lazarus is dead, and I am glad, on 
 account of you, that ye may believe, because I was not there 2 ," the 
 first question is, What is the verb, expressed or implied, on which 
 there depends the clause "that ye may believe"? 
 
 (1) The only verb expressed is ya'i?^ '• an ^, taken by themselves, 
 the words " Lazarus is dead and I rejoice in order that ye may 
 believe " might mean " I force myself to rejoice over it and to express 
 my joy in order that ye may believe " — as a general, after the death 
 of a brother in battle, might say to his soldiers, " I rejoice over it in 
 order that you may be encouraged to follow his example." According 
 to this view, the Son " rejoices " over His friend's death- — foreseeing 
 the triumph over death — being filled by the Father with joy in order 
 that He may accomplish a work for the strengthening of the faith of 
 the disciples. 
 
 [2100] (2) But we have not here ^aipw and Iva consecutively, 
 (as above (2097) 77'yaAAtacraTo Iva). " For your sakes " intervenes. 
 Now "for your sakes" implies that the speaker desires something for 
 the sake of those spoken to. And, in answer to the question, "desiring 
 what?" tl 8e\(uv; the reply would be 6e\wv Iva 7rio~Tevo-r]T€, "desiring 
 that ye may believe." Hence Iva may depend upon 6e\io implied in 
 oY v/xa? : " I rejoice for your sakes desiring that ye may believe." 
 
 [2101] (3) The next clause to consider is " because (on) I was 
 not there." (a) This may depend upon "believe." Then it would 
 mean, "that ye may believe in me because your faith has not been 
 shaken at the spectacle of Lazarus dying in my presence when I, you 
 might think, could have healed him." In this spirit, Martha and 
 Mary say to Jesus, " If thou hadst been here, my brother had not 
 died," and Martha may be supposed to add, "Yet even now [though 
 
 1 [2097 a] ' A7a.Mtd0ju.cu is never used in the Bible with iva to mean "rejoice 
 (to do)." Once, when meaning "rejoice to do," it is used with infin. (Ps. xix. 5) 
 " rejoiceth to run {dpa/xelv) his course." For Origen's comment, see 2689. 
 
 - Arifapos dwedavev, Kai xcupw, dY vpias, 'iva iriaTevay)Te, on ovk y]jxr\v eK«. I 
 have added a comma after xolpw. 
 
 117 
 
[2102] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 the faith of some might have been shaken] I believe that whatsoever 
 thou shalt ask from God, God will give thee." But is it likely that 
 Christ would rejoice in the prospect of a belief so negative and frail 
 that it depends upon His absence? More probably, if this were the 
 grammatical construction, there would be a latent positive meaning, 
 "That ye may believe because I was not there to save him from death 
 and because I shall consequently go thither to raise him from death" 
 i.e. that ye may believe because I shall raise him from death as a 
 consequence of my absence, (b) Again, the words " because I was 
 not there" may depend upon "rejoice," the meaning being, "I 
 rejoice — on your account, desiring that ye may believe — because I 
 was not there," i.e. " I rejoice that I was not there, not for my own 
 sake, not to avoid the spectacle of his death, but for your sakes 
 desiring that ye may believe." 
 
 [2102] (4) On the whole — having regard to John's frequent use 
 of Iva to introduce divine preordinance and to the stress laid on 
 Christ's knowledge of all that was happening to Lazarus, combined 
 with His determination to remain at a distance till His " friend " was 
 dead — we shall probably come closest to the meaning, if we take the 
 words as signifying that the Son rejoiced over all the circumstances 
 of the death of Lazarus, as He was ready to rejoice over His 
 own death, and for the same reason — namely that, in both cases, 
 the death would tend to the glory of God by strengthening men's 
 faith in God. We are intended to listen to Jesus as the words 
 dropped slowly from His lips, clause by clause. The same shock 
 that the disciples would have felt we also are intended to feel, when 
 we hear Jesus say, " Lazarus is dead, and I rejoice." Then we are 
 to be in part comforted by His affection and in part bewildered by 
 " for your sakes." Then some reassurance follows when we hear 
 " in order that ye may believe." Then we are plunged into be- 
 wilderment again by the words " because I was not there." This is 
 what we are to realise as the confused feeling of the hearers at the 
 time. But realising it as readers, in the light of subsequent events, 
 we are to interpret the oracular words as meaning that the Son 
 rejoiced in all that the Fat her revealed to Him, in the death, and in 
 His absence from His friend's death-bed, for the sake of His 
 disciples, and that the death, the absence, and the rejoicing, were all 
 ordained for the fulfilment of the divine purpose 1 . 
 
 1 1 2102 ./ ! Chrysostom's comment is " Died ami I rejoice on your account. 
 Why, pray, on your account? Because I foretold [it], not being there, and 
 
 Il8 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [205] 
 
 [2103] In Xli. 7 "A<£es avrqv iva eis ttjv ijp.£pav tov ivTatpiao-piov /xov 
 T-qprja-rj avro, obscurity arises, not from the construction of Iva Trjprjarj 
 "in order that she may keep," but from the doubtful meaning of the 
 context (which will, I hope, be discussed in a future treatise) and 
 from the possibility of some corruption 1 . 
 
 (S) "Ina and Subjunctive, compared with Infinitive 
 
 [2104] In xi. 50 "It is profitable for you (lit.) in order that one 
 man should die for the people," and in xvi. 7 "It is profitable for 
 you (lit.) in order that I may depart," Iva follows a word that suggests 
 a profitable object to be pursued (as explained above 2094). But 
 owing to the context, in each case, there is probably a notion of 
 preordinance. For this reason, perhaps, Iva. and the subjunctive are 
 put into the mouth of the High Priest when he utters the words 
 under higher influence than his own ("not of himself") as being 
 a divine decree: but afterwards the evangelist, when referring to 
 these very words, uses the infinitive, xviii. 14 "Now Caiaphas was 
 he that gave counsel to the Jews that it was expedient that one man 
 
 should die (on crvp.(pep€L iva avOptaTiov d-rroOavelv) for the people 2 ." 
 
 (e) Omission of principal verb before i'na 
 
 [2105] As the Iliad declares its subject to be the wrath of 
 Achilles but adds that the " purpose that was being accomplished " 
 was that of Zeus, so, though in reverse order, the Fourth Gospel 
 begins with the Logos and God and Light ; and then, coming to " a 
 man," indicates that the purpose of the man's "coming" is to bear 
 witness about the Light. To express this purpose the evangelist 
 
 because, when I shall have raised [him] up [from the dead], there will be no 
 suspicion (ovdeula tcrrai iiwo\pla)." Theodoras (Cramer ad loc.) says " I rejoice, He 
 says, for your sakes (vfi&v frenev). For the fact that I was not there will contribute 
 to your faith (to yap fj.ii elvai fie frei crvvTeXecret. irpcs rr\v -kIutiv tyjv v/J.eTe'pav) since, 
 if (ei fi.fr) I had been present, I should have healed him while still ailing (appco- 
 gtovvto. idepairevov), but such a wonder as that would have been slight for the 
 manifestation of power." 
 
 1 On xv. 8 fr tovtcj} ido^dadij 6 iraT-qp fiov iva Kapirbv irokvv (pip-qre, see 2393. 
 
 - [2104 a] Jn's preference of 'iva to the infinitive is illustrated by (a) i. 27 " I 
 am not worthy that (iva)," contr. with "worthy to" in Lk. xv. 19, 21, Rev. v. 2, 
 4, 9, 12, and by (b) ii. 25, xvi. 30, 1 Jn ii. 27 xP € ^ av ^X el " '" a » contr. with x- ^X 6 '" 
 and infinitive in Mt. iii. 14, xiv. 16, 1 Thess. i. 8 (comp. Heb. v. \2 tov diddaiceiv). 
 On the infinitive with tov see 2093 a. 
 
 119 
 
[2106] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 uses iva for the first time 1 . As the man is described as "sent from 
 God," the purpose of the "coming" may be supposed to be that of 
 God, not of the man except so far as the man makes it his own as 
 well. The Gospel then proceeds to subordinate the " man " to the 
 "light" by saying, i. 8 " He. was not the light, but [ ] in order 
 
 that (a'AX' Iva) he might bear witness concerning the light" 
 
 [2106] How are we to fill the bracketed gap? R.V. supplies 
 "came," and perhaps correctly: but the passage should be con- 
 sidered with others like it, ix. 3 "Neither did this man sin nor his 
 parents, but \ ] in order that' 1 the works of God should be 
 
 manifested in him," xiii. 18 "I speak not concerning you all: I 
 know whom (nVas) I chose, but [ ] in order that the Scripture 
 
 might be fulfilled...," xiv. 30 — 1 "And he [i.e. the prince of the 
 world] hath nothing in me ; but [ ] in order that the world may 
 
 know that I love the Father and as the Father gave me command- 
 ment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence," xv. 24 — 5 " If I had 
 not done. ..they had not had sin; but now (vvv Se) have they both 
 seen and hated me and my Father; but [ ] in order that the 
 
 word that is written in their law might be fulfilled, They hated me 
 without a cause." Similarly 1 ]n ii. 19 "They came forth [i.e. 
 originated] from us, but (aAA.') they were not of us: for if they had 
 been of us, they would have continued with us, but [ ] in order 
 that they might be made manifest how that they all are not of us." 
 
 [2107] Attempting to supply these ellipses we may first take 
 those passages in which dX\d is preceded by a negative. In these, 
 where we can supply a verb by repeating it from the preceding 
 context, it will be reasonable to do so : i. 8 " He was not the light 
 but on the contrary [was, or was sent, or came\ in order that he might 
 bear witness concerning the light," repeating lyivf.ro, or arreo-ToA- 
 /ttevos [y)v\ or rj\$ev, from i. 6 — 7 (but see 2112) :! : similarly ix. 3 
 " Neither did this man sin nor his parents but on the contrary [he 
 was born blind] in order that the works of God should be manifested," 
 
 1 [2105 a] i. 6—7 eytvero avdpuiros aireaTa\p.ivos -rrapa Btov...ovTos rjXdev 
 eh p.aprvplav, 'iva iiaprvp-qorj... (.'(imp. Is. lv. 4 " I [i.e. Jehovah] have given him 
 for a witness to the peoples." 
 
 " Hiu [ ] in order that," in the whole of this paragraph = AM' 'iva. 
 
 :i [ 2107 <■/ 1 The view that d\\d means "/>/// on the contrary [subordinated to 
 the light]" and aot, " but stili\m some way connected with the light]" is favoured 
 byjn iii. 2s or/, . . .,;..\V, "not... but on the contrary •" uttered by the Baptist himself 
 about his relation to < Ihrist. 
 
 I20 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2110] 
 
 referring to the question of the disciples "Who did sin. ..that he was 
 born blind}" (but see 2112). 
 
 [2108] In xiv. 30 — 31 above quoted, the negative clause "hath 
 nothing in me," means " he finds no sin in me." The opposite of 
 this would be "he finds righteousness in me." But instead of 
 supplying this or any clause, the best plan perhaps is to connect 
 together " But on the contrary... even so I do (ovrm ttouS)," so that 
 the meaning is, "Satan does not find sin in me [and constrain me 
 to die because of my sin], but on the contrary — [unconstrained by any 
 law of sin or Satan] in order that the world may know..., and even 
 as the Father gave me commandment— w / do," i.e. I act sinlessly 
 and voluntarily for His glory. In that case, the principal verb is not 
 omitted but is placed at the end of the sentence. 
 
 [2109] In the following instances, where there is no negative 
 clause immediately preceding aAAa, the context suggests the ellipsis 
 of some exclamation of sorrow for sin as being "[evil indeed], but 
 yet [ordained] in order that" some divine purpose, or saying of 
 Scripture, may be fulfilled : xiii. 18 "I know that you will not all be 
 saved ; I know whom I have chosen : [evil indeed] but yet [it has 
 so come to pass] in order that the Scripture may be fulfilled." Similarly 
 in xv. 24 — 5 aAAa means "but still," and the speaker falls back, in 
 trust, upon the fulfilment of "the word that is written in their law" 
 as being the only consolation: "They have both seen and hated me 
 and my Father; but s till [it has been so ordained] in order that...." 
 The evil is regarded as evil, but as evil resulting in the fulfilment 
 of the Law. 
 
 [2110] In 1 Jn ii. 19, where a negative precedes, but at some 
 interval, aAAa' appears to mean "but still" and to suggest, in the 
 thought of a mysterious and divine justice, some compensation for the 
 defection of disciples: "They went out from us, i.e. they originated 
 from us, but they never really belonged to us. Had they belonged to 
 us, they would have continued with us — [evil, indeed] but [at all events 
 an evil working for good] in order that they might be manifested.... 1 ." 
 
 1 [2110 rt] R.V. supplies "they went out" from what precedes, and takes it as 
 "they revolted" or "deserted." "E^rfkOov might, in suitable context, apply to 
 " coming forth" either (a) as sons from a home, soldiers from a camp etc., or (b) as 
 runaways, deserters, rebels. Here, the following words, dXX' ovk r\aav e£ Vp-Qv, 
 rather suggest antithesis, "They [at first] came out from us [as children from our 
 home, or soldiers from our camp] but they were ?iot really [in heart] belonging to 
 us.... For e£epxo/J.ai £k, irapd, aw6, meaning "originate from" or "come from," 
 see Jn viii. 42, xiii. 3, xvi. 28, 30, xvii. 8. 
 
 [2110/*] Origen, however (Huet ii. 410D), commenting on the going out of Judas 
 
 121 
 
[2111] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 [2111] There is but one instance of ellipsis with a'AA' Tva in the 
 Synoptic Tradition. It occurs in Mark alone, and the parallel 
 Matthew and Luke are of interest as shewing how such a missing 
 clause might be variously supplied. The Three Synoptists, after 
 substantially agreeing that Jesus said " I was with you ' [day] by 
 day ' in the Temple and ye did not seize me," give His following 
 words thus : 
 
 Mk xiv. 49 Mt. xxvi. 56 Lk. xxii. 53 
 
 " but in order that "but {hi) all this is "but (dXX') this is 
 
 (dXX' Iva) the Scrip- come to pass (yeyovev) your hour and the 
 tures might be ful- in order that the power of darkness." 
 filled." Scriptures of the 
 
 Prophets might be 
 fulfilled." 
 
 Here it would be an extremely weak interpretation, in Mark, to 
 repeat the preceding verb, "seize" (so as to make the sense "but 
 [ye have seized me] in order that"). A better course is to explain 
 it as above, as being an exclamation of mingled sorrow and self- 
 consolation at the temporary triumph of evil: "[evil and strange] but 
 yet, [ordained] in order that the Scriptures might be fulfilled." 
 Matthew takes it so, and expressly asserts that " all this " (tovto 
 oAof) came to pass according to divine decree. Luke, on the other 
 hand, seems to emphasize the fact that the arrest took place by night: 
 "Ye did not seize me by day; but [now ye seize me by night], this 
 is your [appointed] hour, fit for a deed of darkness." 
 
 [2112] In the light of this passage we must perhaps be prepared 
 to say that in one at least of the Johannine instances (i. 8. ix. 3) 
 explained above (2107) by a repetition of a preceding verb, John 
 may have intended to supply, as Matthew does here, "now all this 
 came to pass," so that the meaning of Christ's reply about the blind 
 man (ix. 3) would be, "No particular sin of the parents or of the 
 child in any pre-existing condition explains the facts : the zvhole was 
 ordained for the glory of God." Possibly the same explanation 
 applies also to the saying about the Baptist (i. 8). It is 
 characteristic of John's style that he so often uses a phrase — 
 
 after receiving the sop from Jesus (xii. .^o) says riXeov i^rjXdev a7rd rod '\-qaov 
 avaXoyov t<£ 'E^XOov i$ riixGiv, apparently illustrating the "going out" in the 
 Gospel by the "going out" in the Epistle, and taking the latter as revolt, or 
 inn. According to that view, the rendering would be "They wen) out as 
 rebels from us. (An evil, indeed,] but still they were never in heart belonging to 
 us," /'.c. but still the evil would have been greater if they had really belonged !■> us 
 and had yet fallen away. 
 
 122 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2115] 
 
 perhaps borrowed from the early Greek vernacular Gospel and 
 retained in one instance by Mark alone of the Synoptists — that 
 leaves the reader in some doubt as to what is alleged to have happened, 
 but insists that it happened for a certain purpose. 
 
 (£) "In a dependent on verb implied in question 
 
 [2113] i. 22 "They said therefore to him, Who art thou (ti's el;)? 
 that we may give an answer to them that sent us." 
 
 ix. 36 "He answered [and said], And who is he, Lord, that I may 
 believe on him ?" 
 
 "Tell us," and (2157) "thou wilt surely tell me," may be 
 severally supplied before " that." 
 
 (77) "In a with indicative (2690) 
 
 [2114] "Iva with future indicative occurs in vii. 3 "in order that thy 
 disciples also shall behold (deupijo-ovo-i)," xvii. 2 "in order that all 
 that thou hast given to him he shall give (8ajo-ei) to them eternal life." 
 This (comp. 1 Cor. ix. 18 <W 6ija-a>) is fairly frequent in N.T But 
 1 Jn v. 20 "he hath given to us a mind that we may be recognising 
 (Iva yivwo-Koftev) " stands on a different footing, being probably a mere 
 misspelling arising from the confusion of o and w (966 a). Compare 
 
 Gal. vi. 9 — 12 Oepiaofieu (XCFG etc. -w/x£i')...w; Kaipov c^w/aci/ (so W. H. 
 with KB* but Lightf. (2696) %o/A€v) . . Apyat.upe.da (AB* -d/*e0a)... 
 
 SiajKaH'Tcu (ACFG etc. -ovTai). In the context, the writer says "See 
 with what large (irrjXiKOLs, but B* tjXlkols) letters I have written to you 
 ivith )iiy own hand." It is possible that the Apostle, like some 
 writers in the Egyptian papyri, habitually interchanged o and w ; and 
 early reverence for the autograph may have preserved some traces of 
 the interchange in the best Greek mss. (2691). This however will not 
 explain Jn xvii. 3 (ADL etc.) Iva ytvuxrKovo-iv (d cognoscant) where 
 possibly some scribes took the meaning to be "so that they know." 
 In the difficult passage (1673 c) v. 20 Iva vp.zl<; 0avp.d(r]Te (SS "and do 
 not wonder ) xL have davp.dC,ere. In xii. 40 tVa p.-q l8ui(Tiv...Kal 
 Idaop-ai ax>Tov%, John follows Is. vi. 10 (LXX, but Sym. la$fj), and so 
 does Mt. xiii. 15. Compare Eph. vi. 3 tVa ev o-ol yeV^Tat Kal 'ia-y 
 (which deviates from LXX both of Ex. xx. 12 and of Deut. v. 16). 
 This resembles W.H. rnarg. in Jn xv. 8 Iva KapTrov...<f>tpr]Te nal 
 ytvTjo-taOz ip.ol p.aQt]iai — a natural transition, but BDL have yivrjadz. 
 
 (6) "Ina, connexion of 
 
 [2115] A iva clause generally follows the principal verb, but see 
 2108 and comp. xix. 31 (where iva occurs with a negative) ol ovv 
 
 123 
 
[2116] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 lonouiot, e7r€t 7T. i/v, Iva fx.7/ /x€Li i] . . . i]v yap . . .rjpwTi]aai' tov IX tVa... . 
 The connexion is doubtful in xix. 28 pe-ra tovto etSw? 6 'Ir/o-oiis on 
 77017 Trdi'Ta TCTeAeorat iva TeXtiwOr) rj ypa</>r) Ae'yei, Aii//w. Chrysostom 
 paraphrases thus, ciSws oiv 7raVra 7r€7rA.?7pii>peva, Ae'yei, Aii^w, 7raA.1v 
 
 ivravOa Ttpo<pr]Titav irXrjpCjv, apparently connecting the iva clause with 
 A€yet, and the rhythm of the sentence being like that of xix. 31 
 somewhat favours this view. If that were correct, the best inter- 
 pretation would be that the Son felt the thirst and uttered the 
 expression of it in order that the Scripture might receive its fulfilment 
 (not that He deliberately uttered the word in order that a particular 
 passage of Scripture might be fulfilled (1722)). But, on the other 
 side, Johannine usage decidedly favours the rendering " knowing that 
 all things were now accomplished iti order that the Scripture might be 
 perfectly fulfilled'''' — provided that we read what follows in the light 
 of these words. Then "He saith, 'I thirst'" will mean, "[Knowing, 
 I say, that the time had come for the supreme perfection of the 
 Father's will as expressed in Scripture] he saith, 'I thirst.'" The 
 writer indicates (1) that all things were accomplished that the 
 Scripture might be fulfilled, (2) that Jesus knew this when He 
 uttered the words "I thirst." He leads us to infer that Jesus 
 uttered the words as the crown of that accomplishment and with 
 a view to that fulfilment. Our conclusion is, then, that according 
 to Johannine grammar the Iva clause depends on TereXearat ; but, 
 according to Johannine suggestion and intention, the Iva clause is 
 to be repeated so as to depend on Aeyct. 
 
 (4) "Ina...I'na 
 
 [2116] Such a sentence as "In order that x may come to pass 
 in order that y may come to pass" would naturally mean that an 
 immediate object x is to be attained with a view to the attainment 
 of an ultimate object y — so that the second iva clause would be 
 grammatically (though not mentally) subordinate to the first. But 
 the second clause may be reiterative — y being another form of 
 expressing x — -"in order that [I say] y may take place," so that 
 
 1 [2115 1/] In this sentence 'iva. nr) could not depend on ripuiTTjaav, the principal 
 verb, without changing the meaning into "asked Pilate that the bodies might not 
 remain." But they "asked" for something rather different—" that their legs might 
 be broken and they might be taken away." The sentence does not give grounds 
 apposing thai in ordinary cases (where 'iva is used without a negative and 
 where do epurdv 'iva follows) fohn Mould place a iva clause before the principal 
 verl). 
 
 174 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2118] 
 
 the second clause is coordinate with the first. In xiii. 34 "A new 
 commandment give I unto you, that (<W) ye love one another — even 
 as (Kadws) I loved you, that (IVa) ye (v^eis) also love one another," 
 the second clause is reiterative (though amplified by the definition, 
 "even as "). 
 
 [2117] This sequence of iva...Ka8<6s...lva ("In order that ye 
 should love — [How love?] Even as I loved, that ye should love") 
 suggests that we should arrange in the same way (as being an answer 
 to the question "How glorify the Father?") xvii. 2 "Glorify thy Son 
 that the Son may glorify thee — even as thou gavest unto him authority 
 over all flesh, that all that thou hast given to him, he may give unto 
 them life eternal." According to this view, we may briefly paraphrase 
 the latter part of the sentence thus, " [How say I ' that the Son may 
 glorify thee'? I mean] that the Son may glorify thee by giving 
 to others even as thou hast given to him." It is implied that the 
 Father is the Supreme Giver and that the supreme authority consists 
 in "giving." Moreover the highest glorifying of the Father consists 
 in giving. Whosoever gives to others, as from the Father, gives what 
 he has received from the Father, and glorifies the Father in the 
 hearts of those who " see his good works and glorify his Father who 
 is in heaven 1 ." Nearly the same sense might be obtained (but not 
 in such accordance with Johannine style) by making the second tVa, 
 not parallel with the first, but dependent on toWas, and by taking 
 Katfoj's as, in effect, ko! ydp, "for indeed": "Glorify thy Son, that the 
 Son may glorify thee : for indeed thou hast given all authority to him 
 in order that he may give life to others [and that he may thus glorify 
 thee]." A third arrangement, to take the second <W clause as 
 grammatically subordinate to the first ("that he may glorify thee... 
 that he may give unto them eternal life ") would be quite contrary 
 to all Johannine thought as well as to the interpretation of the 
 sequence in xiii. 34. 
 
 [2118] A similar sequence of tVa, kolOws, and iVa, but followed 
 by a third iva, is in xvii. 20 — 1 "But not about these alone do 
 I pray but also about them that are to believe through their word 
 in me, that all may be one — even as (KaOws) thou, Father, in me, and 
 I in thee, that [I say] they also may be in us 2 , that the world may 
 
 1 Mt. v. 16. 
 
 - [2118<7] xvii. 21 (R.V.) "That they also maybe in us," AM. has "That 
 they also may be one in us," reading 'iva ko.1 avrol iv tj/alv £v wglv, with XAC 2 L. 
 
 125 
 
[2118] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 believe that thou didst send me," where the second Iva clause 
 appears to be reiterative, and coordinate with the first, while the 
 third Iva clause is subordinate. The same sequence, but perhaps 
 not the same connexion, occurs in xvii. 22 — 3, which, if arranged 
 like xvii. 20 — 1, would run thus, "And I too have given to them the 
 glory thou hast given to me that they may be one — even as (ko^?) 
 we (^/xct?) [are] one, I in them, and thou in me, that they may be 
 perfected into one, that the world may recognise that thou didst 
 send me and didst love them even as thou didst love me." The 
 sense, however, demanded in the latter passage seems to require 
 "I in thee" [not "them"] "and thou in me" — if the words are to 
 be arranged thus. If the words are not corrupt, it seems necessary 
 to punctuate xvii. 22 — 3 as W.H., with no pause before Ka^uls : 
 " that they may be one even as we [are] one, I in them and 
 thou in me, that [I say] they may be perfected into one." But, 
 even taken thus, the words seem to shew a want of parallelism. We 
 seem to need either (1) "that they may be one... [namely] I in them 
 and they in me," or (2) "even as we are one, [namely] I in thee and 
 thou in me." The present text seems to confuse (1) and (2) 1 . If 
 
 SS has a blank in the MS. "may be [ ] that the world may believe." Burk. 
 
 suggests " a possible restoration " meaning " united." On Kayu see 2127 b. 
 
 1 [2118 b] The passage may have been confused at an early date owing to ( 1 ) 
 its various possibilities of connexion, (2) the juxtaposition of 6N meaning "in" 
 and 6N meaning "one," (3) doctrinal controversies as indicated by Epiphanius 
 (Haer. lxix. 19 and 69, 743 A and 793 b). Clem. Alex, quoting xvii. 21—23 as 
 "gospel" and as "the Lord's utterance," says (r4o)"Ei>a p.kv avrbv [i.e. rbv Qe6v~\ 
 Xe-yet, " 'iva wdvres Sv w<ti Kadios av, irdrep, iv ipiol, Kay Co iv aol- 'iva Kal avroi iv 
 
 rjpiiv iv ucri 'iva w<nv iv, icaOws r)p.us iv, iyio iv avro?s Kal av iv i/xoi, 'iva wcri rere- 
 
 \eiwfxivoi eis iv." But in the whole of this quotation there is nothing that contains 
 a statement that " God is one," unless in av, irdrep, iv and av iv, Clement read iv 
 for iv. iv ifiol might perhaps be taken to mean " one with me," as ets is used with 
 a dat. by Plutarch (Mor. 1089 a) "having drunk from one and the same cup with 
 [that of] Epicurus (e\- p.ias oiVox^s 'EmKovpy 7re7rwK6res)." Origen uses iv dp.a 
 in connexion with the passage, {Exhort, ad Mart. 39) " Hecome worthy of becoming 
 one with (tov iv yeviadai dpa) Son and Father and Holy Spirit, according to the 
 Prayer of the Saviour saying ' As I and thou are one {'tis iyio Kal crv iv icr/xev) that 
 they may be (?) one with us (iva Kal avrol iv rjjjuv iv ucrt, where " deest iv in edd. 
 Wetst. et Kuaei").'" Here the last words may mean "in us" or "one in us," or— 
 if iv takes a dat., like rb avrb— "one and the same with us." So Origen spr.ik- 
 of (Ce/s. viii. 12) rb'Eytlj Kal 6 TTarr\p iv iapav, Kal to iv ev\rj ripynivov virb rod 
 viou tov dtov iv Tifj, '(Is iyio Kal <tv iv io-p-tv. 
 
 [2118 r- 1 Although the text of Clement, in the extract given above, now quotes 
 Jn xvii. 21 — 3 as in A.V., it is not at all certain that he did so in the original text 
 
 126 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2120] 
 
 the text is correct, the best plan will be to take "I in them and 
 thou in me " as an appositional clause explaining the meaning of 
 "one" in "that they may be one." 
 
 [2119] The underlying thought is, perhaps, as Clement says, that 
 "one" means "God," and that the indwelling of God is the sole 
 cause of unity. But how can God the Father dwell " in " men ? 
 Only if the Son dwells "in" men. If the Son dwells "in" men, and 
 the Father dwells "in" the Son, it follows (spiritually as well as 
 logically) that God the Father dwells in men, which means also that 
 unity dwells in them, so that they are one. Probably this is the 
 meaning : but the precise text and the precise grammatical ex- 
 planation of it, must, at present, be given up as unascertainable. 
 
 [2120] The following instance has been placed last, out of order, 
 owing to its special character, xv. 16 "Ye chose not me, but I chose 
 you, and set you [in the vineyard] that (<Va) ye might go [the] way 
 [that I go] (1659 — 60) and [that ye] might bear fruit and [that] your 
 fruit might abide — that (tva) whatsoever ye ask the Father in my 
 name he may give you." "Fruit," as always in John 1 , means the 
 vintage or harvest of souls, which elsewhere the Apostles are said to 
 
 of his work. A long extract would naturally be conformed by scribes to the 
 canonical text. They would take more pains about it than about a short quotation 
 or allusion. Origen (Dc Princip. i. 6) quotes xvii. 22, 23 correctly, but, later on, 
 he mixes up xvii. 24, 21, 22, giving, as part of the quotation (id. ii. 3. 5) "and 
 that, as I and thou are one, these also may be one in us (? one with us)," and, later 
 still, (id. iii. 6. 1) "and that as thou and I are one, they also may be one in (?) us," 
 where Jerome confirms Rufinus in his translation of this quotation of Origen's 
 (Clark transl. vol. ii. p. 264). Epiphanius, too, quotes as a saying of Jesus (Haer. 
 743 A) " and the saying, ' The two of us are one, that they also may be one' (ical Sri, 
 Oi duo iv ifffiev Iva Kai avrol iv waiv) " and (id. 793 a) " Make them that they may 
 be in me (? one with me) as I also and thou are one (iroirjaov avrous 'iva uxriv iv ifioi 
 us Kayu teal cv 'iv ifffxev) " and (id. b) " the two of us are one (oi dvo iv io-/j.ev)." 
 
 [2118 d] xvii. 22 — 3 is thus given by W.H 'iva ucriv iv nadws rj/xeis 'iv, iyw iv 
 
 avrois Kai av iv ifxoi, but by K.V. " that they may be one, even as we [are] one ; I 
 in them and thou in me," SS begins a new sentence at xvii. 23 thus : "...that they 
 may be one even as we are one. I shall be with them and thou with me" introducing 
 the new sentence with " I." Similarly Migne prints both a (which has " Et ego 
 in illis") and d and/("Ego in eis"). Many Gk and Lat. authorities ins. icr/mev 
 before iyd>. All these facts indicate early differences of connexion. It may be 
 worth noting that a, d, and f, have (at the end of xvii. 22) " sicut et nos," e 
 "quomodottf nos" — facts that suggest confusion between KaOus, Kai us, and us Kai. 
 
 1 [2120 «] iv. 36, xii. 24, xv. 2 — 16. Comp. Rom. i. 13. To an Apostle, it 
 was "gain" to die and be with Christ, but it was (Phil. i. 22) " fruit " to live and 
 gain souls for Him. 
 
 127 
 
[2121] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 " reap," but here they are said to " bear " it as a vine-branch bears 
 its clusters 1 . 
 
 [2121] The question is, Why does not the sentence end with 
 " that your fruit might abide," i.e. that the Church of Christ might 
 be spread ? Is not that worthy to be the ultimate object ? Is it not 
 bathos to say to Apostles "in order that (iva) the Church of Christ 
 may be spread— in order that (Tva) your prayers may be answered " ? 
 It certainly would be bathos if we did not assume the last words to 
 mean "in order that your prayers for more fruit and for more 
 gaining of souls may continually be answered." Thus taken, the 
 clause is not bathos. It reminds the Apostles that the more they 
 succeed, the more they must remember that their success depends 
 on God's answer to their prayers, and — since divine answer to 
 human prayer depends on human unity with divine will — on the 
 oneness of their will with His. According to this view, the meaning 
 is, " That ye may save souls — that [I say] your prayers for the souls 
 of men may ever be heard 2 ." 
 
 (x) Ka9<6 s 
 
 (a) Suspensive 
 
 [2122] Katfak, when suspensive, keeps the reader's attention in 
 suspense till he reaches the principal verb later on, e.g. "even as I... 
 so do ye " ; when supplementary or explanatory, it follows the verb 
 ("Do ye.. .even as I"). Ka^s is never used suspensively in 
 Matthew. Luke uses it thus thrice in the Double Tradition, where 
 the parallel Matthew has Zairep etc." John has suspensive k<x0w? 
 
 1 [2120/-] It is hardly possible that <ptpi}re can mean "carry home as 
 vintagers." Apart from other reasons, the freq. tcapirbv (pipei in the context 
 applied to (xii. 24) the grain of wheat, (xv. 2, 4, 5) vine-branches, precludes this. 
 
 ' 2 [2121rt] Comp. 1 Jn v. 15 — 16 "If we know that he heareth us what- 
 soever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we have asked of him. If 
 any man see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask...." In xv. 16, 
 if the 2nd ha. is subordinate to the 1st, the meaning is " in order that by saving 
 souls, ye may acquire apostolic strength in order that your prayers for souls may 
 be still more completely heard." This would be in accordance with the law , "He 
 thai hath, to him shall' be added." So, he that gains "talents" for his Master. 
 may be said to gain them "in order that " he may gain more. But the coordinate 
 interpretation is more in accordance with Johannine usage. 
 
 •' [2122</] Lit. vi. 31 ica0£» (Mt. vii. 12 iro-vro. ovv otra iav) 6i\ere irotetre 
 
 enrols b/u>lus, xi. 30, xvii. 26 K aOin tyfon (Mt. xii. 40, xxiv. 37 wvrrep). 
 
 Ml. i. 2 _3 may possibly be suspensive. I.k. xvii. 2S has o^-olus xadus 
 
 I.'X 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2124J 
 
 about a dozen times, always in Christ's words, and mostly indicating 
 a correspondence between the Father and the Son, or between the 
 Son and those whom the Son sends 1 . 
 
 (/3) Followed by kai' or ka^ m apodosis 
 
 [2123] " Even as" in protasis naturally prepares the way for 
 "precisely so," "altogether so" "al(l)so" in apodosis ("even as you 
 do, he also will do "). In the Johannine Gospel, exhibiting the 
 correspondence between the Father and the Son, as proclaimed by 
 the latter, and between the Son and the children of the Father, cases 
 of this idiom are necessarily frequent, and, in particular, "Even as 
 he [the Father] does.../ also («ayw) do." In English, there is no 
 ambiguity except that we may not feel quite sure whether " also " is 
 intended to suggest " besides " or " in precisely the same way." But 
 in Greek, where " also " is represented by xai, which regularly means 
 "and," the words will be manifestly liable to ambiguity, if the sense 
 admits of the rendering "Even as he does. ..«#*/ [even as] I do." 
 Ka#ak followed by Kayw occurs in the following five instances : — 
 
 [2124] (i) vi. 57 "Even as the living Father sent me and I 
 (Kayw) live on account of (Sta) the Father, he also (R.V. so he) that 
 eateth me (kcu 6 rpwywv /xe) — he also [I say] (ko.kcivo<;) shall live on 
 account of me." Here R.V. agrees with A.V. in rendering Kayw 
 " and I" but Chrysostorn and Severus of Antioch both render it "so 
 I" and this makes good sense : " Even as the living Father sent me, 
 so I live on account of the Father" [i.e. so I, corresponding to His 
 will, live (2297 foil.) merely to do His will, or on His account], "and 
 he that eateth me shall [in the same way] live on account of me 2 ." 
 
 1 [2122 b~] KaOws in i. 23, vi. 31, vii. 38 (? 2129), xii. 14 introduces (or follows) 
 Scripture, and is supplementary, but is suspensive in iii. 14, v. 30, vi. 57 (Chrysost. 
 agst. R.V.), viii. 28, x. 15 (2125—6), xii. 50, xiii. 15, 33, 34, xiv. 27, 31, xv. 4, 9, 
 xvii. 18, xx. 21. In vi. 58, " Not as the fathers died [shall ye die]," the verb 
 should probably be supplied after ov Kadics (as in xiv. 27 ov Kadws 6 /c6o>os bib'wo'i.v 
 e'yw didufju), and in that case Kadws would be suspensive. In v. 23 it does not 
 introduce Scripture, and it is supplementary ; but it may possibly be evangelistic 
 comment, not words of the Lord (2066 />). 
 
 - [2124 a] See Cramer and Chrysost. ad loc. fw ^70; ovtcjs <hs 6 HaT-fjp. 
 
 The words might, in theory, be connected with what precedes : vi. 56 — 7 
 6 rpdiyuiw fiov tt\v crdpKa. kclI irivwi' ixov to alfia iv ifiol [xivei. Kayoi iv avrui, a<z#ws 
 aireareiXev /j.e 6 'cCiv ■narrfp kcljiI) fu) 8ia tow waT^pa. But it would be against the 
 suspensive usage of Kadws, and is in other respects improbable. In the next 
 instance, however, R.V. treats kclOws as non-suspensive. 
 
 a. vi. 129 9 
 
[2125] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 [2125] (2) Ka0w? is taken as explanatory (not suspensive) by 
 R.V. in x. 14 — 15 "I am the good shepherd; and I know mine 
 own, and mine own know me, even as the Father knoweth me, 
 and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep 1 ." 
 But the generally suspensive use of ko.6u><; in Christ's words, up to 
 and beyond this point in the Gospel 2 , would suggest that it is to be 
 taken as in A.V., "As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the 
 Father, and I lay down my life for the sheep." It is true that there 
 is an attractive symmetry and equality in a kind of double proportion 
 between four terms in R.V. "/know mine ozvn and mine own know 
 me, even as the Father knoweth me and /know the Father." More- 
 over A.V. may have been somewhat influenced by inferior mss., 
 which alter "mine own know me " into "I am known by mine." 
 But still there is something to be said for the view of Chrysostom, 
 who says that "the knowledge is not equal" between the shepherd 
 and the sheep but that it is " equal " between the Father and the 
 Son 3 . 
 
 [2126] According to this view, there would be (one might 
 suppose) a distinct pause after the words " mine own know me," 
 while Jesus is preparing to teach His disciples for the first time what 
 is implied by personal knowledge. This has not yet been mentioned 
 by Him, though He has spoken of knowing " concerning the 
 teaching whether it be of God," of knowing "the truth," and even 
 of knowing "that I AM 4 ." According to the Greek doctrine, 
 summarised in the epigram at Delphi " Know thyself," the knowledge 
 of one's own nature was the highest knowledge. According to the 
 Synoptic doctrine of Christ, some knowledge of one's own defects 
 (the beam in one's own eye) was but a rudimentary preparation 
 for " seeing clearly " to help one's neighbour. According to the 
 Johannine doctrine, the highest knowledge of all was that knowledge, 
 
 1 'E7C0 eipib 7rot/U7)e 6 ko\6s, Kai yivucrKU to. ep.d Kai yivuxrKovcl Lie to. e/xd, Kat)w$ 
 yivwoKei fxe 6 ttclttip K&ylo yivwiTKOj tov TraTepa, Kai ti)v \pvxv v / xol/ Tidrffii virtp rwv 
 Trpoft&Twv. 
 
 - [2125 </] Kafuis supplementary — apart from quotations of Scripture (2122 />) — 
 is almost confined to the Last Discourse (2128—32). 
 
 :; Chrys. (Migne) (reading as A.V.) "Akovgov tL iirrjyayt' Kai yivdbiTKU) to. e/xa, 
 
 Kai yivuxTKO/xai inrb twv (/xuip Efra, iVa /j.t) rr/s yvucreuis iffov t6 /xirpov vo/j.iar}s, 
 
 &Kovcov trG)s Siopdovrai avrb rrj iiraywyri' WvwaKti) to. epa, cp-qai, Kai yivuxrKOfxat. 
 virb tGiv ip.wv. 'AXX ovk icnj i) yvuiais' a\\a wov (V77 ; 1'j7t£ tov Ilarpbs Kai ep.ov. 
 'Eku yap, KaOios yivwo~KU Lit 6 llarrjp, K&yio yu>ibo~Kw rbv Ilartpa. 
 
 4 vii. 1 7, viii. j8, 32. 
 
 ISO 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2128] 
 
 or understanding, between the Father and the Son which, in some 
 mysterious way, implied self-sacrifice : " I know mine own and mine 
 own know me. [But what is this 'knowing'? It is a mystery to be 
 perceived through experience, and to be felt and acted on, not to be 
 expressed or comprehended in mere words] — Even as the Father 
 knoweth me so I too know the Father and [this knowledge is the 
 reason why] I lay down my life for the sheep." 
 
 [2127] (3) In xv. 9 (R.V.) "Even as the Father hath loved me, 
 I also (/<ayw) have loved you : abide ye in my love 1 ," (A.V.) "As the 
 Father hath loved me so have I loved you," W.H. txt places only 
 a comma before "abide," so that the meaning would be "Even as 
 the Father loved me and I loved you, abide in (/aci'votc hi) my love." 
 But, if that were the meaning, might not John have marked the 
 apodosis by inserting "ye also" (fxeivare kcu v/acis) 2 ? And is not 
 R.V. (and A.V.) more consonant with the general meaning of Kayia 
 in these sentences, and with the fact that John says "abide in my 
 love" (not "in our love")? (4) In xvii. 18 "Even as thou didst 
 send me into the world, / also (*cayw) sent them into the world," 
 R.V. and A.V. agree in "As thou. ..even so... I." In (5) xx. 21 
 "Even as the Father hath sent me, I also (#caya>) send you," R.V. 
 and A.V. have "As... even so send I you." A comparison of the five 
 instances confirms the view that A.V. is right in (2) and that in each 
 of the five /<dyw should be rendered " I also" or, more idiomatically, 
 "even so 3 I." 
 
 (y) Supplementary 4 
 
 [2128] Outside Christ's words, supplementary Ka8o)<s occurs early 
 in the Gospel in the phrases " even as Isaiah said " and " even as it 
 is written," and, later on, "even as it is written" and "even as is 
 the custom 5 ." But, in Christ's words, the earlier portion of the 
 
 1 KaOibs riyain)a£v fie 6 irarrip, K&yw v/mas riydTrriffa, (marg. riydTrr/aa-) fxeivare 
 ev rrj ay&Trr] ttj ipLrj. 
 
 '-' [2127 «] Comp. xiii. 15 " For I have given an example to you that, even as I 
 have done to you, ye also (/cat vfxets) may do," xiii. 33 " And even as I said to the 
 Jews I say to you also (k. ufuv)" (comp. xiii. 34). 
 
 3 [2127/'] In xvii. 21 "in order that all may be one — even as thou, Father, in 
 
 me, (?) I also in thee — in order that they also may be ," the connexion is 
 
 doubtful (2132 a). It may be an exception. But it is quite consistent with John's 
 style that the words "even as thou [art] in me, so [am] I in thee," may be a 
 parenthetic explanation of the divine unity implied in " One." 
 
 4 This section includes doubtful cases. 
 
 5 i- 23, vi. 31, xii. 14, xix. 40. 
 
 131 9—2 
 
[2129] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 Gospel affords hardly any instances. The first is v. 23 "that all 
 may honour the Son even as they honour the Father." There are 
 some indications (2066 b) that this may be evangelistic comment. 
 
 [2129] (?) vii. 37 — 8 " If any man thirst let him come unto me 
 and drink : he that believeth on me — even as the Scripture said — 
 rivers from his belly shall flow, of living water 1 ." Here it is im- 
 possible to tell what passage or passages of Scripture the writer has 
 in view (1722 /C*), and whether "even as" refers to what precedes or 
 follows. Perhaps the most probable " Scripture " is Isaiah's invita- 
 tion " Ho every one that thirsteth come ye to the waters," with the 
 context describing the fertilising of the wilderness as the result of the 
 Word of God 2 . "He that believeth on me (i.e. in the Word)" 
 appears to be parallel to " If any man thirst [i.e. for the Word] " ; 
 and " the Scripture " may refer to what precedes (i.e. the " thirsting " 
 or " believing ") as well as to what follows (i.e. the " flowing " or 
 diffusion). We cannot confidently say that /<a#ws here is suspensive 
 or supplementary. 
 
 [2130] In xiii. 34 "A new commandment give I unto you that 
 (t'va) ye love one another — even as I have loved you, that (<W) ye 
 also love one another 3 ," R.V. txt and A.V. agree in making k<z#ios 
 suspensive. If the second "that" had been omitted, Katfojs would 
 be manifestly suspensive ("Even as I... so ye"). As it is, after 
 giving the simple precept " that ye love," the writer seems to repeat 
 it emphatically in order to define the nature of the love of the 
 brethren for one another and to shew its correspondence to the love 
 of the Son for them : " that ye love one another — [/ mean'] even as 
 I have loved you, that ye also love one another." It would be very 
 weak to take /caucus supplementally and the last clause as a mere 
 repetition, " that ye love one another as I have loved you — that ye 
 also [I say, likewise] love one another." 
 
 [2131] The last quotation, shewing an emphasis laid upon the 
 nature of the New Commandment of Christ, prepares us to find 
 
 1 'Edf tis OLipq. epx^aOu) wp6s /me /ecu mvirw. 6 irurrtvuv els e/xi, Kadws tlirev ?? 
 ypaipri, TTorafjioi in rrjs KOiXias avrou pevoovviv iidaros fruvros. 
 
 2 Is. lv. i— 13. 
 
 3 [2130 </] 'Ei>to\t)i> ko.ivt)v dldufxi Vfuv iva dyairare aXkJjKoVS kcl6ws rjya.VTj(ra 
 i'p.as 'iva nai v/xth a-yairare aWrfKovs. W.I I. have a comma after aW^Xocs. 
 K.V. marg. gives tlie last clause as "that ye also may love one another, "apparently 
 
 ning " in order that ye may love " (2094). Hut that does not interfere with the 
 suspensive nature of kclOws. 
 
 13; 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2133] 
 
 Him defining the future love that the brethren are to have for one 
 another by reference to the past love that He has had for them : 
 "love one another even as /have loved you." And, as a fact, in the 
 Last Discourse, the hitherto almost invariably suspensive construction 
 is occasionally exchanged for a supplementary one, ^ r . xv. 10 "If 
 ye keep my commandments ye will abide in my love even as I have 
 kept the commandments of the Father and abide in his love," 
 xv. 12 "This is my commandment that ye love one another even 
 as I have loved you." Of the same character are the next four 
 instances of kolOws in xvii. 2, n, 14, 16. 
 
 [2132] This is not unnatural. As long as Christ is looking 
 fonvard to His work on earth, He impresses on His disciples the 
 truth that, "even as" this or that is in heaven, so He will do, or is 
 doing, this or that on earth. But when His work on earth is on the 
 verge of completion, He refers to it (after the manner of Jewish 
 references to Scripture, "even as it is written ") mentioning it as an 
 accomplished fact, a new Law for His disciples, "obey even as I 
 have obeyed," "love even as I have loved." And this view prevails 
 in the Last Discourse except when He is looking forward to the 
 future on earth, not now for Himself, but for His disciples (xvii. 18 
 and xx. 21), "Even as the Father hath sent me I also send you" — 
 which is the last instance of all 1 . 
 
 (xi) Ka( 
 
 (a) Kai' in narrative (Hebraic) 
 
 [2133] The opening words of the Bible exhibit a frequent Hebraic 
 use of "and," e.g. "And the earth was. ..and darkness was. ..and the 
 
 1 [2132 a] The occasional difficulty of distinguishing suspensive from supple- 
 mentary xadws may be illustrated by xvii. 21 — 2, punctuated by W.H. thus, 
 'iva wavres iv waiv, Kadics av, iraT-qp, iv ifioi Ktxyw iv col, 'iva Kai avrol iv rifxiv wctlv 
 'iva 6 ko<t/j.os it iffTevr]... Kay iii tt)v Sb^av tjv MSoiKas fioi 5i5wKa avrois, 'iva uaiv iv 
 Kadws Jj/xeis ev, iyio iv avrois Kai o~i> iv i/xol, 'iva ucriv TereXeiiofievoi els ev, 'iva ytvuxrKri 
 6 Koff/Aos.... Here W.H. differentiate their punctuation, making the former clause 
 apparently suspensive but the latter supplementary. Some reasons for this migh 
 be alleged, based upon rhythm and possibly on the use of Kayu in the first sentence : 
 but the difference is extremely subtle. 
 
 [2132/'] In the Epistle, Kadus (total 9) is sometimes suspensive, e.g. ii. 27 
 ' And even as he taught you, abide" (1915 iiii>) ; sometimes supplementary, e.g. 
 iii. 23 "That we may love one another even as he gave commandment." Its most 
 noticeable use is in the phrase "even as he" where He means Christ, always 
 expressed by inetvos (2382), in passages bidding Christians do, and be, "even as " 
 their Lord (ii. 6, iii. 3, 7, iv. 17). 
 
 133 
 
[2134] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 spirit of God moved. ..and God said... and there was light. ..and God 
 saw the light... and God divided the light... and God called... and the 
 darkness he called... and there was evening and there was morning." 
 Bruder, referring to this use of ko.l as "in oratione historica ex 
 simplici Hebraeorum narrandi modo 1 ," shews, by his tabulations, 
 that John uses it very rarely as compared with any of the Synoptists. 
 The short Gospel of Mark has it more than 400 times 2 , John less 
 than 100 times. It may be said that John does not deal much with 
 narrative, but mainly with discourse. That holds good also of 
 Matthew, and in some degree of Luke, so that it does not explain 
 John's abstinence. 
 
 [2134] Besides, if we take the first and the last chapters of John, 
 both of which consist almost wholly of narrative, how are we to explain 
 that in the last chapter, consisting of twenty-five verses, Bruder gives 
 the Hebraic kcu as occurring only once 3 , whereas in the first twenty-five 
 verses of the first chapter we have about eighteen instances? For 
 example, the Prologue begins "...and the Word was with God and 
 the Word was God.. .and without him was not anything... and the life 
 was the light. ..and the light shineth...a«^ the darkness apprehended 
 it not." The usage continues even when the writer brings us down 
 from the Word to the testimony of John, "^4;/</this is the testimony... 
 and he confessed and he denied r\oX....and they asked \\\m...and he 
 saith...a;^ he answered" etc. The explanation is probably this. 
 In the opening of the Gospel John follows the style of the opening 
 of Genesis, not in affectation, but with a symbolism natural to him, 
 sympathetically describing what was "in the beginning" of spiritual 
 Being, as Genesis describes what went on in the beginning of 
 material creation. But after the Resurrection, when the Apostles 
 are receiving their morning meal before going forth to convert the 
 whole world, Greeks as well as Jews, " all things are become new," 
 and the old-world Hebraic style is thrown aside. The Johannine 
 use of ko.1 in narrative, meaning "and" (as distinct from "also," 
 
 1 [2133«] He inserts by error ical (for on) in i. 16 and omits Kal in i. 4 /ecu ij 
 <;wr) r/v. His list refers the reader elsewhere for the special phrases /ecu eytvero, 
 Kal &ttcu, /ecu Idov. But these are not Johannine phrases. If they were included, 
 [elm's abstinence from rai would appear still more clearly. Some of Bruder's 
 instances might be otherwise classified ; but his statistics suffice as a rough lest. 
 
 2 [2133//] Of course, this is in part explained by the predominance of narrative 
 in Mk. Mt. has it about 250, I.k. about 380 times. 
 
 :1 xxi. uj Kal tovto dirCov \4yei. 
 
 134 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2136] 
 
 "even" etc.) seldom if ever causes ambiguity and calls for no 
 detailed comment. The following sections, which will deal with nai 
 in speech as well as in narrative, will confine themselves almost 
 entirely to cases where the meaning is ambiguous or obscure, or 
 where the precise emphasis is doubtful. 
 
 (/3) Kai connecting affirmation and negation 
 
 [2135] In Hebrew, "and" is frequently used where English 
 would use "and yet" or "but." John adopts this usage in many 
 cases, especially where one of the clauses connected by " and " has 
 a negative, or a word implying a negative: — i. 10 — ri " The world 
 was made through him and [yet] the world knew him not. He came 
 unto his own [house] and [yet] his own [household] received him 
 not," iii. n — -12 "That which we have seen do we witness and [yet] 
 our witness ye receive not.... I told you and [yet] ye believe not" 
 iii. 32 "What he hath seen and heard, this he witnesseth, and [yet] 
 his witness no one receiveth," vii. 19 "Hath not Moses given you 
 the law, and [yet] none of you doeth the law?" vii. 30 "They sought 
 therefore to seize him, and [yet] no one laid his hand on him because 
 his hour had not yet come," viii. 49 " I honour my Father and [yet] 
 ye ^honour (aTi/Aa'£€Te) me" (where a. has a negative force), viii. 54 — 5 
 " Of whom ye say that he is your God, and [yet] ye know him not" 
 viii. 57 "Thou art not yet fifty years old and [yet] thou hast seen 
 Abraham?" ix. 30 "Ye know not whence he is and [yet] he hath 
 opened mine eyes," xiv. 9 " Have I been with you so long, and [yet] 
 knowest thou me not, Philip?" xiv. 24 "He that loveth me not 
 keepeth not my words and [yet] the word that ye hear is not mine 
 but the Father's who sent me," xvi. 32 "There cometh a time.. ..and 
 ye shall leave me alone ; and [yet] I am not alone, because the 
 Father is with me," xx. 29 "Blessed are they that have not seen and 
 [yet] have believed." 
 
 ( 7 ) «ai = " and yet " 
 
 [2136] Kat is thus used in some cases where both the connected 
 clauses are affirmative, or affirmatively interrogative ("is it not?"), 
 but the sense implies contrariety: iii. 19 "The light hath come.... 
 and [yet] men loved the darkness," iv. 20 " Our fathers worshipped 
 in this mountain, and [yet] ye say that in Jerusalem is the place....," 
 vi. 49 "Your fathers did eat the manna...W [yet] they died," i.e. 
 and yet it did not save them from death, vi. 70 "Did not I choose 
 
 135 
 
[2137] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 you the twelve, and [yet] one of you is a devil?" ix. 34 "Thou wast 
 altogether born in sins and [yet] thou teachest us ! " x. 39 " They 
 [therefore] sought again to seize him, and [yet] he came forth from 
 their hand," xi. 8 "The Jews but now were seeking to stone thee 
 and [yet] thou goest thither again ! " 
 
 [2137] Contrast the Hebraic "and" used in the manifestation of 
 the risen Saviour to Mary Magdalene, with the Hellenic "however'''' 
 used in the manifestation to the Seven Disciples: — (1) xx. 14 "And 
 she beholdeth Jesus standing and [yet] knew not that it was Jesus," 
 (2) xxi. 4 "Jesus stood on the shore ; the disciples did not however 
 (ov /xcVtoi) know that it was Jesus." 
 
 [2138] Perhaps the construction with "and" is sometimes pre- 
 ferred by John because he wishes to emphasize the mystery of the 
 ways of Providence. At all events, on two occasions, after saying 
 that people wished to seize Jesus, or that He was teaching in the 
 Temple, (vii. 30, viii. 20) "and no man" arrested Him, he adds 
 "because his hour had not yet come" But elsewhere, when there is 
 no such reference to the "hour," he does not use the Hebraic 
 construction : vii. 44 " Now some wished to seize him, but [in spite 
 of that] (dAA') no man laid hands on him." 
 
 [2139] Whatever his motive may be, the statistical fact is un- 
 deniable that the phrase "and no one" (kcu ou'Sets) (unbroken by 
 intervening words) is not often (perhaps only thrice) used by 
 John in what we should call its natural sense, i.e. additively or 
 consecutively, e.g. "My Father... is greater than I, and no one is 
 able to snatch them out of my Father's hand 1 ." More frequently 
 (about six times) it may mean " and yet no one." 
 
 [2140] The same rule does not apply so frequently to the 
 Johannine use of "and not," which is used in varied contexts, 
 e.g. "A little while and ye behold me not" "They have taken the 
 body of the Lord and we know not where they have laid him," 
 
 1 [2139 a] Jn x. 29. The text and the translation are doubtful (see 2496^). 
 The preceding context has the words (x. 28) "they shall assuredly not be lost... 
 and no one (ko.1 ov...tis) shall snatch them out of my hand." The other instances 
 arc viii. 33, xvii. 12. On iii. 13 see 2141. [In xvi. 22 "and your joy no one 
 taketh," the phrase is broken by the intervening words.] In xvi. 5 the meaning 
 may well be " You are full of sorrow at the thought of my departure and yet not 
 otu of you {koX ovdels 0; u/j-Qv) asks me whither I am departing." " And nothing 1 
 occurs thus in vii. 26 " Is not this he that they seek to kill ? And yet (icai) see! he 
 speaketh openly and nothing (ko.1 ovbiv) do they say to him." It might be fairly 
 maintained that the "yet" implied in the preceding aal runs on to the second ko.1. 
 
 I3 6 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2141] 
 
 " Thou knowest all things and hast not need," " Ye have neither 
 seen him and ye have not his word abiding in you." Still, the 
 instances in which "and not" is, or may be, adversative, slightly 
 exceed the non-adversative 1 . Nor is it fanciful to say that this curious 
 Johannine characteristic reflects the writer's view of the world 
 — its double nature of light and darkness, its disappointments, 
 incongruities, and pathetic paradoxes, which he feels to be often 
 expressible better by an "and" than by a coarse, commonplace, 
 obtrusive "out" : "He was in the world and — the world knew him 
 not," " He came unto his own, and — his own received him not." 
 
 (S) Special instances of kai = " and yet " 
 
 [2141] This general preponderance of adversative meaning must 
 weigh in the interpretation of particular passages of which the mean- 
 ing is disputed, e.g. i. 5 " The light shineth in the darkness and [yet] 
 — the darkness apprehended it not" (1443, 1735^ foil.) [instead of 
 "and the darkness overcame it not"]. In iii. 13 "If I told you 
 earthly things and ye believe not, how shall ye believe [i.e. ye will 
 assuredly not believe] if I tell you heavenly things ? And [yet] no 
 man hath ascended into heaven except him that descended out of 
 heaven...," the meaning appears to be, "Ye will not believe and yet 
 the truth is told you by him who alone knows the truth." In 
 v. 39 — 40 ("Ye search the Scriptures, because ye think to have in 
 them eternal life, and they are they that bear witness concerning me, 
 and [yet] ye have no desire (kcu ov OeXere) to come unto me that ye 
 
 1 [2140 a] This conclusion is reached by reference to ov in Bruder (1888) and 
 by examining instances of kcli ov. An examination of the same phenomena, under 
 the same heading, in Luke, reveals very different results. In the first place, John 
 uses ov more frequently than Luke does in the proportion of about 4^ to 2% — 
 a testimony to John's predilection for contrasts and opposites. In the next place, 
 whereas John exhibits this predilection even more in his Prologue than in the rest 
 of his Gospel, Luke does not use koll ov adversatively till the end of his sixth 
 chapter in the words of Christ, " Why call ye me Lord, Lord, and \j'et] do not the 
 things that I say?" Subsequently he uses it fairly often, mostly in words of Christ, 
 or in parables, or in passages where he follows the Synoptic Tradition, especially 
 in such antitheses as "They desired to see and [yet] they saw not," " He came 
 seeking and [yet] he found not," " They shall seek and [yet] they shall not be able 
 to find " etc. 
 
 [2140/;] In his first six chapters Luke freely uses the additive " and not" i. 7 
 "and they had no child," ii. 43 "and his parents knew no/," ii. 50 "and they 
 understood not," iv. 2 "and he ate nothing.'''' Later on, in Luke's adversative 
 instances, there is probably not one that presents any ambiguity. 
 
 137 
 
[2142] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 may have life") "ye search. ..and " is more probably correct than 
 "Search... and" (2439 (i)). 
 
 [2142] In vii. 27 — 8, the Jews first declare that they know the 
 origin of Jesus, implying that consequently He cannot be the 
 Messiah, " But [as for] this [man] we know whence he is, whereas 
 (Se) the Messiah — when he comes, no man is to know whence he 
 is." Jesus replies, apparently repeating their assertion of knowledge 
 as an exclamation of His own, and shewing its falsity: "(lit.) Both 
 me ye ' know ' and ye ' know ' whence I am ! And [jet] I have not 
 come from myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not," 
 i.e. "Ye say ye know my origin, and yet I come from Him who is 
 Truth whom ye know not 1 ." 
 
 [2143] In x. 35 "If he [David] called them gods. ..and [if] the 
 Scripture cannot be broken," the meaning might be "and [if never- 
 theless, in spite of so difficult a meaning] the Scripture- cannot be 
 annulled." But ov, before Swcn-ai, may be regarded as d in dSwaros, 
 and kcu ov StWrai may be regarded as differing little from a parenthetic 
 ahvvaTov 8e. And this perhaps is the best view : " If the Psalmist called 
 them gods — and [all know that] the Scripture cannot be annulled — 
 how can ye accuse me?" 
 
 [2144] In some cases the choice between "and" and " yet" may 
 be called a mere matter of taste, as in the following : — 
 
 Mt. vi. 26 (A.V.) Lk. xii. 24 (A.V.) 
 
 " ...they sow not neither do they "...they neither sow nor reap... 
 
 reap.. .yet (koI) [R.V. and] your and (/cm) [R.V. and] God feedeth 
 heavenly Father feedeth them." them." 
 
 Isaiah vi. 9 
 
 R.V. LXX and Mt. xiii. 14 (R.V.) 
 
 " Hear ye indeed but (Heb. vaw, " By hearing ye shall hear and 
 
 "and") understand not." (comp. Acts xxviii. 26 "and") 
 
 shall in no wise understand." 
 
 1 [2142 a] AXXot tovtov oi5a/j.ei> irbdev tariv ' 6 Si xpiOTos orav ZpxrjTai oudtls 
 yivuxTKfi irbdtv iar'iv. "FjKpa^€i> ovv...\iyu}v KdfJ.t oi'Sare nai otSare tt60(v el/xi m /cat 
 dw' ifnavrov ovk i\rj\v6a, dXX' Zariv d\7]0iv6s 6 Tri/xxf/as /Ue, 6v i'/xeis ovk oidare. " Both 
 me do ye know" is intended to reproduce the ambiguity of the original which may 
 be either exclamatory or interrogative. OlHare repeats oiSa/xev ironically. Comp. 
 ix. 20 — 30 '* ' YVc know not....' ' Ye know not... ! '" 
 
 - ( >n i) ypa(pri, see 1722 k. 
 
 138 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2146] 
 
 [2145] Apart from all questions of taste it is certain that our 
 Lord, speaking in Aramaic, used the ambiguous vazv, capable of 
 meaning "and" or "and yet," and certain also that any Greek 
 translators of Aramaic Christian traditions or of Hebrew Gospels 
 would have the alternative of rendering vazv, when used in the latter 
 sense, either literally by nai or freely by words meaning "but," 
 " however " etc. There results a reasonable probability that John, 
 writing many years after the circulation of the Synoptic Tradition, 
 which seldom uses the Hebraic Kat in the sense "and yet," 
 deliberately resorted to it as one of many means of forcing his 
 readers to reflect on the many-sidedness of the Lord's doctrine 
 and on the occasional inadequacy of the letter of the earliest 
 Gospels to reproduce the living word. Whatever may have been 
 his motive, or motives, the fact remains that he uses — with a 
 frequency and boldness unparalleled in the Synoptists — the Greek 
 additive conjunction in a non-Greek adversative fashion to introduce 
 adversative clauses with a suddenness that heightens the sense of 
 paradox, thus : v. 43 " I have come in the name of my Father and 
 — ye do not receive me," v. 44 " How can ye believe, receiving glory 
 from one another and — the glory that comes from the only God ye 
 do not seek?" vi. 36 "Ye have both (/cat) seen me and — ye do not 
 believe," vii. 36 "Ye shall seek me and — ye shall not find." 
 
 (e) Kai introducing an exclamation 
 
 [2146] Kat occasionally introduces an exclamation that may be 
 treated as a question, implying incongruity with a previous state- 
 ment : ii. 20 "This temple was built in forty-six years: and [yet] 
 thou (emph.) (Kat av) in three days wilt raise it up ! " viii. 57 "Thou 
 art not yet fifty years old, and [yet] thou (unemph.) hast seen 
 Abraham (emph.) (Kat 'A. ewoaKas ; marg. K-at 'A. ewpaxev o-c) ! " xi. 8 
 " The Jews but now were seeking to stone thee, and [yet] again thou 
 (unemph.) goest thither 1 ! " 
 
 1 [2146(7] In i. 16 "From his fulness did we all receive, and grace for (avri) 
 grace,"' the kclI does not mean "namely," or "that is to say," but "and, what is 
 more," "and indeed," or "yea" (see dim, 2284 — 7). There is probably no instance 
 in Jn where /ecu' means "namely." "Receive" is used absolutely (comp. 1315 and 
 A both i. 3, 4, 7 etc.), and /ecu introduces a new statement about the nature of the 
 reception. 
 
 139 
 
[2147] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 (£) Kai meaning " also " 
 
 [2147] Kat before a noun or pronoun, corresponding to our 
 "also" after a noun or pronoun, is sometimes used by John to 
 predicate again, what has been predicated before, about a different 
 person or thing 1 . Where "not only" precedes 2 , attention is called 
 to "also" and there is no ambiguity or obscurity. But the meaning 
 is liable to be missed in passages where the previous predication is 
 implied (not expressed) or expressed at a considerable interval, e.g. 
 vii. 3 " Depart to Judaea that thy disciples also («W xal ol /*. aov) 
 may behold thy works," i.e. " Here in Galilee, among thy countrymen 
 and kinsfolk, thou hast no disciples worth mentioning : go to Judaea, 
 where thou hast disciples, that they also may behold thy works 3 ." 
 In xii. io "But the chief priests took counsel that they might kill 
 Lazarus also" the reference is to xi. 53, the meaning being, in 
 effect, " I have said above (xi. 53) ' From that day forth therefore 
 they took counsel that they might kill him [Jesus] ' : now I say that 
 they included Lazarus also in their plans 4 ." 
 
 (77) Kai in Apodosis after £, ei, ka6coc etc. in Protasis. 
 
 [2148] This construction is frequent in John because he dwells 
 on the principle of correspondence between the visible and the in- 
 visible, between the incarnate Son below and the Father above : 
 v. 19—26 "For what things soever he [i.e. the Father] doeth, these 
 the Son also (koL 6 uio's) likewise (6/Wws) doeth.... For as the Father... 
 raiseth up, so (ovtws) the Son also (koi 6 wo's) quickeneth....For as 
 the Father hath life in himself so (ovruis) to the Son also (ko.1 t<3 vl<2) 
 gave he to have life in himself," viii. 19 (comp. xiv. 7) "If ye knew 
 
 1 [2147 <z] This construction is most freq. in Lk. In Jn it is about as freq. as 
 in Mt. 
 
 - [2147/0 "Not only," 06, or fx-q. nbvov (adv.), Jn v. 18 before verb, ov (x6vov 
 (\ve, elsewhere before noun, xi. 52 oi'x bwip rod ZOvovs ijlovov, comp. xii. 9, xiii. 9, 
 xvii. 20. This precise constr. (Bruder) does not occur in the Synoptists exc. 
 Mt. xxi. 21. When Mt. iv. 4, Lk. iv. 4 quote Deut. viii. 3 "Not by bread alone," 
 they have ovk iw apry fj.6v<? (adj.) (as LXX). In Jn xi. 52— xvii. 20, 01' and fxovov 
 (adv.) are always separated, "not for the nation alone,'" " not because of fesus 
 alone" etc. 
 
 3 [2147 r] Comp. Rom. i. 13 "that I might have some fruit in you also (ko.1 iv 
 v/xtv)—n.s also (ko.8ojs Kal) in the rest of the nations," where " in you also " would 
 not have been quite clear unless the writer had added the subsequent words to 
 make it clear. 
 
 4 [2147 <f\ Kal, meaning "also," is preceded by 8i in ii. 2, iii. 23, xviii. 2, 5, 
 
 18, xix. 19, 39, xxi. 25 [But in ii. 2 Si Kal may mean "now both..."]. 
 
 I4O 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2151] 
 
 me, ye would know my Father also (k. toj/ it. h-ov)" xii. 26 " Where 
 I am there shall be my servant also (k. 6 Sicxkovos 6 c/xo's) 1 ." 
 
 (6) Kai YM6IC 
 
 [2149] Kai vfiels, v/aus etc., meaning "ye also," "you also" etc., 
 is so frequent in John 2 , that the frequency almost suffices of itself to 
 determine the sense in xiv. 19 "...but ye behold me : because (0V1) I 
 (emph.) («yw) live, ye also (Kai vfiels) shall live." Here R.V. marg. 
 gives " and ye shall live." But this, — whether rendered " ye behold 
 me... and ye shall live," or " because I live and [because] ye shall live" 
 — makes very weak sense. R.V. txt makes perfect sense and 
 accords with Johannine usage. In xvi. 21- — 22 "the woman hath 
 sorrow. ..and ye (R.V.) therefore (ovv) have sorrow," might, and 
 probably should, be rendered "ye also therefore have sorrow," since 
 xat implies correspondence, and not mere addition. 
 
 (t) Kai in Crasis 
 
 [2150] Kai is always combined by crasis with ey<o (freq.), with 
 €fioi (once, xvii. 6), and with I/ac (twice, vii. 28, xvi. 32) except in 
 antithesis xv. 24 Kat kfiX Kai tov iraripa /xov. It is combined with 
 cK€t in xi. 54, but not in ii. 12, iii. 22, vi. 3. With the masculine 
 cK€tvos it is always combined, except in xix. 35 on which see 2383. 
 For koV, see 2160. 
 
 (k) Kakginoc 8 
 
 [2151] After a subject expressed by a participle, eKeZvos is some- 
 times used appositionally for emphasis, "he and no other" and where 
 Kat is prefixed to it, the meaning is "he also" or "he i?i the same 
 way," or "he on his side" etc. :• — vi. 57 "He that eateth me, he also 
 (KciKelvos) shall live on account of me," i.e. just as I live on account 
 of the Father (see context); xiv. 12 "He that believeth on me, the 
 works that I do shall he also (koikco/os) do," i.e. as well as I myself. 
 In vii. 29 "I am from him (irap avrov) and he (emph.) sent me 
 (Kajcctvos [i€ aVeo-retXcv) " the Kat is probably additive, and the 
 meaning is that Jesus comes not only from the presence of the Father 
 
 1 [2148 a] On the possibility of ambiguity when /ecu, after a clause with Kaduis, 
 may mean "also" or "and," see 2123, and on Kadus followed by K&yw in particular, 
 see 2124 — 7. 
 
 2 vii. 47, ix. 27, xiii. 14, 15, 33, 34, xiv. 3, xv. 20. On viii. 38 Kai v/xels ovv... 
 iroieire, see 2193 — 4 and 2359. 
 
 3 [2151 a] Kat e\'€?j/os never occurs exc. in xix. 35, where NA read Kcuceivos 
 (2383). In xvii. 6, KA Kai e/xoi — here with CD — again differ from W.H. Ka/xoi. 
 
 141 
 
[2152] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 but also by His express sending, "and he, and no other, sent me 1 ." 
 In x. 1 6 "And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold : them 
 also (/mKetva) must I bring...," the meaning might be (theoretically) 
 "and them must I bring," but John's predilection for asyndeton, and 
 the appropriateness of the meaning "also "here, indicate that ko.1 is 
 emphatic, not additive. The only other instance is xvii. 24 " that 
 where I (emph.) am they also (ko.k€lvol) may be together with me 
 (/xcr epov)" i.e. "that they, as well as I, may be there"; the phrase 
 Her ifxov suggests that they are to be not only in the same place but 
 "together" in mind and spirit. 
 
 (A.) Kai, "also," connexion of 
 
 [2152] Kat, "also," before nouns and pronouns, has been dis- 
 cussed above. But Kat, "also," before a verb, is sometimes liable 
 to be confused with xai before the subject of the verb. Thus, Sia 
 
 tovto Kat VTrrjVTrjcrev avr<2 6 o^A.os might be confused with Sia tovto 
 
 virrjVT-qaev aura) koL 6 ox/Vos. Yet the former means (1) "For this 
 cause the multitude went also to meet him," i.e. besides doing, or 
 having done, something else, it did this additional act. The latter 
 would mean (2) "But there went to meet him the multitude also" 
 i.e. the multitude, as well as Christ's disciples, or companions. 
 
 [2153] This distinction is ignored by A.V. in xii. 18 Sta tovto 
 ko.1 vTTTjvT-qo-ev airr<5 o ox^-os, where A.V. has "for this cause the 
 people also." R.V. has "for this cause also the multitude," which 
 would naturally mean " for this cause as well as for other causes." 
 But the words ought to mean that the multitude, besides doing other 
 things (e.g. noising abroad the raising of Lazarus) also, or actually, 
 took the extreme course of organizing a procession in Christ's 
 honour, i.e. "went also to meet him," or "actually went to meet him-."' 
 
 (//,) Kai "also" in viii. 25 
 
 [2154] There is great difficulty in viii. 25 " They therefore said 
 unto him, Who art thou? Jesus said unto them, [In] the beginning 
 
 1 [2151/0 Asyndeton ("He also") is less probable here. If that were the 
 construction, the sentence and its context would mean " I [emph.) know him 
 because I (unemph.) am from his presence: he, on his side, sent me. 
 
 - [2153 a\ Possibly A.V. may have considered that ko.1 represented a distinction 
 between two multitudes, (t) xii. 12 6 by\o% iroXvs, which came out oj Jerusalem, 
 (2) xii. 17 6 oy\o% 6 wv fxtr avrov ore top A. i(p^vqctv... which accompanied Jesus 
 into Jerusalem, and which is said to have (//'.) "testified." John does distinguish 
 between these two multitudes. But koX here has nothing to do with emphasizing 
 the distinction. 
 
 142 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2155] 
 
 whatever I also speak unto you (rrjf dpxv v otl kol XaXw vp.1v, 
 punctuated by W.H. txt interrog., marg. affirm.)." Chrysostom's 
 explanation is as follows, " Now what he means is to this effect, 
 Even at all to hear the words that fall from me ye are unworthy, 
 much more are ye unworthy to understand also who I am 1 ." Cramer 
 quotes Cyril thus, "I am justly punished, says [He], because I made 
 a beginning even of [receiving] word[s] from you, because I have 
 addressed to [you] aught of the things that know [? 6iAot6on 
 ? eoiKOTooN "that seem likely " | to profit [you] and took counsel 
 [how] to deliver [you], I have been counted thus cheap in your 
 estimation 2 ." It will be observed that the two do not agree. 
 Chrysostom apparently takes tt]v dp\v v as oAw?, "at all," but Cyril 
 takes it as "beginning." Chrysostom's interpretation would require 
 ov, or tl /ecu, or some negative context, which is found with t?/v 
 dpxqv when it means "at all" (" never at all" "not at all" etc.) 3 . 
 
 [2155] As regards on, Chrysostom apparently takes it as the 
 neuter pronoun ("that which I even speak," paraphrased by him 
 as "the words that fall from my lips," rwi/ Xoywv tlqv -nap ip.ov) : 
 Cyril takes it as "because" ("because I made a beginning"). 
 Neither of them takes otl interrogatively. Of the instances alleged 
 by Westcott here for interrogative on, one is probably corrupt, and 
 two are not parallel to the instance in question 4 . Even if the inter- 
 rogative use in Mark could be proved, it would be alien from 
 Johannine usage (2231 c — e). 
 
 1 [2154 a] "O 5e \e7e1 tolovtSu iari ■ Tov 6Xws aKoueiv tQv \byuv tQv Trap' e/xov 
 dvd^Loi eare, htjti ye Kal fiadeiv Scrm iyu eifii. 
 
 " [2154 /'] Cramer ad loc. AiKaia ttclctx^, 4>T)<riv, otl Kal \6yov wap vp.uv 
 €TroLritTa.p.r)v apxr)v, otl 7rpoo~we<pwvriKa. tl tujv ddorwv (?) ti^eXetp, Kal dcacrdi^eLV 
 i(3ov\evad/jLT]v, ei'reXTjs ovtu \e\6yL<rp.aL Trap' 1 vlllv. Perhaps there should be a full 
 stop after dpxw- Cramer also has a comment (resembling Chrysostom's) quoting 
 the text as "rr/p dpxv v °' Tt Ka -l \a\Q iip.lv, iroWd ^x w 7rct P' vp.Qv \a\elv Kal Kplvetv. 
 
 3 [2154 c] It is very doubtful whether such a negative could be implied here 
 from the tone of the answer ("[You ask me who I am. I give you no reply. 
 I tell you not] at all even that which I say [much less that which I am]"). 
 
 [2154 if] No negative v.r. is given by Alford. SS (Burk.) has "The chief [is] 
 that I (enip/i.) should speak [myself] with you," a "initium quod loquor vobis," 
 b "inprimis quia loquor vobis; cum...," d "initium quoniam et loquor vobis," 
 f "principium quod et loquor vobis," gat. and mm. "principium, quod loquor," 
 e and Vulg. "principium qui et loquor vobis." 
 
 4 [2155 a] In Mk ix. n, 28, otl is preceded by ewqpthTUv, and the best transla- 
 tion would probably be an affirmative — 3tl or \e~yovTes otl being simply used to 
 introduce the statement — "They questioned him saying, 'The scribes say Elijah 
 must first come. [How is that?']," "They questioned him saying 'We could not 
 
 H3 
 
[2156] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 [2156] If on is a relative pronoun the meaning would seem to be 
 that Jesus identifies Himself with that which He speaks, i.e. with the 
 words which, as He says (xii. 48), "shall judge" those who reject 
 Him. Then, perhaps, the ko.1 may be explained with reference to what 
 precedes — where He has said to the Jews, " If ye believe not that 
 / am " — so that the meaning is, " [/ am] that which I also speak." 
 From an ordinary person, this would mean " I am as good as my 
 word." From a prophet, it might mean " I am the messenger of 
 God, nay, the message of God." But coming from the Logos — who 
 is both the Word and the Act of God, the Messenger of righteousness 
 and justice and also the Righteous Judge Himself — it implies a 
 unique and mysterious identity between the Personality and the 
 Word. As John the Baptist says (i. 23) "/ [am not to be accepted 
 as the son of Zachariah the priest, or on any other personal grounds, 
 but as being] a voice (eyw $>wq)" so Jesus says " I am [not to be 
 accepted as the Son of David, born at Nazareth, or Bethlehem, but 
 as being] that which also I speak from the first," i.e. the Logos, as 
 He had spoken it from the first, consistently 1 . 
 
 (v) Kai' meaning "[indeed], and...?" 
 
 [2157] In ix. 36 "And who is he, Lord, that (2113) I may 
 believe in him ? " the question (uttered by the blind man whom 
 Jesus had healed) follows the words, "Thou believest [dost thou 
 not] in the Son of man?" The man is startled by the unusual 
 
 cast it out. [How was that?].'" In both cases, the question is implied in the 
 tone, and in the verb "questioned" which makes all the difference. In Mk ii. 7 
 diaXoyt^'ofj.ei'OL ev rah Ka.p8ia.1s avrwv, Tl ovtos ovtcjs Xa\e?; W.H. print on only in 
 marg., and Swete gives, as the authority for it, only B (whose authority is weak on 
 insertion and omission (2650) of O) and one cursive. See 2231 d — e. 
 
 The adv. apxri" (and tt)v a.pxv 1 ') when meaning "at all" appears always 
 (Steph.) to have a negative context expressed or implied. It is implied in Clem. 
 Horn. vi. 1 1 t'l Kal ttjv apxw oiaXeyopiai ; i.e. ov Set 8ia\tyeadai. Comp. ib. xix. 6. 
 Without a negative, it means "at the first " as in Gen. xli. 21, xliii. 18, :o, and 
 Just. Mart. Apol. § 10 {bis). 
 
 1 [2156 a] So Nonnus, Tls ov 7r Aeis ; koX Xpiords dviaxev, ottl irep tofuv 'E£ 
 apxvs ddptfop, Zxw vy)pLdp.a SiKafciv. This, though probably not an actual utter- 
 ance of Jesus, may be a Johannine and mystical paraphrase of something expressed 
 differently by the Synoptists, according to whom, Jesus expressed His desire to go 
 back to the "beginning" of things, before the Law of Moses was given "because 
 of the hardness of men's hearts." He also said that His "words" would "never 
 away." He claimed for "the Son of man" that He was "Lord also "i 
 the Sabbath." Combining these statements we shall arrive at a claim on the 
 put oi the Son of man to identify Himself with the Father's Law or Word. 
 
 I44 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2159] 
 
 phrase ("believe in the Son of man"), and he craves additional 
 explanation "[Thou sayest this] and [thou wilt surely tell me] who 
 is he?" Somewhat similarly in answer to Christ's startling statement 
 about the spiritual disability attendant on riches, the disciples reply, 
 "[Thou sayest this] and — who [then] can be saved 1 ?" Probably, 
 later on, John finds a parallel and a contrast between this question 
 asked by a believer and the question asked by the unbelieving Jews, 
 (xii. 34) "Who is this Son of man?" and the surprise of the former, 
 together with his readiness to believe in what surprises him, brings 
 out clearly the nature of the man's faith. He is ready to believe 
 in anyone that Jesus bids him believe in. In effect — before Jesus 
 had spoken — he already believed, heart and soul, in Jesus as a 
 divine incarnation of kindness and power. 
 
 (f) Kai €an (See also 2513—5 (i)) 
 
 [2158] In Isaiah x. 22 "For though thy people Israel be as the 
 sand... only a remnant shall return," LXX has kqX lav yiv-qrai. 
 St Paul, for k. I. yevrjTai, has (Rom. ix. 27) e<xv 17 (A.V. "though," 
 R.V. "if"). Probably St Paul used eav with the consciousness that 
 the apodosis gave it the meaning "even if," and LXX intended kcu 
 to mean "even." In an author like John, much given to asyndeton, 
 there is an antecedent probability (in doubtful cases) that /cat e'a'v 
 would mean, not " and if," but " even if." 
 
 [2159] Kai lav occurs as follows: viii. 16 "I judge no man, 
 (R.V.) yea, and if I judge (kcu lav npivw Se eyw), my judgment 
 is true" (A.V. " and yet if I judge"). Perhaps, "yea, even if I 
 judge"; xii. 46 — 7 (R.V.) "I am come. ..that whosoever believeth 
 on me may not abide in the darkness. And if («ai eav) any man 
 hear my sayings and keep them not, I judge him not," better, 
 perhaps, "Even if any man hear and disobey, I judge him not"; 
 xiv. 3 (R.V.) "And if (*ai eav) I go and prepare a place for you, 
 I come again, and will receive you...," better, perhaps, "Even if 
 (or, And even if) I go... [yet] again do I come." There is great 
 
 1 [2157(7] Mk x. 26, Lk. xviii. 26 (Mt. xix. 25 ris &pa). So Xen. Cyrop. v. 
 4. 13 " 'You are passing over a still greater marvel.' '[Indeed] and what might 
 that be (nai rt 5r) tout i<rriv;)?" And, in reply to Cyrus's orders as to the 
 drawing up of soldiers for an attack, an officer replies (ib. vi. 3. 22) "[Indeed] 
 and doyon think we shall be strong enough (Kai ooKodfxev crot, 2<py, w Kvpe, 'iKavQs 
 £l-eu>)...?" Similarly, in English we might have "'Give him what he asks.' 
 'And where am I to get it?'" So /cai irus ; freq. (Steph. 2305 B). 
 
 A. VI. I45 IO 
 
[2160] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 difficulty about the whole of this passage, but it seems to mean 
 "I should not myself call it going on a journey (Tropcvofxai) but going 
 back to the Father (v-rrdyu)) : however, to use your word, even if 
 I do ' go,' yet I will return " (2080 — 6). In the Epistle, *ai eav occurs 
 twice. It is used with indie, in i Jn v. 15 kcu e'av oioap.^v "and if we 
 know " (see 2515 (i)). R.V. "and if" does not seem adequate to the 
 meaning in 1 Jn ii. 1 — 2, "I write... that ye sin not. Grant however 
 that one sin (kcu idv tis dp.dprrj) zve have a Paraclete." It is not 
 meant that we have no Paraclete if we do not sin. The meaning 
 is, "Even if we do sin [let us remember that] we have a Paraclete." 
 
 (o) Kan 
 
 [2160] Kav occurs four times in John and means " even if " 
 certainly in viii. 14, x. 38, xi. 25, and possibly in viii. 55, (R.V.) 
 "But I know him [i.e. the Father] ; and if I should say {kq.v crn-co) 
 I know him not, I shall be like unto you, a liar." It is true that *o,v 
 means "and if" in Luke, and in the Mark- Appendix 1 ; and three 
 Johannine instances are hardly enough to establish the necessity 
 of a similar meaning in the fourth. Yet, having regard to the 
 instances, so far as they go, and to the frequency of asyndeton in 
 John, and to the extraordinary force and abruptness of the thought, 
 the balance of probability inclines slightly toward the latter rendering: 
 " I know him. Even if I say I know him not — [what then ?] I shall 
 be a liar." 
 
 (73-) K<m'...k<m', "both... and" 
 
 [2161] In vi. 36 "But I said unto you that ye (unemph.) have 
 both seen [me] and [yet] do not believe," dAA' uttov v/j-lv on ko.1 
 kwpa.Ka.ri [/i.c] koX ov iricrTcveTe, A.V. has " ye also," which would 
 require ko.1 v/aus. R.V. omits "both." The word "both" increases 
 the abruptness of the paradox, as in xv. 24 (where R.V. inserts it) 
 " they have both seen and hated both me and my Father 2 ." Possibly 
 
 1 [2160rt] Kdf, in Mk v. 28, vi. $6 means "though it were but," i.e. "merely," 
 in Mt. xxi. 11, xxvi. 35, "even if." Hut in I.k. xii. 38, xiii. 9, Mk-App. [xvi. 18], 
 J as v. 15 (on which see Mayor), it means "and if." This evidence, so far as it 
 goes, favours the view that John would always use the word in one sense as is 
 the case in Mk, Mt., and Lk. 
 
 - [2161 rz] In vi. 36, yu f ' s om - by almost all authorities exc. HP. prob. because 
 the scribes did not understand that the reference was to vi. 26 " not because 
 ye saw signs" combined with vi. 29 " this is the work of God that ye believe." 
 
 146 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2163] 
 
 R.V. omits it here because it is contrary to English idiom, and 
 because the paradox is expressed by rendering the second kcu " and 
 \yef\." This however does not give the suspensive force of the first 
 kcu, which might be freely rendered '■'■though'" ("though ye have seen 
 me yet ye do not believe"). 
 
 [2162] This usage is almost peculiar to John in N.T. Other 
 books use Kai... Kai to represent (i) the same verb applied to two 
 nouns, e.g. "healing both the blind and the lame 1 " or (2) the same 
 noun or pronoun applied to two verbs, e.g. " he began both to do and 
 to teach." But these and other instances ("both hungering and 
 thirsting," and even "both to be filled and to be hungry 2 ") are unlike 
 the Johannine coupling (with " and [yet] "). Sometimes also John 
 couples, not opposites, but correlatives, or correspondent statements 
 like that of St Paul, " God both raised up the Lord and will raise up 
 us 3 ," where the text suggests that Redemption is one great fore- 
 ordained plan including past and present. Thus the Voice from 
 Heaven says xii. 28 "I have both glorified and will again glorify," i.e. 
 as it was, so it shall be. 
 
 [2163] ix. 37 "Thou hast both seen him and he that is speaking 
 with thee is he 4 ," is the reply of our Lord to the man born blind, 
 asking who "the Son of man" is, in whom he is to believe. Jesus 
 does not at once say, as to the Samaritan woman, " I that speak unto- 
 thee am he." The words "Thou hast seen him" coming to the 
 blind man from Jesus, who had just made him "see," and whose 
 voice he would recognise, could hardly fail to be clear. The blind 
 man could hardly think of asking, "But of all those whom I have 
 seen since I received sight a few hours ago, which is he?" Perhaps, 
 
 The former implies that the Jews had " seen " the Messiah manifested by " signs " ; 
 the latter, that, in spite of this " seeing," they still did not " believe " and needed 
 to be commanded to " believe." 
 
 1 [2162 a] Comp. Mk iv. 41 " (?) both (R.V. even) the wind and the sea," sim. 
 Mt. viii. 27. Luke in the parall. (viii. 25) by a difference of order (/cat reus due/Mots 
 eTriT&aaei. /ecu tcjJ vdari, not /ecu r. ave/xois k. t. v5olti.) perh. indicates that he takes 
 /ecu... /ecu' as " even... and." 
 
 2 [2162/'] Phil. iv. 12 otda /cat Tcnreivouadai, olda /ecu TrepiaatveLv is interesting 
 as shewing the Apostle in the act of writing Kai to.it. Kai irepiffa. and then changing 
 his mind, inserting olSa : as Lightf. says, Kai t aw ewovcrd at was "shaped in antici- 
 pation of the Kai TrepLcr<reveiv which follows. " 
 
 3 [2162 r] 1 Cor. vi. 14 6 8e debs Kai tov Kvpiov ijyeipev Kai r}/j.as etjeyepu (B 
 i^rjyeipev). B's reading would mean that " God both raised up the Lord and (ipso 
 facto) raised up us," as part of one plan. 
 
 4 Kcu ecipa/cas avrbv Kai 6 \a\G>v /xera crov eKeivos ecrriv. 
 
 147 IO — 2 
 
[2164] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 therefore, Chrysostom has not chosen the right epithet in calling the 
 clause " obscure 1 ." But it is purposely preparatory and incomplete — 
 as though beginning from the physical and passing to the spiritual. 
 As, after the feeding of the Five Thousand, the Saviour says (vi. 63), 
 "The flesh profiteth nothing, the words that I have spoken to you 
 are spirit and are life," so, after the healing of the blind man, Jesus 
 does not say, "I that healed thee am he," but describes the Son 
 of man as "He that is speaking with thee." He thereby suggests 
 another aspect of the Messiah. He is not only the Healer, but also 
 the Speaker of the words of God 2 . 
 
 [2164] Kat is not immediately before the verb in xvii. 25 (lit.) 
 "O righteous Father, both (/cat) the world did not recognise thee — 
 but I (cyw 8e) recognised thee — and these (kol ovtoi) recognised that 
 thou didst send me." Here the first k<u is intended to keep the 
 reader in suspense, aware that the meaning is incomplete 3 , and 
 perhaps the sentence starts with the simple antithesis, " Whereas (Kai) 
 the world did not... on the other hand (/ecu) these did." But the 
 sentence is broken by a parenthesis ("but I recognised") and this 
 perhaps suggests the reason why "these did [recognise]," namely, 
 because the Son imparted to the disciples His power of recognition — 
 so that a new connexion is introduced, " but I did and consequently 
 these did 4 ." 
 
 [2165] These words (xvii. 25) resemble — spiritually, though not 
 verbally — the saying in the Double Tradition, "I confess unto thee, 
 O Father... because thou hast hidden these things from the wise... 
 and revealed them unto babes. Yea, Father, for so it hath seemed 
 
 1 Chrys. Ovk elireVy'Yiyd) eifjii' dXXd fxiaos Zti kcli inreaTaX/xiuos. Kai ewpanas 
 clvt6v. Tovto Zti adrjXov r\v 5ib rb o~a<pt<TTepov iirriyayev '0 \a\wv fiera (rod, 
 iKeivds ion. By ixiaos he seems to mean "going halfway." 
 
 2 Comp. vi. 68 " Thou hast the words of eternal life," which implies " Thou 
 art the Saviour." 
 
 s [2164 a] As a rule, Kai 6 K6crfj.os, in such a position as this, would mean 
 ■" Even the world," and in some contexts it would make good sense to rentier 
 it thus, "Even the world, even God's own creation, did not know Him*"; 
 ibut this would not be appropriate in a context where "the world" is clearly 
 regarded as an enemy. 
 
 4 [2164/'] See 2162 b' on Phil. iv. \i. Injn xvii. 16, the words Ktd iyvdtptcra... 
 Kai yvuplau might begin a new sentence (like xii. 28 Kai (do^a<ra...Kai tt6.\iv 
 i'o^d(ruj) " I have both made known. ..and will make known," and this hypothesis of 
 asyndeton is more in accordance with Johannine style than the hypothesis of Kai 
 " a nd" repeated thrice after Kai "both." 
 
 1 4 S 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2166] 
 
 good in thy sight 1 ." There, too, the context says that no man 
 knoweth the Father save the Son and he to whom the Son reveals 
 Him. So, we might paraphrase the Johannine " righteous Father " 
 as meaning substantially "I confess the righteousness of that which 
 hath seemed good in thy sight." The Johannine antithesis between 
 " the world " and " these " corresponds to the antithesis between 
 "the wise" and "babes." Also the parenthesis "But I knew thee" 
 followed by "and these knew that thou didst send me," suggests — 
 what Matthew and Luke express — that the knowledge of the Father 
 is peculiar to the Son and to those who receive the gift from the Son. 
 The Kai in the Fourth Gospel supplies the connexion between 
 " hiding " from the " wise " (i.e. " the world " meaning " the worldly") 
 and the revealing unto " babes " (i.e. the little ones of Christ, whom 
 the Fourth Gospel calls " these "). The two are parts of one plan. 
 In John, " hiding " and " revealing " are expressed by " not knowing " 
 and "knowing." The thought is the same as in Matthew and Luke. 
 [2166] In xxi. 24, outo's icrrtv 6 fxa6r)Tr)<; 6 Kal /xaprvpwv Trepi 
 tovtu)v Kal 6 ypou//as Tairra is the reading of B. On the context, 
 see 2169 and 2429 — 35. It would be against Greek usage to 
 suppose that this means, "he that both testifieth and wrote," 6 Kal 
 p.apTvp<2v Kal ypdij/as. In B, therefore, we must take the first Kai as 
 "also": "This [i.e. the beloved disciple above described] is the 
 disciple that also [besides seeing the Saviour in the way described 
 above] testifieth concerning these things," i.e. he not only saw the 
 Saviour but testifies to what he saw 2 . After these words the 
 evangelist continues, "and the one that wrote these things," making 
 a pause after tovtwv and deliberately separating the two statements. 
 As a rule, an apostle would "testify" and his amanuensis or 
 interpreter would write (as in the case of St Paul's Epistles) : but 
 in this case the "beloved disciple" did both 3 . 
 
 1 Mt. xi. 25 — 7, Lk. x. 21 — 2. 
 
 2 [2166 a] " These things " may perhaps not refer to the whole of the contents 
 of the Gospel, but to the events just described, like ravra in xii. 16 (2621 — 2) : 
 Codex a has " de Jesu " and e " de ihm," but these are perhaps confusions of " de 
 his," read as " de ihs." 
 
 3 [2166 /'] Kat would naturally be omitted by scribes before fiaprvpuiu because 
 it would seem to them, if genuine, intended to mean "both" : and this it could 
 not mean. If we omit it, the rendering will still be as above, only omitting the 
 emphatic "also." 
 
 [2166 c] If we adopt the two marginal readings of W.H. and assume [6], in the 
 
 I49 
 
[2167] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 (p) Ka'i r*p 
 
 [2167] Kai ydp occurs in John twice. Once carrot intervenes 
 (iv. 45 kcu airol yap rjkOov, " for they also went ") perhaps receiving 
 special emphasis from its intervention (2692). The other instance is 
 iv. 23, "For the Father also (ko.1 yap 6 7rarrjp) seeketh such for his 
 
 worshippers (toiovtovs £,r)T€i rovs TrfjoaKwovvTas aurov)," R.V. txt 
 "for such doth the Father seek to be h. w.," marg. "for such the 
 Father also seeketh." This rendering ("for... also ") is more probable, 
 here, than " for indeed." Kai ydp may mean " for indeed " — empha- 
 sizing the cogency and truth of a causal proposition — when there is 
 no noun or pronoun that comes close after7vards. But where there is 
 such a noun or pronoun the force of Kai is to emphasize it, as in 
 11 For I also am under authority 1 ." Taken thus, the words are 
 appropriate as a reply to the Samaritan woman, whose tone suggests 
 that she may have thought it a mark of weakness in man, much more 
 in God, to "seek," since "seeking" implied want and need 2 . Mark 
 records a saying of the Son about Himself, " For the Son of man also 
 (Kai ydp 6 v. t. d.) came to be a minister 3 ." John here records 
 a similar saying of the Son about the Father, and with the same 
 conjunction, "For the Father also (Kai ydp 6 rr.) seeketh 4 ." 
 
 On Kai. ..Se see 2076, and on ovre... Kai see 2258 — 9. 
 
 (cr) Kai omitted between two adjectives 
 
 [2168] Such collections of adjectives as we find in the Pastoral 
 Epistles (2 Tim. iii. 2 foil.) "Self-loving, money-loving, boastful, 
 haughty etc." are not to be found in John, where two contiguous 
 
 second, to be part of the text, the translation will then be "This is the disciple 
 
 that also testifieth concerning these things, the [disciple] that also wrote " But 
 
 the possibilities of combining various readings are so numerous that it is not worth 
 while to enter into further detail. 
 
 1 [2167 a] Mt. viii. 9, Lk. vii. 8. Comp. Mt. xxvi. 73 " for thy speech also,'" i.e. 
 besides other suspicious circumstances, Mk x. 45 "for the Son of man also," i.e. 
 He as well as others, not exempting Himself from the duty of common men, 
 Lk. vi. 32 " for sinners also" i.e. as well as the righteous, etc. 
 
 2 [2167/'] Christ had said to her " Give me to drink 7 ' and had then perplexed 
 her by raying that He could give her to drink. The evangelist here represents the 
 Son as saying " Give," just as a father might say to his children " Give me your 
 hearts," and jusl as (lod is represented in O.T. as saying to Israel "Seek ye my 
 face" — thus "seeking" them — in the hope that they may reply "Thy face, O 
 Lord, will I seek." 
 
 1 Mk x. 45. * Jn iv. 23. 
 
 ISO 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2170] 
 
 adjectives may always be explained by special circumstances. In 
 xii. 3, vdpBov ■ma-TLKr}^ (1736 d) (perhaps intended to suggest an inward 
 symbolical meaning) may be taken as a compound noun followed by 
 tvoXvtl'ixov. In xvii. 3, ere tov fxovov dXrjBtvov deov may be illustrated 
 by Rom. xvi. 27 p.6vw cro^w 6ed>, where p-ovos perhaps implies (1895, 
 2664 tf) an adjective ("One") and an adverb ("uniquely"). It is 
 characteristic of John that, instead of saying " the last and greatest 
 day of the feast," he should say (vii. 37) " Now on the last day — the 
 
 great one [too] — of the feast (ev o"e rrj io-^dry yp-epa — rfj paydXy — t?/s 
 
 iopTrjs),'' adding "the great one" as a parenthetical remark 1 . 
 
 (xii) Mt'v, (j-evToi 
 
 [2169] The Johannine use of p.iv is interesting mainly in its 
 bearing on the question whether oTdapav in xxi. 24 may have been 
 taken by Chrysostom as oTSa /xeV, on which point see 2429 — 35. 
 Apart from vii. 12 01 p.\v tXtyov . . .dXXot [Sc], and xi. 6 Tore pikv tpmvev 
 ...errctra para, tovto, it is generally followed by Se, as in xix. 24 ol p.kv 
 
 OVV (TTpa.TLWTai...l<TT7]K£l<Tav Se, xix. 32 TOV p.ZV TTpWTOV . . . £7Tt Se TOV 'I., 
 
 XX. 30 7roXAa p.lv ovv k. dk\a...TavTa Se. In X. 41 'Iwav^s p-tv o"r]p.uov 
 iiroir](T€v oi8ev, Trdi'Ta 8e 6<ja et7rei/ IoxiVt/s 7T€pt tovtov dXrjOij rjv, the 
 
 antithesis suggested by the beginning of the sentence is "John on 
 the one hand did no sign, but this man, who was predicted by John, 
 has fulfilled all John's predictions " — ^but the subject is changed in 
 order to emphasize Trdvra. The two remaining instances of p.i\> are in 
 words of the Lord, xvi. 9 Trepl dp.apTia<; p.£v...TT€p\ StKatotrui'^s 8e...Trepl 
 (2077) ok Kpi'creojs, and xvi. 22 k. v/xeis ovv vvv p.kv Xvir-qv «X eTe ' ^dXtv 8e 
 
 oxpopai v/xa?, where, in strict regularity, the second verb should have 
 continued in the second person ("but hereafter ye shall rejoice "), 
 but the writer passes off to the cause of the future joy. 
 
 [2170] McVtoi occurs nowhere in the Synoptists, but five times in 
 John. In iv. 27 "No one, however, said, What seekest thou?" and 
 in xx. 5 " He did not, however, enter in," a feeling of reverence is 
 suggested : in vii. 13 "No one, however, spake freely about him," the 
 reason is added- — "owing to the fear of the Jews." In xii. 42 — after 
 having said "they did not believe" — the evangelist says "yet 
 
 1 [2168 <?] Some Latin translators have been perplexed by the Gk article and 
 by taking eoprr) as feast-day; a has " in novissima autem magna die festi Judaeorum," 
 but b "in novissimo autem die magno ac solenne," e "in die autem novissimo 
 magno die festo," d andjf" in novissimo autem die (^f+illo) magno diei festi," 
 SS "and on the great day of the feast." 
 
 151 
 
[2171] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 however (o/xw<; fxtvToi) even of the rulers many believed in him, but 
 owing to [fear of] the Pharisees they did not confess him." In xxi. 4 
 "Jesus stood on the beach. The disciples, however, did not know 
 that it was Jesus" is the only remaining instance 1 . Reviewing the 
 whole, we may say that fxivToi is never used except where the context 
 indicates prevention of some action by fear, or reverence or 
 some mysterious restraint. As bearing on the last instance comp. 
 Lk. xxiv. 16 "But their eyes were holden that they should not know 
 him." 
 
 (xiii) "Ottov 
 
 [2171] In classical Greek, ottov is not used after a definite 
 mention of place, as it is in John, e.g. i. 28, "Bethany, beyond 
 Jordan, where (ottov) John was...," xii. 1 "Bethany, where Lazarus 
 was" etc. Compare especially xix. 17 — 18 "...to the place of a 
 skull called in Hebrew Golgotha, where (ottov) they crucified him," 
 i.e. almost equivalent to, "a/id there they crucified him." This 
 Johannine use is not borrowed from the LXX, where ottov is so rare 
 that it is non-occurrent in the Pentateuch, Joshua and Kings. Nor 
 does the Thesaurus give instances of it. But Mark uses it thus four 
 or five times, and Matthew — probably sometimes borrowing from 
 Mark— uses it about thrice 2 . In connexion with the Resurrection, it 
 
 1 [2170 a] Out of Jn, it occurs only 2 Tim. ii. iy 6 p.. arepebs dep.eXt.os, Jas ii. S 
 ei p.. vbp.ov reXelre f3acriXiKbv, Jude 8 bp.oiios p.. koli ovtoi. 
 
 2 [2171 «] Mk ii. 4 tt\v ariy-qv Sttov r)v...Tov KpafiarTov Sttov 6 TrapaXvTiKbs 
 KariKtiTO, (?) iv. 15 oi irapa tt\v bbbv ottov aTrdperai b Xbyos, ix. 48 Y^epvai' ottov 6 
 crKil>\ri^ avrdv ou TeXevroJ, xvi. 6 see below (21716'): Mt. xiii. 5 (definite) to. 
 TTfTpwOr) ottov ovk elxev "YV" TroXXr)i>, but Mk iv. 5 (indefinite if xai is inserted) to 
 TrerpQSes [tcai] ottov ovk dx*" yv v ToXXrjv. In Mt. xxvi. 57, Sttov follows Ka<.a.<pa.v 
 which implies " the palace of Caiaphas." Mt. xxviii. 6, see below (2171c"). 
 
 [2171/'] Mt. vi. 19 — 20 (Lk. xii. 33) is of a somewhat indefinite nature, and 
 Sttov in Mk xiv. 14 (Lk. xxii. 11) (Mt. om.) ttov iarlv rb KaraXvpia. p.ov ottov... 
 (payu, is interrogative, and, so far, indefinite. 
 
 [2171 c] "Ottov occurs, in the Acts, only in xvii. 1 Qeo-aaXoptKriv, ottov..., xx. 6 
 (v. r. ) 7-7)1/ Tpy&da... ottov (W.H. ov). Lk. uses ottov five times, but never as 
 above, unless an exception is to be recognised in Lk. xii. 33 (where Lk. follows 
 Mt. vi. 20) o7toi; kX^ttttjs ovk lyyLfrtL. 
 
 [2171c/] The Johannine combinations of ottov with up.i above, as well as the 
 non-use of el/u "go" in N.T., and almost complete absence of elpi.i in O.T., shew 
 that o7roi; dp.1 (not dp.i) must be read in vii. 34, " where I am " (rep. by the Jews in 
 vii. 36) although the Jews refer to it in vii. 35 as TropdxaOai. If the meaning had 
 been where I "go," i'Tr&yio or Tropevop.ai would almost certainly have been em- 
 ployed (as Jesus frequently uses both). A strong incompatibility is suggested by 
 
 '■where 1 am, there ye cannot come.'' 
 
 152 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2173] 
 
 occurs in Mark and Matthew in an angelic utterance ("see the 
 place"), but in John in a description of two angels in the tomb 1 . 
 Here Matthew approaches a dependent interrogative, but Mark and 
 John do not. 
 
 [2172] John frequently uses ottov, with or without a preceding 
 toVos, to denote that the place now mentioned had already been the 
 scene of some notable action: iv. 46 " Cana. .. .where (ottov) he had 
 made the water wine," vi. 23 "near the place where (ottov) they ate 
 the bread," vii. 42 "Bethlehem the village where David [once] was," 
 x. 40 "the place where John [once] was, at the first, baptizing," xii. 1 
 " He came to Bethany where was Lazarus," i.e. " where (as I said 
 above, xi. 1), Lazarus lived, whom Jesus raised from the dead." 
 Had it not been for the other passages quoted above, this last might 
 have been supposed to mean "where Lazarus was" at the time when 
 Jesus "came." In i. 28, a comma should perhaps (2277a) be 
 inserted after 171', thus : " These things came to pass in Bethany 
 beyond Jordan — (lit.) where John was (fjv), baptizing (/3a7ri-i£a>i/)," 
 and tjv may mean "was and had been for some time" (2648). 
 Under ordinary circumstances we should translate ottov ckci-to in 
 xx. 12, " where lay the body of Jesus," but it is shewn by the context 
 to mean " ivhere it had lain' 1 ." 
 
 (xiv) "O-rrws 
 
 [2173] This (1695) occurs frequently in Matthew and Luke, but 
 only once in Mark (iii. 6 " that they might destroy (aVoAeo-wo-iv) 
 him") and once in John (xi. 57 "that they might take (-mao-iao-iv) 
 him "). Matthew's parallel to Mark iii. 6 agrees with Mark verbatim, 
 but Luke's differs 3 . Elsewhere, Matthew uses oVws (but Luke never) 
 
 1 [2171 <f] Mk xvi. 6 l'5e, 6 t6ttos ottov id-qKav clvt6v, Mt. xxviii. 6 i'Sere 
 tov tSttov 8ttov Zkcito, Jn xx. 12 deiopei b~\jo ayy£\ovs...6Trou txeiTo to aCofxa. 
 rod Irjffov. 
 
 - [2172 a] A " where-clause," e.g. " Etam where (?v9a) Samson lived," is 
 common in the Onomasticon of Eusebius, and such clauses are natural in works 
 about sites of interesting scenes. But in John something more than this is apparent 
 in the emphasis laid by him on the fact that the public work of Christ begins, and 
 almost ends, in two places of the same name, Bethany. There is, perhaps, a 
 feeling that history repeats itself and that things appear to move in a circle 
 even when they are really going on, as when the Son (vi. 62) "goeth up where 
 he was before" Comp. i. 28 ottov r\v T. fiaTTTi'fwv and x. 40 ottov rjv I. to TrpQnov 
 {iaiTTifav. 
 
 3 [2173 a] Mt. xii. 14. Lk. vi. 11 has 8u\d\ovv -rrpos a\\r]\ovs tL ai> Troir/aaiei' 
 rep 'Itjoov. On 7rtdj"c<; see 1723 c and Ox. Pap. 812 (B.C. 5) TreTriao-Tai Xoxpiwv. 
 
 153 
 
[2174] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 in similar contexts 1 . These facts suggest that oVws was current in 
 Mark-Matthew traditions about the plots of the Jews " in order to 
 destroy, or ensnare, Jesus," and that Luke avoided, while John 
 adopted, this method of expression. See 2693. 
 
 (xv) "On 2 
 
 (a) 'On (i) suspensive, (2) explanatory 
 
 [2174] 'On is used by John much more frequently than by Luke, 
 and somewhat more frequently than by Mark and Matthew taken 
 together. One reason is, that John deals largely with causes, and 
 uses otl very frequently in the sense "because." In theory, 
 ambiguity might arise from the fact that Ae'yw, ttio-tcvw, deiopiio etc., 
 followed by otl, might mean "I say, believe, behold, that," or, "I 
 say, believe, behold, because" In practice, however, such ambiguity, 
 though not infrequent, is not very serious, except perhaps in one 
 important passage to be considered later on — because John adheres 
 to regular Greek usage, which would not sanction the conjunction 
 after such verbs, except to mean "that," introducing the object of 
 the verb. 
 
 [2175] A more serious cause of ambiguity is that on — like 
 KaOws (2122 — 32) — may be used (t) suspensively ("because I live ye 
 shall live") as well as (2) explanatorily ("ye shall live" [why?] 
 "because I live"). The former construction is comparatively rare. 
 Where it occurs, " because " ought to be, so to speak, protected from 
 the preceding sentence by a U or other conjunction as in Gal. iv. 6 
 "But because (otl 8e) ye are sons, God hath sent forth his Spirit." 
 Else, " because ye are sons " might be connected with the last words 
 of the preceding sentence. In the following passage the first on is 
 certainly suspensive after ovtws : the second on is probably sus- 
 pensive — but not certainly (owing to the absence of a conjunction) 
 Rev. iii. 16 — 17 "Thus (ounos), because (otl) thou art lukewarm... I 
 am about to spew thee out of my mouth. Because (otl) thou sayest 
 'I am rich...' and knowest not..., I counsel thee to buy...." Here 
 the construction might be "Because thou art lukewarm I purpose to 
 spew thee out, because [/ say] thou sayest...," and "I counsel" 
 
 1 [2173/'] Mt. xxii. 15 bwu>% avrbv ■Kayifevawoiv iv \6yifi, xxvi. 50 ottws avrbv 
 OavaTuGwoiv. lilacs (p. :n) on Jn xi. 57 says " for the sake of variety"; but the 
 repetitions of Ira in 2116- 20 are against this view. 
 
 - <>ro»' is discussed under Tense, Aorisl and Present Subjunctive (2531 — 5). 
 
 154 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2177] 
 
 might begin a new sentence ; and the English Hexapla prints the 
 words thus in all versions after that of 1380 a.d. 1 . 
 
 [2176] The suspensive use of on in the Greek Testament is first 
 found in Genesis iii. 14 "And the Lord God said unto the serpent, 
 Because (otl) thou hast done this, cursed art thou," and iii. 17 " Unto 
 Adam he said, Because (on) thou hast hearkened... cursed is the 
 ground." In the second case, it would be quite possible to take 
 otl as introducing the words of the speaker, " Unto Adam he said 
 [that] ' Thou hast hearkened... Cursed is the ground.'" It is perhaps 
 for this reason that in Deuteronomy (i. 27 "and said, ' Because the 
 Lord hated ' ") where the Hebrew is the same, the LXX has Sia to 
 which Luke also has (xviii. 5 " Yet because this widow troubleth me "). 
 In N. T., suspensive otl is almost confined to the Johannine writings 
 and the Apocalypse, and it is one of a few very interesting similarities 
 of style suggesting that the author of the Gospel may have been a 
 disciple, or younger coadjutor, of the author of the Apocalypse 2 . 
 
 [2177] In John, the ambiguity of suspensive on is greatly increased 
 by his excessive use of asyndeton, e.g. xiv. 19 "But ye behold me. 
 Because (otl) I live, ye also shall live." Here it is possible, theo- 
 retically, to connect " because " with what precedes, and R. V. marg. 
 assumes this connexion, so as to give either (1) "But ye behold me 
 because I live; and ye shall live," or (2) " But ye behold me, because 
 I live and [because] ye shall live." If the words occurred in a 
 Synoptic Gospel, one of these marginal renderings would be probable. 
 But in John, regard being had to his suspensive use of on else- 
 
 1 [2175 a] The suspensive construction is preferable (as in R.V.). It might 
 also be adopted in Rev. xviii. 7 "How much soever she glorified herself. ..so much 
 give her of torment and mourning. Because she saith in her heart, ' I sit a queen 
 and am no widow and shall in no wise see mourning,' therefore (5lo. tovto) in one 
 day shall her plagues come...." Here, however, all the English versions have 
 "for she saith in her heart " and begin a new sentence with " Therefore." "On is 
 also suspensive in Rev. iii. 10 "...that they may know that I loved thee. Because 
 (otl) thou didst keep the word of my endurance I also (K&yu) will keep thee...," 
 where it would be quite possible to render the words " that they may know that I 
 
 loved thee because thou didst keep... and I " That is to say, it would be 
 
 theoretically possible. But no one familiar with the style of the author would so 
 render it. 
 
 2 [2176 a] Besides Gal. iv. 6 (above quoted) otl suspensive occurs in i Cor. xii. 
 15 — 16 (bis) "If the foot shall say, 'Because I am not the hand, I am not of the 
 body' it is not therefore not of the body," and Rom. ix. 7 "Neither, because they 
 are Abraham's seed, are they all children." 
 
 1; 
 
 :0 
 
L2178] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 where 1 , and to his habitual use of (2149) /cat vfieh to mean " Ye 
 also," the rendering given above, which is in the main that of R.V. 
 text, may be pronounced the only possible interpretation. 
 
 (ft) "Oti introducing (i) cause of action, (2) ground of statement 
 
 [2178] A doubt may sometimes exist whether on, "because," 
 introduces (1) the ground or motive of an action ("he does this 
 because he likes it") or the proof of the truth of an assertion ("You 
 did this, [I know] because you were caught in the act "), where (in 
 English) we should mostly use " for." Such a sentence as x. 5 " They 
 will fee... because they know not," introducing a cause inherent in the 
 persons spoken of, presents no difficulty. And in this way " because " 
 would generally be used where it connects two verbs in the same 
 person ("you (or, they) do this because you (or, they) do that"). 
 But the meaning is not so clear in v. 38 "Ye have not his word 
 abiding in you because (on) whom he sent him ye believe not." Does 
 this mean (1) that, because they rejected Christ and refused to believe 
 in Him, the Jews darkened their minds and made it impossible for 
 the word of God to "abide" in them? In that case, on introduces 
 the reason why the "word" did ?wt "abide." Or does it mean (2) 
 " Ye have not his word abiding in you : [I know this] because whom 
 he sent him ye believe not"? In that case on introduces the cause 
 of the speaker's kno7vledge, the proof of his assertion. The use of on 
 to mean "[I say this] because," "[And this is true] because," is so 
 frequent in John that the latter (2) is the more probable explanation. 
 If John had meant the former (1) he would have probably written "For 
 this cause (Sta. tovto) ye have not his word abiding in you because" — 
 a very common formula with him' 2 . 
 
 1 [2177a] Comp. i. 50 6'rt elirov crot, xx. 29 on ewpaKcis fJ.e, where ort is 
 suspensive and initial. Suspensive on is also initial with 6V in xv. [9, and d\\' 
 on is initial and suspensive in xvi. 6. In viii. 45 eyu 5e otl tt)v a\rjdciav Xeyw, ov 
 iTLo-TeueTt fj.01, the 5^ introduces an antithesis to the previous sentence: "Ye on the 
 one hand are the children of the Father of lies and move in falsehood as your 
 atmosphere: but I on the other hand — just because I say the truth, ye do not 
 believe me." 
 
 - [2178a] R.V. and A.V. "for." Westcott says (ad toe.) "For (because)....] 
 This is not alleged as the ground but as the sign of what has been said. Comp. 
 Luke vii. 47; 1 John iii. ij.." The former passage ("her sins. ..are forgiven 
 because she loved much'") states the cause of being forgiven, in accordance with 
 the Law of Forgiveness: the latter ("we know that we have passed from death... 
 because we love the brethren") stales the ground of "knowing," which may be 
 
 I 5 6 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2180] 
 
 [2179] In ii. 18 "What sign shewest thou because thou doest 
 these things ? " the meaning of on seems to be " [We ask thee this 
 question] because 1 ," and similarly in vii. 35 "Where doth this man 
 purpose to go, [we ask this] because [according to what he says] we 
 shall not find him ? " In xii. 48 — 9, " The word that I spake, the 
 same shall judge him in the last day, because I spake not from 
 myself; but the Father...," the meaning may be explained by turning 
 "because I spake" into "because it is spoken." "The word" will 
 have the right to judge you, and will judge you, because it comes 
 ultimately, not "from myself," but from the Father, the righteous 
 Judge. In x. 12 — 13 "But the hireling... fieeth, and the wolf 
 snatcheth and scattereth them because he is a hireling," some 
 authorities insert " the hireling fieeth " before " because," and R. V. 
 supplies these words in italics ; but the sense may very well be that 
 " the wolf scatters the flock — [ Why ?] because the shepherd is a 
 hireling." Similarly the laziness of a sentinel is a contributory cause 
 to disaster, and an enemy may be said to surprise a camp "because 
 the sentinel was asleep." The passage illustrates John's varied use 
 of on. 
 
 [2180] In i. 14 — 18, a complicated passage in which connexions 
 of thought are broken by interventions of parentheses, on occurs 
 thrice, and in each case seems to base a new statement on some 
 preceding similar one, with a curious mannerism frequent in the 
 Fourth Gospel but particularly noticeable here. "On seems to mean 
 in each case " [I say this] because of that" where " this " and " that " 
 are similar or identical words (like "full" and "fulness" "first" and 
 "before" "grace" and "grace") thus: (a) "He is become before me, 
 [/say ' before '] because he was first in regard to me " ; (b) " the Logos 
 tabernacled among us... full of...- [/ say i fuW\ because from his 
 fulness did we all receive"; (c) "...and grace (or grace, [I say ' grace'] 
 because, whereas the Law [of God] was given [as a preparatory grace 
 
 also called the cause of knowledge. The analogy of both of these would seem to 
 point to (1) rather than (2): but Westcott seems to favour (2), if "the sign of 
 means "the sign of the truth of." 
 
 1 [2179a] Somewhat less probable would be "In consequence of your taking 
 upon yourself to do these authoritative works you must be certainly intending to 
 prove your authority to us by working a sign — what is that sign?" See 2183 a. 
 
 - [2180a] The intervening verse (i. 15 "John beareth witness before me") 
 
 is probably to be regarded as a parenthesis. It is so printed by W.H., but not 
 by R.V. 
 
 157 
 
[2181] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 or preparation for grace] through Moses, the [real] grace [of God] and 
 the truth [of God] came into being through Jesus Christ." 
 
 (7) "On (?) "that" or "because" 
 
 [2181] "On is interpreted "because" by Chrysostom, but "that" 
 by R.V., in iii. 19 "And this is the judgment, that (avT-q Se eo-nv 77 
 Kpto-is on) the light hath come into the world and men loved the 
 darkness rather than the light." Here Chrysostom — taking "judg- 
 ment " as condemnation bringing punishment with it — paraphrases 
 thus, " What he means is to this effect, For this cause (Sta tovto) 
 they are punished because they did not desire to leave the darkness 
 and run to the light." But the use of a similar phrase in 1 Jn i. 5 
 and v. 14 "And this is the boldness that we have . . . [namely] that..." 
 confirms the view that on here means "that." The very fact that 
 men love darkness is their condemnation. Similarly (2187) iii. 18 
 6 /at) TTLarevoiv rj&r) KeKpnai on /at) TreTriarevKev is more accurately 
 rendered "found guilty of not having believed" than "found guilty 
 because he has not believed": and Ammonius (paraphrasing "found 
 guilty" as "punished") suggests this view of on in his comment: 
 "Disbelief is of itself a punishment 1 ." 
 
 [2182] "On probably means "I say this because" in xvi. 8 — n 
 " He will convict the world about sin and about righteousness and 
 about judgment; in the first place (/teV) about sin, [/say this] because 
 they believe not on me ; in the next place (Se) about righteousness, 
 [/ say this] because I go unto the Father and ye no longer behold 
 me ; in the next place (Se) about judgment, [/ say this] because the 
 prince of this world hath been judged." The absence of the defining 
 clause a\nq Se' ea-TLv differentiates this passage from iii. 19, and the 
 statement " I will judge the world about these three things" suggests 
 to the reader "Why about these three in particular?" so as to 
 prepare the way for a threefold " because." — " I say about sin, 
 because it will be shewn that they are unbelieving and unbelief is at 
 the bottom of sin ; I say about righteousness, because it will be shewn 
 that they drive me out of the world, and to be driven out of the 
 unjust or unrighteous world "—as Aristides the just was driven out 
 of unjust Athens — "is a proof of justice or righteousness"; I say 
 about judgment, because the prince of this world, who — by means 
 
 1 Cramer ad loc. avrb rb diriaTUv k6\cl<tIs can. 
 
 - Coiii|). Heb. xi. 37 "Evil entreated, of whom the world -.ens not worthy, 
 wandering in deserts...." 
 
 [58 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2184] 
 
 of his agents, Pilate and the priests — will have judged and sentenced 
 me to the death of a criminal, will himself have been judged and cast 
 into hell, so that the judgment of this world will have been judged 
 and condemned 1 ." 
 
 [2183] R.V. and A.V. differ in ix. 17 "What dost thou (o~v) say 
 about him, (R.V.) in that he opened thine eyes?" (A.V. "that he 
 hath opened thine eyes ? "). The object of " sayest " has preceded 
 (" IVAat say est thou?") and the blind man has already said (ix. 15) 
 in effect, "he hath opened mine eyes." Consequently, we may 
 naturally expect on to introduce, not the object of "sayest," but 
 a reason for the saying : " In consequence of this cure — what do 
 you say about him ? " At all events the blind man takes it in this 
 way, for he replies "[I say] he is a prophet," — and not, as the A.V. 
 rendering would require, "Yes, I say that he did open my eyes." 
 But, if R.V. is right, it would be better not to insert a comma (as 
 R.V. does) before "in that" but to run the words on thus, in effect, 
 "What sayest thou (emph.) about him for having [as thou sayest] 
 opened thine eyes ? " The comma of R.V. before on might lead 
 the reader to give on the force of "we ask this because" or " for 
 indeed " — as though the questioners acknowledged the miracle : but 
 the next verse shews that they did not acknowledge it 2 . 
 
 [2184] In the following, on certainly means "that"; but the 
 instance may be conveniently placed here, because, as in the in- 
 stances last discussed, on follows ri and a question. R.V. punctuates 
 the sentence as two questions, A.V. as one. It represents what the 
 Jews " kept saying " to one another while they " kept looking for " 
 Jesus 3 , asking one another whether He would come to the Feast, in 
 view of the attempts, mentioned in the context, to kill or capture 
 
 1 [2182(7] The "judgment" (or "condemnation") of "the prince of this 
 world," would be regarded by Christians as demonstrated primarily by the 
 Resurrection of Christ and its triumph over death. But external signs of it would 
 also be looked for in all that subsequently befel Pilate, Herod Antipas, and the 
 rulers of the Jews, who would be regarded as the agents of "the prince of this 
 world." 
 
 2 [2183 a] According to this view, this passage differs slightly from ii. 18, 
 where a comma precedes &ri : "What sign art thou about to shew unto us — \we 
 ask this'] because thou doest these things (2179)?" Here the position of the 
 authoritative ftfuv, in t'i arjixdov SeiKvvets ijfj-'iv, indicates that the sign must be 
 shewn "unto us," and that "we" have a right to ask for it. 
 
 3 xi. 56 imperf. ei~riTovi>...Z\eyov. 
 
 159 
 
[2185] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 Him : xi. 56 "What think ye? That he will assuredly not come to 
 the feast ? " Tt WokzI vfj.lv; on ov (xr) eXOy cts rrjv lopTr/v; The intention 
 certainly is to give prominence to Christ's courage in the face of 
 dangers recognised by everybody, and the meaning of the text 
 appears to be : " What do you (emph.) think ? [Do you think, as 
 we do,] that he will never dream of venturing to come to the feast? " 
 But the text is not quite certain 1 . The passage, however, comes 
 usefully here as shewing how complex may be the considerations on 
 which the meaning of 6Vi may depend, and how even the Greek 
 commentators may be puzzled by John's use of it. 
 
 [2185] Other instances in the Fourth Gospel ■where A.V. and 
 R.V. differ in this respect are unimportant e.g. iv. 35, (R.V.) "Lift 
 up your eyes and look on the fields, that (6'n) they are white already 
 unto harvest 2 ." Here A.V. has "/or they are white"; and, in favour 
 of A. V., it might be fairly argued that if John meant "behold that..." 
 he might have written " behold that the fields are white," as else- 
 where (vi. 5) "beholding that (on) a great multitude cometh 3 ." 
 
 1 [2184<z] D reads Tt 5o/ceiYe, a, b, e, AoKetre, "Do ye suppose?" (instead of 
 Tt 5oK€t vlliv;). SS has "Do ye suppose that perchance he cometh not to the feast?" 
 Origen ad loc. has at first ri vluv 8oku ov fx-q Z\8r)... ("What do you think? He 
 will never surely come [will he]...?") though quoting correctly afterwards. 
 Chrysostom (Migne) ad loc. has doKeire, and "in the course of (eV) the Feast." 
 He adds Tovriariv, 'T&vravda, avrbv e/xireo~e7i> 8eT, tov Kaipov k<x\ovvtos avrbv. 
 Cramer has ri vluv ooKei, on ov /xr/ 2\6r) els tt\v kopTqv, adding 6 Se \e7et toiovtov 
 tOTiv, ivravda avrov eLnreaetv Set tov Kaipov koKovptos avrbv. Steph. iii. 882 gives 
 efxirlTTTw absol. "temere irruere." Chrysostom uses ifx-ireo-eii* again (on Jn vii. 10) 
 about coming to a feast in the midst of excitement. 
 
 - [2185 <?] In iii. i\ (A.V.) "that his deeds may be made manifest, that they 
 are wrought in God," R.V. has txt '■'■that" marg. "because." In vii. 52 (A.V.) 
 "Search and see, /or," R.V. has txt "that," marg. "for." In viii. 22 (A.V.) 
 "Will he kill himself? because he saith..." i.e. "\_We ash this'] because," R.V. has 
 "that" he saith (presumably attempting to correct not the sense but the English). 
 On xiv. 2 see 2186 foil. Cases of "not that" meaning "not because" are not 
 included in this list. 
 
 [2185/'] In xviii. 37 (R.V. txt) "Thou sayest that I am a king," R.V. marg. 
 has, "Thou sayest [it] because I am a king," on which Westcott justly says, "The 
 translation ' Tlwu sayest (i.e. rightly), because I am'' seems to be both unnatural as 
 a rendering of the original phrase, and alien from the context." In xxi. 23 ovk 
 elirtv 5e avrw 6 '\r}crovs tin ovk atrodwrjo-Kei, SS has "for that" i.e. because, "but 
 |e-u>. ii"i for that he was not to die said he [it]." In such cases, the Latin quod, 
 or quia, would often reproduce the ambiguity of the Greek. 
 
 ;; 1 2185 1] &eao-0al ti 8tl foil, by indie, (like v. 42 tyvwKa vp.as on ovk ?X eTt ) 
 does not appear to exist elsewhere in N.T. Westc. says '-lor, rather that," but 
 ons; Thayer recognises ri as the ordinary accus., apparently favouring 
 A. V.; Alloid lias no remark about the construction. 
 
 l60 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2186] 
 
 But perhaps R.V. is right in judging that John (even when an 
 accusative intervened) would not use on (2174) after any verb of 
 perception in any sense but " that," because to use it in any other 
 sense would, as a rule, involve obvious and immediate misunder- 
 standing 1 . 
 
 [2186] In all the passages bearing on on, up to this point, no 
 instance has been found of Ae'yw closely followed by on meaning " I say 
 . . . because." This makes it all the more remarkable that in one passage, 
 according to R.V., John has used €i7reiv on to mean, "say [it] because," 
 on which is based the following rendering (xiv. i — 2), "Let not your 
 heart be troubled : ye believe (or, believe) in God, believe also in 
 me. In my Father's house are many mansions ; if it were not so, 
 I would have told you ; for I go (el 8e fir/, e?7roi' du vfxlv on -rropevofxat) 
 to prepare a place for you." It has been shewn, under the head of 
 el 8e /XT] (2080 — 6), that there is no authority for the rendering "if it 
 were not so." Even if it were allowable to supply the sense in that 
 way (el 8e fxi] [olJtus 171']), it is doubtful whether such an ellipsis could 
 be repeated as a second ellipsis, so as to make the sense " I should 
 have said to you [that it was not so] " elirov dv vfuv [on ov^ ovnos 
 eortv]. No authority has been alleged for this 2 . But, apart from all 
 these facts, the regular Greek and Johannine use of Xeyew or el-n-elv 
 on, "say that' 7 should oblige translators to assume, in the first 
 instance, that, if the text is not corrupt, the meaning here is, " I 
 should have said to you that I a?n going*." 
 
 For on equivalent to ware, in xiv. 22, see 2694. 
 
 1 [2185</] In Jn xx. 13 R.V. and A.V. have '■'■Because they have taken away 
 my Lord," but W.H. txt has \4yei clvtoTs otl 'Hpa^ (marg. "On TJpau), which — 
 being more impassioned and more like xx. 18 otl 'Ewpa/ca— is prob. correct, in 
 spite of the fact that the words are an answer to the question "Why weepest 
 thou?" 
 
 2 [2186 a] The instances, Mt. xxviii. 7 "Behold I have said [it] to you," 
 Mt. xxiv. 25 "I have said [it] to you before," Jn x. 25 "I said [it] to you and ye 
 believe not" all refer to something preceding, and more or less definitely expressed. 
 For example, Jn x. 25 "I said [it] (elirov) to you" refers to the preceding words 
 "If thou art the Christ say [so] (d-rrbv) to us." In xiv. 29 "I have said [it] 
 (dp-qua) to you" (better than "I have told you") probably refers to xiv. 28 
 "I said (enroi') to you, I depart." 
 
 3 [2186 />] For the new meaning that would be given to the whole passage by 
 this interpretation the reader is referred to «' 5e /jlti (2080 — 6). Here it may be 
 added that several authorities (including a and e) omit on, and that the Syriac 
 (including SS) has "I should have said that I go." In LXX, otl "recitativum" 
 is omitted after "I said" in Ps. xxx. 6 "I said I shall never be removed," xxxi. 
 
 A. VI. l6l II 
 
[2187] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 (S) "On mh 
 
 [2187] In one instance, on pif in the Gospel curiously contrasts 
 with otl ov in the Epistle: Jn iii. 18 "He that believeth not (6 ^ 
 ■n-icTTeviDv) hath been judged already because he hath ?wt believed (on 
 firj ircTrto-Tcu/cev) in the name of the only begotten Son of God," i Jn 
 v. io " He that believeth not God (6 /at) -ino-Tevwv tw 0cw) hath made 
 him a liar ; [I say this] because he hath not believed in the testimony 
 
 that God testified (on ov Treirio-TevKtv fi? tt)v fxaprvpiav) " In the 
 
 latter, on ov states the fact objectively ; in the former, on firj states it 
 subjectively, as the judgment pronounced by the Judge, "This man 
 is guilty in that he hath not believed'' so that the meaning is almost 
 " hath been pronounced guilty of not believing:' See 2695. 
 
 (e) Oyx oti 
 
 [2188] In classical Greek, ov^ on often means "not only" and 
 may be explained as "not [only do I say] that," so as to prepare the 
 way for a'AAa K ai " but [I] also [say this]." But in N.T. it never has 
 that meaning. When it comes immediately after a statement that is 
 in danger of being misunderstood, ov\ o'n might be explained as 
 (i) " [I say this], not because...," (2) " [7 do] not [mean to say] that...: 7 
 The latter is generally the more probable. See Ellipsis, 2218 — 9. 
 
 (£) "Oti " recitativum " 
 
 [2189] "On "recitativum" is a Greek way of expressing our 
 inverted commas, or the Hebrew "saying," as in i. 20 "he confessed 
 that (otl) I am not the Christ" i.e. " saying 'I am not the Christ.'" 
 This is very frequent in Mark, frequent in John, somewhat less so in 
 Luke, and comparatively rare in Matthew 1 . The use of otl 'Eyw in 
 the case of the Baptist above and of the blind man in ix. 9 lAeyci/ on 
 'Eyw elfj.L, may be contrasted with the omission of on when " I am " 
 is uttered by Jesus in xviii. 5 Ae'yci avTols 'Eyw dfj.L...Lo\ ovv elirev 
 avTols 'Eyw elpL. Neither here nor elsewhere — except in two or 
 three instances where sayings of Christ are repeated for the second 
 
 12 "I said... I am cut off," xxxii. 5 "I said I will confess" etc. This may have 
 influenced the scribes that omitted it here. If it did, the fact would indicate that 
 the scribes regarded 6n as meaning "that" not "because." 
 
 1 [2189 a I The mss. vary, and editors print the same text differently (e& 8tl 
 eyw and on 'E>u>) so that it is difficult to obtain exact statistics. W.I I. print 
 Mt. x. 7 K-opixraere X^ovres 8n "HyyiKev , but Lk. vii. 4 \tyovres on a$i6s iariv $ 
 irapi^ri tovto, dyairq. yip to tdvos TffxCiv.... 
 
 l62 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2190] 
 
 time (2190) — does John use otl before direct speech of the Lord after 
 "he said": consequently when we find "7 said" a little later on, 
 xviii. 8 Uttov vfjuv otl lyu> elfit, there is some reason for thinking that 
 this is reported speech, " I said to you that I am 1 ." There are many 
 instances of this phrase (" I said that ") because John (differing from 
 the Synoptists) frequently represents Christ as referring to what He 
 Himself has previously said, e.g. i. 50 "Because I said unto thee that 
 (otl) I saw thee under the fig-tree," vi. 36 "But I said to you that ye 
 have seen me," viii. 24 "/ said... to you that ye shall die in your 
 sins," xi. 40 " Did I not say to thee that, if thou wilt believe, thou 
 shalt see the glory of God ?," xvi. 15 " For this cause I said to you 
 that he taketh from that which is mine and [that he] will declare 
 it unto you." In all these passages there is nothing to shew whether 
 otl introduces (1) direct or (2) reported speech; but W.H. print the 
 text as the latter, and their view agrees with the general absence 
 of otl recitativum elsewhere after " he said " introducing words of 
 Christ. 
 
 [2190] The text varies somewhat in xiii. 33 " Even as I said to 
 the Jews that ' Where I go, ye are not able to come,' [so] to you also 
 I say- — for the moment"; but if the text is correct- and if the 
 reference is to viii. 21, then otl recitativum is here used in exact 
 quotation of a saying of the Lord. The quotation is not exact in 
 
 xviii. 9 Lva irX-qptoOrj 6 Aoyos ov ei-rrev otl Ov<; Sc'Sojkci? /xol ovk a7rcoAecra 
 
 1 [2189 b] For the omission of otl elsewhere before iyu elfxi, in words of the 
 Lord, see vi. 20 \^y« clvtols 'E7W elfu, and vi. 35 elirev aureus 6 'I-qaovs 'Eyui eZ/xi 6 
 
 tipTOS TT)V j'WJJS. 
 
 [2189 c] In the Baptist's words, W.H. print iii. 28 elirov [6706] Ovk elfj.1 e'ytb 6 
 Xptcrroj, dXX' 6Vt 'ATrearaXfi^vos el/xi tpLwpocrdev eKeivov. However printed, the text 
 seems to blend (1) "I said ' I am not the Christ but am one sent,''" (2) "I did not 
 say '/am the Christ,' but I said, 1 1 am one sent.'''''' 
 
 2 [2190 a] "Oti is ora. by ND b, e. SS has "that, where I go they cannot 
 come.'' Christ had said in vii. 34 "Where I am, ye are not able to come," and 
 (perhaps for this reason) a and e read "sum" in xiii. 33; b reads "eo" which may 
 be intended for «/u accented elfu "I go" (in vii. 34, a renders elfd "I am" by 
 "vado" and sim. SS "go"). Another instance where on is omitted by Bruder 
 (following XA) but ins. by W.H. is xiii. 11 dia. tovto elirev 8ti Ovxl TrdfTes Kadapoi 
 ioTe. What Jesus had actually said, was 'T^ueis Kadapoi tore ctXX' ovxJL Trdvres, so 
 that this quotation is not exact. In view of a future consideration of Johannine 
 quotations it is worth while noting that (a) vii. 34 Sirov eifii e'yw v/xeis ov duvacrde 
 eXdeif is exactly repeated by the Jews in vii. 36, that (b) viii. 21 otrov eyih vwdyoj 
 vfAels ov ovvacrde eXOeiv is exactly repeated by the Jews in viii. 22, and that (c) the 
 second of these sayings is exactly repeated by Christ, with 6tl in xiii. 33 otl "Ottov 
 £yu...e\&eli'. 
 
 l6T, II 2 
 
[2191] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 i$ avrwv ov8eia, which is a certain instance of on recitativum before 
 words of the Lord. It is assumed by Westcott and Alford that the 
 
 reference is to xvii. 12 irrjpovv avrovs iv tw ovojxaTL o-ov w Se'SwKas fJ.01 
 
 ...ko.1 oiSeU i£ avrwv cnrwAeTo. But there is a great difference between 
 "Those whom thou hast given me I lost not one of them" and "I 
 kept them in thy name which thou hast given me... and not one of 
 them was lost." Why does not the evangelist give the words 
 exactly? This question must be considered under "Variation" 
 (2544 foil.). It does not come under the present heading except so 
 far as it suggests a possibility that the writer may sometimes use on 
 to mean " [to this effect] that" — when he does not propose to give the 
 exact words in a quotation '. 
 
 (xvi) 05v 
 
 (a) In Christ's words 
 
 [2191] Ovv, in Matthew and Luke, when used by our Lord, 
 introduces a precept, or inference, as being based on something that 
 precedes (often a parable or statement of considerable length) of 
 a very cogent nature : " Be not ye therefore anxious," " Look to it 
 therefore whether the light within thee be darkness," "If therefore ye, 
 
 1 [2190^] Thus our Lord says to the Jews ix. 41 \4yere tin WKiwo^v, and 
 x. 36 Xiyere tin B\a<T<prjfieis, meaning "Ye say in effect." In reality (1) they had 
 not said, "We see," but "Are we blind also?" and (2) they had not said "Thou 
 blasphemest," but "We stone thee for blasphemy and because thou, being a man, 
 makest thyself God." 
 
 [2190 c] It will be found that almost all Jn's quotations and repetitions, with 
 or without tin, are given with variations (2544 foil.). But tin introduces an exact 
 quotation (soon after the passage last quoted) in x. 34 Ouk Zanv yeypa/j./xevoi' ev r£ 
 vow v/xCiv on 'Eyw elira Qeoi iare, where a short saying is quoted exactly to 
 illustrate the pervading thought in the whole of what Jesus calls "your own Law," 
 that those to whom the word of God comes are in some sense "gods." In xx. 18 
 ayy^Wovua rots fiad-qrah tin "EwpaKO. t6v Kvptov kclI tclvto. elirev avrrj, the tidings 
 of Christ's Resurrection are first summed up in one phrase of direct speech "I 
 have seen," and then the fact that He said certain things is expressed in reported 
 speech. 
 
 [2190</] In xvi. 17 tL eanv tovto S \iyet tjixIu ~S\.iKptiv Kai ov...Kai "On i-rrdyu 
 ■n-pbs rbv waripa, tin is probably "because." Jn would hardly omit on recit. 
 before "MiKpdv and insert it before 'Tttciyci; — if both were the first words of quota- 
 tions. "Because" may be the first word of "Because I go to the Father" repeated 
 from xvi. 10 "because I go to the Father and ye no longer behold me." Several 
 authorities interpolate the italicised words in xvi. id, and it is clear thai these 
 took tin as "because." 
 
 164 
 
CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 [2192] 
 
 being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much 
 more...?'' "If therefore in the unrighteous mammon ye were not 
 faithful, who shall entrust to you... 1 ?" John (1883) uses ovv very 
 frequently in his Gospel, about 195 times in all, but in Christ's words 
 very rarely, only 8 times. It occurs most frequently when He 
 is arguing with unbelievers or doubters ; but He uses it twice in the 
 Discourse with the disciples before the Passion, and, for the last 
 time, to the soldiers arresting Him. He has twice asked them "Whom 
 seek ye?" And they have twice replied, "Jesus of Nazareth." Now 
 He replies (xviii. 8) " I told you that I am he. Therefore, if it is I 
 that ye seek, let these depart." "Therefore," in R.V., has the advan- 
 tage of uniformity, but "then" would sometimes be preferable. 
 
 [2192] The other instances in Christ's words are as follows : 
 vi. 62 "Doth this cause you to stumble? (lit.) If therefore ye should 
 be beholding {lav ovv Oeojpijre) the Son of man ascending where he 
 
 1 [2191a] Mt. vi. 31, Lk. xi. 35, Mt. vii. 11, Lk. xvi. 
 it as follows — mostly in Christ's words — where the parall 
 
 Mk 
 
 iv. 24 [3\eTreTe ri... 
 iv. 30 /cat i\eyev, ITcDs 
 
 Mt. 
 
 om. 
 
 ix. 50 Ka\bv to aXas 
 xii. 9 ri TToirjcrei 
 
 xii. 10 oudi T7]v ypacprjv 
 ravrrfv aviyvwre 
 
 xii. 20 eirra. d. ■qcrav 
 
 xii. 23 iv r. a. rivos aii- 
 rCiv 'iarai yvvq 
 
 xii. 37 Autos A. \iyei 
 
 avrbv KvpLOV 
 xiii. 4 eiirbv rjfiiv wore 
 
 ravra 'icrrai. 
 xiv. 61 Su el 6 xp«7Tos 6 
 
 vibs rod evXoyqrov 
 
 xv. 9 OiXere airoXvaw 
 i/fuv 
 
 xiii. 31 clXXtjv wapafioX-qv 
 
 ir.a. Xiywv Ofxola 
 v. 13 v/j,els ecrri rb aXas 
 xxi. 40 brav ovv e , Xdrj...Ti 
 
 ttol Tjcrei 
 xxi. 42 Xiyec avrois 
 
 Trier. Ovdeirore dvi- 
 
 yvwre 
 xxii. 25 y)crav be irap' 
 
 r\plv iirra. d. 
 xxii. 28 iv rfj a. odv rivos 
 
 tQv eirra i-arai 71*77 
 
 xxii. 45 el ovv A. KaXel 
 
 aVTOV KVpLOV 
 
 xxiv. 3 as Mk 
 
 xxvi. 63 el o~ii el 6 XP L ~ 
 arbs b vibs t. deov 
 
 xxvii. 17 cr vvr)yp.iviov ovv 
 avrQv elirev . . .riva 6i- 
 Xere airoXvcrw 
 
 In the last five passages of Lk., only Lk. xx. 44 is 
 result indicates a general preference of ovv in Lk. 
 
 165 
 
 1 1 . Luke often inserts 
 Mk omits it : — 
 
 Lk. 
 
 viii. 18 (SXiirere odv ttwsI 
 xiii. 18 fXeyev ovv, TivL 
 
 xiv. 34 Ka\bv oZv to aXas 
 xx. 15 ri ovv iroirjcrei 
 avrois 
 
 XX. 17 ri OVV iffTLV TO 
 
 yey pap.fj.ivov 
 xx. 29 eirra ovv d. rfaav 
 
 xx. 33 i) 71*71 ovv iv T. 
 
 d. rivos avrQv yiverai 
 
 71*7} 
 xx. 44 A. oZv avrbv kv- 
 
 piov KaXel 
 xxi. 7 irbre ow ravra 
 
 to-TCLi 
 xxii. 70 (perh. parall.) 
 
 aii ovv el b vibs t. 
 
 deov (see context), 
 xxiii. 16, 22 iraidevcras 
 
 ovv avrbv diroXvcrw 
 
 in Christ's words. The 
 
[2193] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 was before — ". Here there is an ellipsis of the apodosis — "What 
 will ye do?" or "What is to happen?" The passage is extremely 
 obscure (2210—12) : but the meaning appears to be that, if they 
 stumble already at the truth, they will, as an inevitable consequence, 
 stumble again when a higher truth is set before them. In viii. 24 
 " I said therefore to you 'Ye shall die in your sins,'" after "Ye are 
 of this world," Jesus assumes that "this world" (1 Jn v. 19) " lieth 
 wholly in the evil [one]," i.e. in the hands of sin and death, so that 
 those who " are of this world " will " therefore die " in their sins ; in 
 viii. 36 " The Son abideth [in the house] for ever. If therefore the 
 Son shall free you, ye shall be free indeed," it is assumed that what 
 the Son of the house does will be ratified by the Father, and " there- 
 fore" will be permanent and "real." 
 
 [2193] In the following difficult passage, ovv may help to decide 
 between the alternative renderings given by R.V., (viii. 37 — S) (lit.) 
 "Ye seek to kill me. ..The things that I (emph.) have seen in the house 
 of the (irapd tw) Father I speak : ye also therefore (kol u/x«s °*"0 — 
 the things that ye heard from the (-rrapa tov) father, ye do (a rjKovo-are 
 ■n-apd tov Trarpos Troupe)." Here R. V. txt has " and ye also do " 
 (apparently rendering ko.1 by "and," olv by "also"), but R.V. marg. 
 "'do ye also therefore the things which ye heard from the Father." In 
 R.V. txt, it is affirmed that the Jews do the works suggested from 
 the devil, who is to them " the father " ; in R.V. margin, the Jews are 
 exhorted to do the works suggested by the Father, God. 
 
 [2194] In favour of the former rendering (" ye do ") there is the 
 precedent of k«u lyxeT? ovv quoted from xvi. 22 above (2149, comp. 
 2196—7) with the indicative, where it meant "ye also in a cor- 
 responding way." So here, the meaning seems to be that there is a 
 correspotidence between the conduct of Christ and that of His 
 persecutors. They are as consistent in evil as He in good : 'The 
 things that I have seen in the house of Light I speak : ye, by the law 
 of your nature as I by the law of mine — I do not say ye 'speak,' but, 
 more than that— the things that ye have heard from the house 
 of darkness, ye do 1 ." 
 
 1 [2194a] It is implied that they "see" nothing, being children of darkness; 
 
 but they execute the whispered suggestions <>f evil that come to them from "the 
 
 father" of the house of darkness (somewhat as the mutterings of Satan are 
 
 sented by Milton as coming to Eve in her sleep). There is a paradoxical 
 
 antithesis: "What I see, I speak] what ye hear, ye do." 
 
 [2194A] lor "the father" used to mean "Satan," comp. viii. 44 "Ye are of 
 
 166 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2196] 
 
 [2195] In xii. 49 — 50 "The Father that sent me — he hath given 
 me commandment what I should say and what I should speak. And 
 I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore 
 that I (emph.) speak — even as the father hath said [them] to me, so 
 speak I," Chrysostom has excellently expressed the force of ovv by 
 the paraphrase " // is not natural (ovk e^ei <f>vcriv to Trpayixa) that the 
 Father should say one thing and I utter another." The meaning is, 
 " I not only know what I am commanded to say, but also know that 
 it is my Life, Life Eternal, to fulfil the commandment, it follows 
 therefore that I must speak the Father's words." There is an argu- 
 ment a fortiori in xiii. 13 — 14 "Ye address me [with the titles] 'the 
 Teacher' and 'the Master (Kupios),' and ye say well, for such I am. 
 If therefore I washed your feet — 'the Teacher' and 'the Master' — ■ 
 ye also are bound to wash each other's feet." In Matthew and Luke 
 this cogent " therefore " would perhaps have been accompanied by 
 "How much more!" and SS has something like it here "And if 
 I, your Rabbi. ..how much doth it behove you...!" 
 
 [2196] In xvi. 21 — 2 "The woman [or, wife] when she is in 
 travail (orav TiKTrj) hath sorrow because her hour hath come : but 
 when she hath given birth to (yewrjarj) the child she remembereth no 
 more the anguish because of the joy that a man is born into the 
 world. Ye also therefore (kou v/acU ovv) now indeed (yvv fxiv) have 
 sorrow : but I will see you again and your heart shall rejoice and 
 your joy no man shall take from you," we may explain " therefore " 
 in a broad and general way by saying that the argument takes child- 
 
 the father the devil." As in French '■'■the head" means "my, your, his head" 
 according to the context, so may "the father" in Greek ; and the writer deliberately 
 uses the ambiguous expression "the father" in order to prepare for the defining 
 climax in viii. 44, (1) "the father," (2) "the devil," (3) "your father." 
 
 [2194 c] The view that Troielre is indicative is supported not only by the 
 analogy of xvi. 22, but also by the fact it is in Jn's manner to repeat a statement 
 twice or thrice with valuations, and we find the indicative again in viii. 41 "ye do 
 the deeds of your father," viii. 44 "ye are fain to do the lusts of your father." 
 Moreover the imperative rendering, "Do ye also the things that ye heard from the 
 Pather," i.e. God, would imply that the Jews had heard the Father's voice, which 
 (though theoretically arguable as referring to the Law of Sinai) is somewhat 
 inconsistent with v. 37 and viii. 43. The statement in viii. 37 "ye seek to kill 
 me" implies, "ye are doing the work of your father Satan," as appears from 
 viii. 44 ("he was a murderer from the beginning") and from 1 Jn iii. 10 — 12 "in 
 this the children of God are manifest and the children of the devil. ..Cain was of 
 the evil one and slew his brother.'''' 
 
 167 
 
[2197] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 birth as a type of a fundamental law in human nature that all deep 
 and lasting joy must be reached through pain and sorrow. But 
 probably there is a more definite reference in the evangelist's mind. 
 For Micah combines the prophecy about the Messiah from Bethlehem 
 with a mention of affliction and temporary abandonment of Israel. 
 " He will give them up until the time that she which travaileth hath 
 drought forth 1 " and the phrase "birth-pangs of the Messiah" is 
 associated with this prophecy in the Talmud, where it occurs several 
 times 2 . 
 
 [2197] Mark and Matthew represent our Lord as saying, just 
 before His prediction of persecution for the disciples, " These things 
 are the beginning of travail-pa?igs (wSiWv) 3 ." Besides the "travail- 
 pangs " of the Church collectively, it was necessary that there should 
 be " travail-pangs " in the soul of each believer before it could give 
 birth to the idea of the spiritual Christ 4 : and both these doctrines 
 may have been in the mind of this evangelist, who is the only one 
 that records, in exact words, the doctrine that a man cannot enter 
 into the kingdom of Heaven unless he is "born from above." Thus 
 a number of considerations, not present to modern readers, may 
 have suggested the thought of inevitable consequence in the words 
 "Ye also, therefore, now indeed have sorrow." 
 
 (/3) Oyn applied to Christ's acts 
 
 [2198] Setting aside instances where ovv introduces words of the 
 Lord, we find that it either introduces an act of special solemnity, or 
 else — as is most frequently the case — it is applied to His various 
 journeys. The writer perhaps had in view the objections of con- 
 
 1 [2196«] Mic. v. 2 — 4 "But thou Bethlehem Ephrathah...out of thee shall 
 come unto me he that is to he ruler in Israel ; whose goings forth are from of old, 
 from everlasting. Therefore will he give them up until the time that she which 
 travaileth hath brought forth. Then the residue of his brethren shall return unto 
 the children of Israel, and he shall stand and feed his flock in the strength of the 
 Lord." 
 
 2 [2196/'] Sanhedr. o8£. Levy ii. 5a refers also to Schabb. 118a, Pes. 118a. 
 
 3 [2197 /rl Mk xiii. 8, Mt. xxiv. 8. The parall. Lk. omits this, but inserts 
 (xxi. 1:1 "Before all these things,' 1 '' perh. intending this as a paraphrase of the 
 metaphor, 
 
 4 [2197/'] That appears to be the metaphor here, the "soul" being regarded 
 as the mother in travail. From one point of view, the "new birth" is that of the 
 Soul itself: from another, it is that of the idea of Christ within the soul, which 
 transforms the soul into I lis image. 
 
 168 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2200] 
 
 troversialists, some of whom, like Celsus, might regard Jesus as a 
 vagrant exorcist, or as a fugitive escaping from arrest. The first 
 instance of all (iv. i " when therefore the Lord knew ") represents 
 Him as departing not from pursuit but from too much popularity. 
 The next two (iv. 5, 6) represent His coming to Sychar and sitting 
 at the well — actions providentially arranged with a view to the 
 conversion of Samaria. The words (iv. 46) " He came therefore 
 to Cana," introduce the healing of the nobleman's son. In vi. n 
 occurs the first instance that does not apply to journeying, "Jesus 
 therefore took the loaves," of which the symbolical importance needs 
 no comment. In vi. 15, the multitude sought to make Jesus a king 
 by force; "therefore" He retired. In the Raising of Lazarus, ovv is 
 four times used, first, paradoxically, " When therefore Jesus knew " 
 of the sickness of Lazarus, "he abode" at a distance three days; 
 "therefore" when He arrived, He "found that Lazarus had been 
 four days in the tomb"; seeing Mary weeping Jesus "therefore... 
 troubled himself"; some of the Jews ask, in effect, why Jesus did 
 not save Lazarus, "Jesus therefore .. .cometh to the tomb 1 ." The 
 fourfold conjunction sounds strange in English. But the intention 
 of the narrative as a whole is to represent the Raising of Lazarus as 
 foreordained ; and this repetition of " therefore " may be intended, in 
 particular, to shew how the Son, step by step, moved forward in 
 a regular and predetermined sequence to do the Father's will in 
 performing the last and greatest of His "signs." 
 
 [2199] The next two instances refer to Christ, as first avoiding 
 peril, and then confronting it, when the Jews took counsel to kill 
 Him: xi. 54 "Jesus therefore no longer walked openly among the 
 Jews," xii. 1 "Jesus therefore came to Bethany" — following im- 
 mediately on the statement that the chief priests had taken steps 
 to seize him ! It is not surprising that Chrysostom alters this 
 second ovv to 8e. But the meaning, perhaps, is, that both in 
 avoiding peril and in meeting it Jesus followed the Father's will, 
 not the ways of ordinary men. 
 
 [2200] After the instance in the sacramental Washing of Feet 
 (xiii. 6 "He cometh therefore to Simon Peter"), the next is in the 
 narrative of Gethsemane, where, upon the arrival of Judas and the 
 soldiers (xviii. 4) "Jesus, therefore, knowing all that was coming 
 upon him, went forth and said to them, Whom seek ye?" There 
 
 1 «. 6, 17, 33, 38. 
 169 
 
[2201] CONJUNCTIONS 
 
 remain but two more instances. One ("Jesus therefore \v ent out") 
 introduces the exclamation of Pilate " Behold the man 1 ! " The 
 other introduces the first manifestation of the risen Saviour, "When 
 therefore it was evening... came Jesus and stood in the midst 2 ." The 
 facts as a whole indicate that, although " therefore " is an exaggerated 
 rendering of ovv, yet the particle, when used in connexion with the 
 acts of Christ, is often intended to suggest a sequence of cause and 
 effect 3 . 
 
 (xvii) '£V 
 
 (a) 'Qc (?) for eooc 
 
 [2201] 'O? is translated "while" by R.V. in xii. 35—6 "Walk 
 white ye have the light... white ye have the light, believe in the light." 
 Several mss. and authorities read ews for ok, but the difficulty of the 
 latter, and its double occurrence, demonstrate it to be the true 
 reading. But that ok does not mean " while " is made highly 
 probable by ix. 4 " I must work the works of my Father while (ecus) 
 (marg. ok) it is day." It is scarcely credible that a writer like John 
 should use ok twice in precisely the same sense in which he has used 
 £W9. *f2s in Gal. vi. iows xaiphv (x M l xer i s doubtful. Lk. xii. 58 ok 
 yap {i7rayeis is not quite parallel 5 . Taking the text as it stands, 
 
 1 xix. 5. See 1960 and 2645. 2 xx. 19. 
 
 3 [2200 a] These instances are taken from Bruder (1888) with whom, in each 
 case quoted above, W.H. agrees. There may be other instances in W.H. not 
 included in Bruder. The list given above does not include vi. 5 etrapas ovv, 
 xiii. 12 "Ore ovv 2vi\pev tovs wSSas avrQv, xix. 26 'I. o$v idtbv rr/v fnjrepa, xix. 30 
 tire 01V ZXafte to ofos, xxi. 15 6re odv i)piOTr\aa.v, because the principal verb that 
 follows is, in each case, "said " (not a verb of action). Perhaps, however, there 
 might have been included (on the ground that "cry aloud" is a kind of action 
 distinct from mere saying) vii. 28 'lKpa.^v o$v iv t$ iep<f>. This occurs as follows 
 vii. 25 — 8 "Is not this he whom they seek to kill? And, lo, he speaketh openly 
 
 ..no man knoweth whence he is. He cried aloud therefore in the temple...." 
 See the context. It is uncertain whether the "therefore" means "in consequence 
 of the words 'no man knoweiA,'" or "Accordingly, ' speaking openly' in spite of 
 tin- attempts to kill him." On ovv used after parentheses, or resumptively, see 
 2631—5. Of course it must be remembered that ovv, being used by Jn freely 
 (1) to introduce action of any kind, would naturally be used by him (2) to 
 introduce actions of Christ without any intention to express providential sequence. 
 Still, if the actions of Christ introduced by ovv are compared with the actions of 
 Christ introduced by 5^ or by asyndeton, I think it will be found that the first 
 class are specially important. 
 
 4 On lis, "when," see 1776 d— e. 
 See 2696. 
 
 I/O 
 
CONJUNCTIONS [2202] 
 
 we may make fair sense of xii. 35 — 6 by rendering <Js "as." 
 Compare 1 Jn ii. 27 "As (cos) his anointing teacheth you [in the 
 present]... and even as (kolOws) it taught you [in the past], abide 1 in 
 it." This harmonizes with St Paul's precepts, "Walk by the Spirit," 
 and " Live up to the standard you have reached [hoping for a higher 
 one] 2 ." So here the meaning — or, at all events, the meaning of the 
 best text — is "Walk according to your light as far as it goes." This 
 rendering of w9 enables us to take 7repi7raT€tv with an implied oirrw?, 
 " Walk [thus, namely] as ye have light [to walk]," and delivers us 
 from the necessity of taking it absolutely, " Walk [in the paths 
 of righteousness]." 
 
 (/9) *Qc "as it were" 
 
 [2202] In vii. 10 "He went up [to the feast] not openly but as 
 it were in secret (cos lv kpvtttw)," the meaning is " like one going up 
 in secret," i.e. not actually in secret but in a manner resembling 
 secrecy. Compare St Paul's words to Philemon (14) "in order 
 that thy good deed may not be as it were compulsory (cos /an-a 3 
 avayK-qv)." The particle may be a short way of saying "people 
 might call it so," and it is perhaps inserted with a view to the 
 vindication of the Johannine view of the publicity of Christ's life, 
 as in xviii. 20, " In secret spake I nothing " ; and in this very feast 
 Christ is described as (vii. 26) "speaking openly (irapp-qo-ia)" and 
 (vii. 28) "he cried aloud in the temple teaching." According to this 
 view, "as it were in secret" means that Christ refused to take the 
 advice of His brethren and to go up with them to the feast accom- 
 panied by such a multitude as attended Him when He " went up " 
 finally. This going up was " comparatively iti secret." But, in case 
 any opponent of the Christians might refer to the saying of Christ's 
 brethren (vii. 4) " No man doeth aught in secret and himself seeketh 
 to be in publicity," the evangelist wishes to shew that there was 
 nothing "in secret" in the exact sense of the term. For this purpose 
 he inserts cJs here and Trapprjo-ia later on. 
 
 1 [2201 a] "Abide," imperative. The writer has admitted that it does (ib. 27) 
 "abide" in them, and that they "have no need that anyone should teach" them. 
 But still he does teach them as St Paul does after similar admissions (1 Thess. 
 iv. 10 and elsewhere). See 2437 — 9. 
 
 - Gal. v. t6, Phil. iii. 16 eis 5 e<pddaafj.ei' ry cu'tuj cttolx^v. 
 
 3 [2202 a] Comp. 2 Cor. xi. 17 ws kv a<ppoauvrj, xiii. 7 ws &56kl/j.ol. In Rom. 
 ix. 32 o6k £k iriarecos dXX' ws e£ Zpywu, the meaning is "on a false basis of works," 
 or "as though it could be attained from works." 
 
 171 
 
[2203] ELLIPSIS 
 
 (xviii) "ila-Tt 
 
 [2203] This conjunction, which is found frequently in Mark and 
 Matthew, and four times in Luke, occurs in John only once, and 
 then with a unique construction, thus, iii. 16 ovtws yap rj-yd-n-qcrev 6 
 #eos tov KoafjLov cocttc tov vlov tov fiovoyevij <l8wk€i>. In the rest of N.T., 
 ware occurs either (i) at the beginning of a clause ("so that " meaning 
 "and so") with an emphatic indicative or imperative (Mk ii. 28 
 "And so the Son of man is lord of the sabbath," 1 Thess. iv. 18 
 "And so (or, Therefore) comfort one another ") or else (2) post-initially 
 with an infinitive (Mk i. 27 "so that they questioned together") 1 . 
 Both these constructions are frequent. But ware never occurs 
 post-initially with an indicative except in John iii. 16 2 . This 
 unique use of ovtws and wcrre with indicative is common in the 
 best classical authors 3 , but it is unlike the style of any evangelistic 
 tradition in N.T. It is one of many proofs that the passage under 
 consideration was not regarded by the writer as a saying of the Lord, 
 but as an evangelistic explanation (see 2066 and 2697). 
 
 Ellipsis 4 
 
 (i) Of two kinds 
 
 [2204] (1) Ellipsis, "leaving out," or "deficiency," may exist 
 when something is left out that can be supplied from the preceding 
 context, e.g. "I said, Go. But he would not [go]," "You have 
 taken my book and left your own [book]." This ellipsis may be 
 
 1 [2203 a] W.H. and R.V. in some cases punctuate differently from Bruder, 
 and the classification is to some extent a matter of taste except where Coare is pre- 
 ceded by 01/rws, ui5e, els tchtovtov etc., so that the ware cannot possibly be called 
 initial. Hinder i8<S8 prints ucrre "in principio periodi" separately, and always with 
 iridic, or imperat. : but he prints Gal.ii. 13 crvi>VTreKpidr)<mv . . .wart Kai B. aKvawrix^Vy 
 under the same heading as Jn iii. 16 oiirco yap i]yaTn)<Tti> . . .ware . . .ZowKtv, and marks 
 these as the only two passages (in the group) where the indie, is used. I should 
 take Gal. ii. 13 quite differently, "And the consequence zvas that even Barnabas 
 was carried away." 
 
 - [2203/] Acts xiv. 1 ey^f€TO...\a\TJaai ovtus uxrre wtcrreDcrcu..., is the only 
 other passage in N.T. where diare is preceded by oiirws. Heb. xiii. 6 uxxrf Oappovv- 
 ras ri/J-ds \£ytii> rather suggests what we may say than states what we do say. 
 
 '■'■ See Steph. viii. 212^ <;, ami, in particular, the first definition of "log- 
 r- -lliiiy " in Plato i~~, 1. oiirus ayairSicri roi'S tTratvtiras uicrre irpocnrapaypdcpovji 
 TrpdiTovs 01 av eKacrraxov eTraivuxriv airrofa. 
 
 4 Steph. (quoting Athen. 14, p. 644 A o-jjera/uoOs k-ot' 2\\et T 'tv tov &pros) calls it 
 " Praetermissio, Omissio," adding " Potest vero et Defectus reddi." 
 
 1/2 
 
ELLIPSIS [2207] 
 
 called "contextual." (2) Ellipsis may consist in the customary 
 omission of words (apart from contextual influence) in certain con- 
 densed phrases, e.g. " Away ! " for " [Go] away ! " or " the first of the 
 month" for "the first [day] of the month." This 1 may be called 
 " idiomatic." 
 
 (ii) Contextual 
 
 [2205] iv. 25—6 '"Messiah cometh...'I am [Messiah].'" This 
 must be distinguished from (a) vi. 20 " I am," rendered by R.V. " It 
 is I " — like our idiom in English, " It [that you see, or, hear] is I " — 
 and also from (b) any special use of I AM with Hebraic associations. 
 The present instance may be illustrated byxviii. 5, 6, 8 "I am [Jesus 
 of Nazareth] " — which refers to the preceding mention of the name 
 in xviii. 5 "'Whom seek ye?' 'Jesus of Nazareth ' "—and also by 
 ix. 9 "I am [(ix. 8) 'the man that used to sit and beg']." Here 
 the Samaritan woman — who is described as saying aloud " Messiah 
 cometh " — is to be regarded (comp. Lk. iii. 15 "reasoning in their 
 hearts... whether he might be the Christ") as saying in her heart 
 " Can it be that this is Messiah ? " and Jesus answers her silent 
 question, "I am [Messiah]." 
 
 [2206] iv. 52—3 "They said. ..[that] 'Yesterday, [about the] 
 seventh hour (on 'E^cs uipav 2 k^ofx-qv) the fever left him.' The 
 father therefore recognised that [it had left him] at that [same] hour 
 (on eKeivy Trj wpa)...." Phrase mentally repeated. In v. n — 12 
 " ' He that made me whole, he [it was that] said to me, Take up 
 thy bed (*pa/3aTTov) and walk.' They asked him, 'Who is the man 
 that said to thee, Take [it] up and walk?,'" the omission of the 
 object of the verb 3 is somewhat harsh, and many mss. and versions 
 insert "bed." 
 
 [2207] viii. 16 "Yea, and even if I should judge, my judgment 
 is true, because I am not alone but [am to be regarded as] I and the 
 
 1 On this, see 2220. Contextual ellipsis is sometimes called " brachylogy." 
 
 2 [2206 a] On the change of case, see 2013, 2025 — 6. In v. 6—7, after Christ's 
 question, "Dost thou desire to be made whole?" we might expect the sick man 
 to reply "Yes." But the man takes the question as an implied reproach on his 
 sluggishness, and replies, "I have no man to put me in the pool." It is not a 
 case of ellipsis but of an answer made to the spirit, rather than to the letter, of a 
 question. 
 
 3 [2206 b~\ No other instance in this group omits the object thus. Kpd/3arros, 
 the word here used by the sick man and previously by our Lord, is (1736 (?) 
 avoided by Luke and condemned by Grammarians as vulgar. 
 
 173 
 
 OF THE N\ 
 
[2208] ELLIPSIS 
 
 Father that sent me," on /xdvos ovk elfit, aW eyw kcu 6 7r€//.i//as fx.e 
 [iraTtjp]. Chrysostom says, " Hereby he hinted (yviiaro) that it was 
 not He Himself alone that was to condemn them (on ovk euros /u.oVos 
 avrovs KaraStxa^t) but also the Father " : and Cramer quotes Am- 
 monius to the same effect. In that case we should have to supply 
 the sense as follows : " I and the Father that sent me [are together 
 as Judges]." But the simple repetition of cI/ju, so as to mean " But 
 [I am] / and the Father 1 " seems more in accordance with Johannine 
 ellipsis and with Johannine theology. This latter view, taking the 
 words to declare the eternal unity of the Father and the Son, would 
 also include their unity in the act of judging. 
 
 [2208] xiii. 8 — 9 "'Thou shalt assuredly not wash my feet.'... 
 'Except I wash thee, thou hast no part with me '...'Lord, do not 
 (fxrj) [wash] my feet (ir68a<;) alone but also my hands and my head!" 
 Verb repeated. Here, /x-rj implies an imperative, and the accusative 
 shews that the construction cannot be " let not my feet (nom.) be 
 washed alone," so that the grammar combines with the context to 
 make the elliptic construction clearer than even in English. In 
 xv. 4 "Abide in me, and I (or, I also) [abide] in you 2 ," the verb is 
 to be repeated, and the meaning may be paraphrased " Your abiding 
 in me shall be mine in you," or " Cause yourselves to abide in me 
 and [thereby] me also to abide in you." The two " abidings " are 
 regarded as inseparable 3 . 
 
 [2209] In xviii. 39 — 40 " ' Desire ye therefore that I release 
 unto you the king of the Jews?'. ...Do not (fxij) [release] this man 
 (tovtov)...," as in xiii. 8 — 9, the fx.rj implies that the verb is to be 
 repeated imperatively, but instead of repeating the object (/u.?) t6v 
 fiacriXia r. 'I.) a pronoun (tovtov) is substituted so that the Jews 
 
 1 Or we might supply £<ttI, "But [it is more correct to say] 'I and the Father 
 that sent me.' " 
 
 - [2208 a] There follows an ellipsis of 5vvaa6e Kapirbv <p£petv a<p' eain-Qv, which 
 has to be mentally supplied after ovSi v/j.eis from the preceding Si'varai k. <p. a(j> 
 tavrov. 
 
 3 [2208/'] In xvii. 21 "that they may be all one: even as (kci0u>s) thou, Father 
 [art] in me and I [am] in thee, that they also may be in us,*' if the punctuation 
 were "that they may be all one even as thou, Father, [art] in me," it might be 
 contended that "art" is supplied from what precedes. Hut, if a fresh sentence 
 begins at "even as," "art" is omitted in accordance with Greek idiom and must 
 be supplied in accordance with it — without any reference to what precedes. So 
 it would not fall under this group of ellipses. See 2127/', 2132 a. 
 
 174 
 
ELLIPSIS [2211] 
 
 avoid calling Jesus "king." In xxi. 19 — 21 '"Follow me' 
 
 [My] Lord, but this man, whatV" the 8e denotes antithesis and 
 implies a preceding yueVclause, " My Lord, [I on the one hand am to 
 do this that thou sayest] but this man on the other hand — -what [is 
 he to do ?] : The preceding context describes Peter as first 
 receiving the command, " Follow," and then (while apparently in 
 the act of following) as " turning " and seeing the unnamed disciple 
 also "following." Hence the meaning might possibly be "I am 
 following thee as thou commandest, but this man, what [is he doing, 
 following without command}!" But the subsequent context ("If 
 I will that he tarry till I come...") points to the future as the object 
 of Peter's question : and both Origen and Chrysostom take it thus 1 . 
 
 (a) 'Ean oyN 6eo3pHT6 (vi. 62) 
 
 [2210] Perhaps the following extremely difficult passage is a case 
 of contextual ellipsis, vi. 62 " This [it seems] causes you to 
 stumble ! If (edv) therefore (ovv) ye should be beholding (OeioprJTc) 
 the Son of man asce/iding where he was before — - 2 ." The interpre- 
 tation turns on (r) the connexion implied by "therefore," (2) the 
 meaning of "behold," whether literal or spiritual, and in good sense 
 or bad, (3) the nature of the "ascending," whether literal or spiritual, 
 (4) the words omitted in ellipsis. 
 
 [2211] (1) "Therefore," following an implied statement "ye 
 stumble at this," would naturally introduce an argument a fortiori, 
 "Much more, therefore, will ye stumble" (see ovv, 2192) or some- 
 thing equivalent to it. (2) " Behold " Oeutprjre (for which Chrysostom 
 reads to^re) has been shewn (1598) to include vacant, unintelligent, 
 and unspiritual " beholding." (3) " Ascending to heaven," when 
 previously predicated concerning the Son of Man in this Gospel 
 (iii. 13 "No man hath ascended into heaven but only he that 
 descended from heaven, the Son of man ") is connected with the 
 " lifting up of the serpent " in the wilderness, and apparently with 
 sacrifice for sin. If that is the meaning here, "ascending where he 
 
 1 [2209 a] 'AkoXovOu fioi...Ovros 8e tL ; On this Origen says (Huet ii. 405 D) 
 (3ov\6p.€vos /xadelv K<xl t6 Kara tov , Iwawr]i> reXos, and Chrys. ad toe. ov ttjv avrr/v 
 7]fiiv 68bi> rj^et; For an altera, ellipsis o( yevrjaerai see 2386 c. 
 
 2 [2210 a] ToOro vfias tTKavdaKlfrei; iav ovv dewprJTe rbv vlbv tov avdpuirov dva- 
 ^aivovTa 6ttov t}v to TrpoTepov; SS has "but if," a has "quod si," b and e "quid 
 si,"/ "si autem,"^" "quid ergo cum." Though D has ^d? ovv, d has "quid si." 
 X om. otv. 
 
 175 
 
[2211] ELLIPSIS 
 
 was before : ' means " offering up in the flesh that supreme sacrifice 
 which raises the incarnate Son to the place that He had in the 
 bosom of the Father as the pre-incarnate Word." But the offering 
 up of this sacrifice in the flesh is described by Jesus, in the passage 
 under consideration, as giving His " flesh and blood " to be the food 
 of men ; and it is the announcement of this that has caused them to 
 "stumble 1 ." 
 
 1 [2211 a] The explanation of the Johannine use of the words "ascend" and 
 "exalt" and of their relation to Jewish thought does not strictly belong to 
 Johannine Grammar : but some remarks on these points are necessary here. The 
 Jews were familiar with the thought of the Deliverer "sitting on the right hand" 
 of God, and with the image of one like unto a Son of man "coming with the 
 clouds of heaven," as also with the Psalmist's apostrophe to the everlasting gates 
 to open and admit "the king of glory." Jesus appears from the Fourth Gospel 
 to have given a spiritual interpretation to these metaphors. To Him "the ever- 
 lasting gates" were the gates of self-sacrilice. The "glory" was service. To 
 sacrifice Himself for men was, relatively to men, giving Himself up entirely, to 
 them and for them. But, relatively to God, it might be called the "ascending" 
 of the Son to the place " where he was before." 
 
 [2211 /'] The whole of Christ's life might be accurately described as a sacrifice, 
 or a "glorifying" of God, or as a process of "ascending" to the Father : but the 
 term "glorifying" is more particularly used for the Crucifixion and the Resur- 
 rection as summing up the essence of the life: The punishment of Crucifixion (as 
 we know from Artemidorus' Manual of Dreams and from Jewish sources) was 
 frequently referred to as a "lifting up"; and similar allusions are found in the 
 Fourth Gospel, never in the Synoptists. Hence, when the Jews stood round the 
 Cross of Christ "staring and gaping" upon Him, as the Psalmist says, they were 
 really " beholding Him going up to the place where He was before." And some 
 thought of this kind — some notion of unintelligent "staring and gaping" — may 
 have been in John's mind when he described the soldier piercing Christ's side, as 
 fulfilling the prophecy "they shall look on him whom they pierced." 
 
 [2211 c] On the late Jewish use of "lifted up*' for "crucified," or "hanged," 
 see Levy i. 549 b (quoted in 1003 c). Artemidorus, too, writing in the second 
 century, connects dreams about " lifting up" and "stretching out of hands" with 
 crucifixion, thus, i. 76 el dt tis v\f/ij\bs iwi tlvos opxoiro, et's <p6(3ov Kai 8eos 7re<r«n-cu- 
 KdKOvpyos 5£ wv ffTavpuOrjcreTai 5ia rb ihpos ical tt)v tQiv x i <-P& v ^KTaaiu, and again 
 in his special section on dreams "about the Cross" (ii. 53) ayadbv 5e Kai TrtvrjTi- 
 Kai yap u\pi]\bs 6 crravpwSeis Kai woWovs rpe<pei, i.e. " Such a dream betokens good 
 for a poor man also; for the crucified is 'lifted up' and he 'feeds many.'" " To 
 feed many" means to be a rich man with plenty of slaves. But it also contains a 
 grim allusion to the fact that the crucified " fed the crows " ("noil pasces in cruce 
 COIVOS"), which he refers to in the context, ras aapKas diroWvovtriv oi OTavpudivre s, 
 "the crucified lose their flesh." For a bachelor, he adds, the cross betokens a 
 marriage, "bul not at all a profitable one," by reason of the "binding" The 
 cross also prevents a man From going forward {i-Rifialvw) on the land and from 
 staying where he would like to stay. To be crucified in a city [ii.) "signifies 
 
 176 
 
ELLIPSIS [2212] 
 
 [2212] According to this view, Oeupeu) is used here, as in some 
 other passages of the Fourth Gospel (1598) for unintelligent " be- 
 holding," seeing with the eyes of the flesh : and the meaning of the 
 passage is, " Doth this cause you to stumble, [the mere setting forth, 
 in word, of the doctrine of a self-sacrificing Messiah] ? [ What] 
 therefore \ivill ye do, a?id how much more grievously will ye stumble\ 
 if ye behold 1 [the fulfilment, in act, of my doctrine, not your doctrine, 
 of the Messianic glory ; if, instead of gazing at the King of glory 
 going up in visible splendour on the clouds of heaven, ye ' stand 
 staring and gaping' at] the [crucified] Son of man, [going down as 
 ye suppose to Sheol, but in fact] going up where He was before 2 ?" 
 
 some office corresponding to the place wherein the cross is erected (apxv v Toiatirqv 
 ar)/j.aivei. ofos &.v fi 6 t6itos ev u3 6 aravpbs eaTr/Kev)." In a later section about 
 "carrying (/3aordfei^) and being carried (fiao-Td£ea6a.i)" (ii. 56) he again refers to 
 the cross. Some of these details are curiously similar to xxi. 18 "thou shalt 
 (1) stretch out thy hands, and another shall (2) gird (i.e. bind) thee, and shall 
 (3) bear thee where thou dost not desire," to which is added, "this he said signifying 
 by what death he [i.e. Peter] should glorify God." See 2642 b. 
 
 1 [2212 a] The present subjunctive may, perhaps, be regarded as prophetic 
 present, or it may denote continuance, "what if ye find yourselves beholding...." 
 
 2 [2212/^] Chrysostom, reading av ovv iSrjTe, likens this mention of "ascending" 
 to Christ's promise to Nathanael ("thou shalt see greater things than these... 
 [angels of God ascending]") and to Christ's argument with Nicodemus ("No man 
 hath ascended to heaven except the Son of man..."). He seems to reject the in- 
 terpretation given above, saying "Doth He knit perplexities with perplexities? 
 No. God forbid ! But by the grandeur of His doctrines, and by their abundance, 
 He desires to attract them (rili /u.ey<:da. tuv ooyfiaTwv /cat ti2 irXrjdei avrovs 
 iirayayiadai /3oi'>\ercu)." 
 
 [2212 c\ This feeling (namely, that Christ is looking forward to a time when 
 the disciples will not "stumble") has probably caused the alterations in the text 
 mentioned above (2210 a). For, if 8i be read for ovv, then contrast replaces 
 inference, and the whole meaning is changed to something of this kind: " This 
 (emph.) causeth you to stumble : but [wait a little, -what will ye say] if ye should 
 be [soon] beholding the Son of man visibly ascending [in triumph] where He was 
 before? [Then ye will cease to stumble]." There is much against this. It 
 involves an alteration of a difficult text to a less difficult one. Moreover, though 
 all Christians (like the martyr Stephen) might be represented as seeing Christ at 
 the right hand of God, only an exceptional few (Acts i. 2 — 13) could be repre- 
 sented as seeing Him in the act of ascending to God. It seems to take dewprjre as 
 being a fleshly "beholding" and yet as one that will remove a stumblingdjlock. 
 It does not tell us who will thus "behold" — or when, and how, they will be 
 delivered from "stumbling" by the "beholding." The Acts, which relates the 
 Ascension, implies that a small number witnessed it. But those whom Christ 
 was now addressing were apparently a large number, for He says to them (vi. 64) 
 "There are some of you that believe not," and then it is added "Many of his 
 disciples went back." 
 
 A. VI. I77 12 
 
[2213] ELLIPSIS 
 
 (iii) Idiomatic 
 
 (a) Ellipsis of " some " 
 
 [2213] The most important elliptical expression in John is the 
 Graeco-Hebraic use of " I am " (without any predicate expressed or 
 implied in the context) for which see 2220 foil. There are two or 
 three omissions of av with the indicative, which need little comment 1 . 
 But the omission of "some" in the phrase "some of" requires 
 notice. For the most part it is free from ambiguity, as in vi. 39 
 "that. ..I may not lose [any] of it {Iva...^ airoXiaw i$ avrov)," 
 where, strictly speaking, /xrj8ev would be supplied, not n, vii. 40 
 "[Some] of the crowd, therefore (eV rov ox^ov ovv), having heard 
 these words, said...," xvi. 17 "There said therefore [some] of (elirav 
 ovv £k) the disciples...," xxi. 10 "Bring [some] of (otTro) the fish." 
 
 [2214] The following is ambiguous, i. 24 Kat a7r€o-TaX/i.eVot rjaav 
 Zk t<Sv 4>apicraiW, R.V. txt "And they had been sent from the 
 Pharisees," R.V. marg. "and [certain] had been sent from among 
 the Pharisees." In favour of R.V. marg. are the following facts. 
 (1) The partitive use of e« is very frequent in John 2 . (2) John has 
 already told us who sent the deputation (i. 19 "The Jews sent to 
 him "). (3) "Some of the Pharisees" makes excellent sense. "Priests 
 and Levites " alone have been as yet mentioned : and they (we may 
 suppose) have asked their questions, and have been silenced. They 
 are on the point of going back to those who sent them, carrying 
 a merely negative answer ("I am not the Christ" etc.). But now it 
 is added that there were " Pharisees " on the deputation, men learned 
 in the Law and the Traditions, given to ask "By what authority?" 
 and not so easily silenced: these therefore intervene with the question, 
 " Why baptizest thou then ? " These arguments are not conclusive, 
 but they make it probable that there is an ellipsis of " some 3 ." 
 
 [2215] ix. 40 "[Some] of the Pharisees heard these things (r}i<ovo-av 
 ex roil' 4>. Taura) — those that were with him (en /act' avrov oVre?) — and 
 
 I [2213 a ] xv. 22, 24 anapriav ovk eixocrav, xix. ir ovk elx^s (^ovalav. In viii. 
 39, we ought probably to read, with W.ll. txt, -rroielre (not, with W.H. marg. 
 ^7roien-e) , see 2078 — 9. "Ac is said to be (Winer p. 382) regularly omitted in modern 
 Greek in such instances, and the omission is freq. in later classical Greek. It 
 might also be a Latinism. Perhaps in N.T. it adds force, "they would assuredly 
 have had no sin." See also 2698. 
 
 - It is about as freq. in Jn as in Mk. Mt. Lk. together. 
 
 II [2214c/] Chrysostom and many scribes of various MSS. read ol before 
 air«TTa\nivoi., as A.V. " they which were sent," so as to leave no ellipsis. 
 
 1/8 
 
ELLIPSIS [2216] 
 
 said, Are we also blind?" A.V. "And [some] of the P. which were 
 with him," R.V. "Those of the Pharisees which were with him." 
 John's frequent use of apposition (1928 — 47) combines here with 
 his frequent use of partitive Ik, to make an ellipsis of nves almost 
 certain. Chrysostom in his comment ("There say unto Him [some] 
 of those that were following Him 1 ") apparently takes it thus, and 
 he suggests that the evangelist added the clause ol ixer avrov to 
 shew that they were the same that had previously revolted and 
 afterwards tried to stone Him 2 . This construction ("[some] from," 
 i.e. " [some] of") is frequent in Hebrew and fairly frequent in LXX. 
 In both, it gives rise to ambiguities, e.g. Lev. xxv. 33 (R.V.) " If o?ie 
 of the Levites redeem," marg. " redeem from the Levites," where 
 LXX (jrapa.) takes the latter view, but Aquila and Symmachus (ck) 
 the former 3 . 
 
 (/3) Ellipsis (?) of "gate" (v. 2) 
 
 [2216] v. 2 (R.V.) " Now there is in Jerusalem by the sheep [gate] 
 (lirl Trj TrpofiaTiKr}) a pool...," A.V. "by the sheep [market] (marg. 
 gate)." The text is probably corrupt. But in any case no solid 
 grounds have been alleged for the hypothesis of an ellipsis of "gate." 
 
 (1) Eusebius, Jerome, Chrysostom, and the ancient Latin and Syriac 
 versions make no mention of "gate" in connexion with this passage. 
 
 (2) Nehemiah mentions all the gates of Jerusalem, the "sheep-gate" 
 among them, where the context would make his meaning quite 
 clear without "gate"; yet the noun "gate" is never omitted by 
 his narrative in Hebrew or Greek 4 . (3) No instance of such an 
 ellipsis has ever been quoted from Greek literature (although it 
 would probably have been frequently used if it existed in that 
 language, as in German). (4) Wetstein has shewn that a Jewish 
 
 1 Aiyovffiv avTip e/c rCiv &Ko\ovdovvTcov <xvtu), Mtj /cat rj/meis rv<p\ol ecfxtv ; 
 
 - [2215 <?] Oi)x d.7rXt!;s 5e 6 evayytXiariis ifj.vy)[ibvev<Jtv, ort f/Kovaav in tG)v 
 <£aptcratW ravra ol /tier' avrov ovres, /cat elwav • Mtj /cat rjfieis rv<p\oi eafxev; d\X' 'iva 
 ffe dvafxi'Tjcrrj 6Vt ovtoi eKeivo: r\aav ol vporepov airoaravTes, elra \16do~avTts, /cat 
 paStws ets Tovvavrlov J uera ; 3aAA6 / uei'oi. 
 
 3 .[2215//] In Dan. i. 6 Theod. e/c "of the number <?/"" = LXX e/c rod yivovs 
 "descended from.'''' In 1 Esdr. v. 45 ol e/c alters the sense of the Heb. of Ezr. ii. 
 70 " some of," LXX awb rod. In 1 Esdr. i. 8, e/c tQiv (SaaikLKuiv "from the king's 
 [treasures] (? king's officers) "—2 Chr. xxxv. 7 — 8 "from the king's substance. 
 And his princes " 
 
 4 [2216 a] Neh. ii. 13, 14, iii. 1, 3, 13, 14 etc. In Neh. xii. 31 "the dung- 
 gate," LXX omits the whole; N has rrjs Kowpias, with rrjs wv\r]s superscr. 
 
 179 12 — 2 
 
[2217] ELLIPSIS 
 
 word similar to irpofiaTiKi] (and perhaps transliterated from it) was in 
 use to mean " bathing place." (5) This might be interpreted in 
 Greek as "pool (Ko\vp(3ij6pa)," besides being transliterated in the 
 text as irpofZaTiicq, " bathing place." (6) On the three occasions 
 where 7rpo(3aTiKy occurs in LXX it happens to be joined to Tv\rj 
 (Neh. iii. 1, 32, xii. 39) so that the adjective might naturally suggest 
 the interpolation of " gate" to any persons perplexed by the apparent 
 use of 7rpo(3aTLKi] as a noun. (7) Thus the two words might be 
 combined so as to give the sense of a "pool" near a "sheep-gate." 
 There may not be quite enough evidence to support this expla- 
 nation ; but, in any case, so far as we are acquainted at present with 
 the Greek language, there is no evidence at all for the ellipsis of 
 "gate 1 ." 
 
 (7) Ellipsis of " daughter " (or " wife "?) 
 
 [2217] xix. 25 (R.V.) "Mary the [wife] (r,) of Clopas." The 
 almost universal practice in Greek writers is to use tj toS 'A. to mean 
 " the [daughter] of A." In a few special cases, where the relationship 
 was historically known, r? tov 'A. might mean "the mother, or sister, 
 or wife, of A.," but these are not to the point here. In Latin, 
 "Verania Pisonis" is used for "Pisp's [wife] Verania," and such 
 a use of the genitive is current in some parts of England : but 
 obviously it would lead to confusion if " Clopas's Mary" could 
 mean indiscriminately either " mother, daughter, or wife, of Clopas." 
 The reasons for believing that ■>) tov must here have been intended 
 to mean " daughter" must be deferred to another work. 
 
 '&■ 
 
 (S) 'AAA' ina, see 2063—4 and 2105—12. 
 
 (e) Oyx oti 
 
 [2218] Some verb or phrase is omitted in connexion with oix 
 oti as follows: (1) vi. 45 — 6 (R.V.) "Every one that hath heard 
 from the Father, and hath learned, cometh unto me. A r ot that (ot^ 
 cm) any man hath seen the Father, save he which is from God, he 
 
 1 [2216/'] As regards the possible ellipsis in v. 44 tt)v 56^av r-qv wapa tov 
 fidvov [deov], and the question whether "the Alone is here used for God, see 
 1895. For the ellipsis of i/xariois in xx. 12 iv XevKOtS, COmp. Rev. iii. 4 7rept- 
 warrioov<Jiv...iv XevKoh, and Arteniid. ii. 3 iv XtvKoh £K(pipea6ai, also Ml. xi. 8, 
 Lk. vii. 25 iv fux\a.Koi% . Wetst. on Jn v. 44 supplies more instances, Latin as well 
 as Greek. 
 
 180 
 
ELLIPSIS [2219] 
 
 hath seen the Father 1 ," (2) vii. 22 (R.V.) "For this cause hath 
 Moses given you circumcision (not that it is of Moses but of the 
 fathers) ; and on the sabbath ye circumcise a man " (A.V. " not 
 because it is of Moses") 2 . Compare 1 Jn iv. 9 — 10 (R.V.) "Herein 
 was the love of God manifested in us, that (on) (A.V. because that) 
 God hath sent his only begotten son... Herein is love, not that (ou^ 
 6V1) we loved God but that (dXA' on) he loved us and sent... 3 ." In 
 the Epistle iv tout©.. .on appears to mean " Herein... [/ mean in the 
 fact] that" and iv tovtu>...ovx oti " Herein... [/ do] not [mean in the 
 fact] that." 
 
 [2219] As regards the two passages in the Gospel, it is not 
 possible to demonstrate that on means " that " (and not " because ") — 
 just as, in English, it is not possible sometimes to decide whether the 
 expression " not that I wish " means " [/say this] not because I wish " 
 or "[/do] not [mean to say] that I wish." But, having regard to the 
 classical 4 and the Pauline 3 uses of ovx on, and to the contexts of the 
 two Johannine passages, we may conclude that "/say" (whether 
 in the sense of "I mean" or otherwise) is to be supplied in both 
 of them. That being the case, it will be more in accordance with 
 
 1 [2218 a] lias 6 aKovcras irapa tov Trarpbs Kal p.a6Ccv ^p%erat irpbs efxe. ovx on 
 tov waripa ewpanev tls el p.rj 6 uv irapa. [tov] deov, outos ewpaKev rbv irarepa. 
 Origen (Huet ii. 293 a) 6 uv wapa tw irarpi, and so SS "he that is with God," 
 Chrys. 1st, 6 wv irapa tov deov, 2nd, 6 wv 4k tov deov. 
 
 2 [2218 b] Aia tovto ~Mwvo~rjs dedwKev vpuv tt\v TrepiTo/m-qv, — oi'X on e/c tov 
 Mwutrecos ecrnv d\\' €K tlov iraTtpwv, — Kal [e^] 0-aj3j3aT<p irepiTe/x.veTe avdpunrov. 
 SS "not because. ..but because," b, c, and /"not because," a om. "because." 
 
 :i [2218c] 'Ey tovtu) i<pavepwdr] 77 d7(Z7r77 tov deov ev J)fuv, oti. tov vibv avTov tov 
 /xovoyevrj ave<jTa\Kev 6 6eos...ev tovtix) ecrrlv t/ dyairri, ovx on i]fj.e7s 7jyaTrrjKap.ev t6v 
 Bebv, d\\' oti avrbs rjydwT]aev ?j/xas Kal aTreareiKev.... But Jn ix. 30 ev tovtlo yap 
 to davy.a<TTbv e<XTiv oti is to be explained differently, since "in this" means "in 
 your not knowing"' (comp. "we know not") and on means "because." See 2393. 
 
 4 [2219(7] In classical Greek ovx 0Ti means (1) "[I do] not [say only] that" 
 i.e. "not only"; (2) "[I do] not [mention the fact] that" i.e. "I pass over the 
 fact," e.g. Plat. Protag. 336 D "Socrates will not forget — / take no account of the 
 
 fact that (ovx ° r ') he jokes and says he is forgetful," i.e. "although he jokes," 
 comp. Gorg. 450 E. Similarly, but with 'iva yvr\ \lyw <roi 8ti, Philem. 19, "not to 
 say that you owe me also yourself." 
 
 5 [2219//] In 2 Cor. vii. 9 "Now I rejoice, not because,'" the meaning is clear, 
 and there is no ellipsis, and prob. in 2 Cor. iii. 4 — 5 "This great confidence we 
 have. ..iwt because...," and 2 Thess. iii. 7 — 9: but in 2 Cor. i. 23 — 4 "I gave up 
 my plan... from a desire to spare you," the best meaning of the following ovx 0TL 
 is attained by some insertion of "say" as "[/ say this] not because," or "[/ do] 
 not [mean to say] that," and so in Phil. iii. 10 — 12, iv. 10 — 11, 17. 
 
 I8l 
 
[2220] ELLIPSIS 
 
 general Greek usage if we supply Ae'yw not before ovx on, but before 
 on, giving Xe'yw the sense "I mean to say," which it repeatedly has 
 in N.T., and in Greek generally, so that ou'x on is equivalent to " [/ do] 
 not [mean to say] t/iat." Then, in both passages, it will correct a 
 possible misapprehension. In the former, vi. 45 — 6, the words " from 
 the Father" — naturally meaning "from the home of" (2356) or "from 
 the side of," the Father — might suggest a person seeing the Father 
 face to face. This is disclaimed by the words "[/do] not [mean] that 
 any one hath seen the Father." In vii. 2 2, there is a similar disclaimer, 
 "Moses hath given you circumcision — [/ do] not [mean to say] that 
 he originated it, but it was from the fathers." 
 
 (0 Ellipsis after " I am " 
 
 [2220] In the Walking on the Waters it is usual to assume that 
 vi. 20 cyoj 6i/xt means "/ am [indeed that which I appear to be]" 
 "I am [my very self]" or, according to our English idiom, "It is TV' 
 This would accord with what is stated in the parallel Mark-Matthew, 
 namely, that the disciples "thought they saw a phantasm"." In 
 opposition to this, Christ might naturally be supposed to say " I am 
 [not a phantasm but] I [myself]." But there is no proof that the 
 Greek words can mean this. And there is proof that, in the Discourse 
 on the Last Days, Mark uses eyco eifxi to mean "/ am [the Saviour, 
 Deliverer, or Christ].' 1 '' Moreover in that Discourse Luke (who 
 omits the Walking on the Waters) agrees with Mark in the use of 
 e'yw dfxi, and Matthew shews that he understood the phrase thus by 
 supplying the ellipsis, "/ am the Christ 3 ." Lastly, Luke indicates 
 that he would not have agreed in rendering iyo> el/xi "I am my 
 very self" by the fact that elsewhere, when he actually attributes a 
 meaning of this kind to our Lord, he adds auroV. 
 
 [2221] The N.T. use of "/ am" to mean "/ am the Saviour" 
 is in accordance with passages in Deuteronomy and Isaiah, where 
 
 1 The same interpretation is usually given to Mk vi. 50, Mt. xiv. 27 Oapaeire, 
 iyuo elfM, /J.T) <po(3cicrde. Jn vi. 20 om. dapcreiTe. 
 
 - Mk vi. 49 Zoo^clv otl (pdi>Ta(Xfj.d toTiv, Mt. xiv. 26 irapaxOrjcrav \4yovrts Sri 
 fyavraoixa £gtiv. 
 
 '■' (2220r/| Mk xiii. 6, Mt. xxiv. 5, Lk. xxi. 8 all have iroWol (Mt.-Lk.+yAp) 
 iXtvoovrai t-rri tu 6v6p.arl fxov \ey6vres (Mk + 8n) 'Eyd (ifj-i (Mt. + 6 Xpiaros). In 
 Mk xiv. 62, iyili tlfxi is not used absolutely hut answers the question "Art thou 
 tin- Christ t" where the parall. Mt. xxvi. 64 has cru d-n-as and the parall. Lk. xxii. 
 67—70 has, ist, t'di' bfiXv tiirw... and, 2nd, v/xeis Myere on iyd> el/u. 
 
 * Lk. xxiv. 39 eyJi d(j.i ai)r6s. 
 
 182 
 
ELLIPSIS [2222] 
 
 eyw eiyu.i corresponds to the Hebrew "/ [am] he [to whom all must 
 look]" and is applied to God. The LXX uses the same phrase to 
 render the boast of Nineveh in Zephaniah, "/ [am], and there is 
 none else beside me 1 ." Nor is there (as at present alleged) any 
 solid evidence to shew that eyoj el/xt could bear, at least in the first 
 century, anything else but this meaning — derived through LXX from 
 Hebraic sources — "I am the Saviour, or Deliverer." The Thesaurus 
 gives no instance of the meaning "I am my very self." Wetstein 
 (on Mt. xiv. 27) quotes authority for phrases in the context, but 
 none for "lam" in this sense. Westcott and Swete quote none 
 to the point 2 . 
 
 [2222] If therefore we are to be guided by evidence, we must 
 suppose the meaning to be, not "I am myself, Jesus of Nazareth," 
 but "I am your Saviour 3 ." It is to be interpreted as a vestige of 
 the poetic and Hebrew element underlying the story of the Stilling 
 of the Storm, in which the disciples saw the form of Jesus, and 
 heard Him saying, "I AM [HE]," meaning "I am He that helpeth." 
 It is, then, a genuine case of ellipsis, for the meaning is not "I am " 
 in the sense of "I live" or "I exist-eternally*." There is an ellipsis 
 of HE meaning, in Jewish tradition, " Deliverer," but also implying 
 more than this, as will appear in the next Johannine instance of 
 "I am." 
 
 1 Deut. xxxii. 39, Is. xliii. 10, Zeph. ii. 15. The Heb. has " I he" in the first 
 two, and simply "/" in the third. 
 
 2 [2221a] Swete (on Mk vi. 50) says "eyw ei/u='It is I,' cf. Lc. xxiv. 39, 
 iyjj ei/jLi avrds, and the use of "OH, LXX iyu in the O.T. (B.D.B., p. 59)." But 
 Lk.'s insertion of avros separates his usage from that of Mk, and Gesen. p. 59 
 merely says that Heb. *JX (LXX iydo) is used "alone in response to a question" 
 e.g. Gen. xxvii. 24 "Art thou my son Esau? And he said I [am]" 6 Se tlirev, 
 'E7W. None of these instances are to the point. 
 
 [2221/;] Westcott (on Jn vi. 20) says, " It is I. Comp. iv. 26, viii. 24, 28, 58, 
 (ix. 9), xiii. 19, xviii. 5, 6, 8 ; Mark xiii. 6, Luke xxi. 8." But (2205) these are 
 either cases of contextual ellipsis or else of special and technical meaning, I AM : 
 and indeed Westcott himself (on viii. 24) distinguishes the technical usage from 
 "cases where the predicate is directly suggested by the context." 
 
 3 [2222a] Comp. Orig. on Mt. xiv. 27 (Huet i. 242 A — b) Tapaxdyvbp-eQa- T~plv 
 Tpavuis KaraXa^eif on 6 awrrip rjpuv eTn8e5rifj.7]Kev, which suggests how "Saviour" 
 and "Jesus" might be interchanged, especially in translating from a language in 
 which "Jesus" meant " Saviour." 
 
 4 [2222/5] The Syr. of iyw eipu is a reduplication of "I," which pronoun (Thes. 
 Syr.) also represents the copula, so that "I I" may mean "I am." 
 
 183 
 
[2223] ELLIPSIS 
 
 [2223] viii. 24 — 5 '"For except ye believe that I AM, ye shall die 
 in your sins.' They therefore said to him, 'Who art thou?' Jesus 
 said to them, '[From] the beginning that which I also speak to 
 you 1 .'" The words "believe me and understand that I AM HE" 
 occur in Isaiah, as follows, "Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, 
 and my servant whom I have chosen, that ye may know and believe 
 me, and understand that I [AM] HE... Yea, since the day was, I [AM] 
 HE-." In the Psalms, this use of HE occurs with an ellipsis of 
 "art " in addressing Jehovah, "Thou [art] HE and thy years shall not 
 fail 3 ." The Song in Deuteronomy says "See now that I, I, [AM] 
 HE," where LXX has " See, see that I AM 4 ." Here Philo para- 
 phrases I AM as " that there is from the beginning a Cause of the 
 Universe 5 ." Ibn Ezra (on Isaiah xliii. 10 — 13) says, "This is the 
 sublimest expression of the unity of God ; for every other being 
 is different from its real form" — apparently meaning that, whereas all 
 other things deviate from their ideal, God alone is true to the Ideal. 
 Hence God is Truth and also Perfection. Apparently he takes 
 I [AM] HE to mean "I am he that is," i.e. is really, eternally, 
 and unchangeably. 
 
 [2224] In LXX, the Hebrew I HE is regularly rendered iyw 
 elfXL. Aquila certainly rendered it so once and presumably always". 
 In Hebrew, the personal pronoun " he " is so frequently used as a 
 substitute for the verb "to be" that Greeks might well translate " he " 
 by ci/u in this phrase. In Aramaic also (Levy) " he " is " used for 
 the copula" as well as for the personal pronoun 7 . Hence any 
 Semitic Logia of Jesus using this idiom would probably be rendered 
 in (ireek for the most part by eyw el/xi. In the Psalms, HE in "Thou 
 [art] HE" is once rendered 6 awds, "the same 8 ." The Semitic I 
 HE is perhaps latent under iyw efyu euro's, assigned to Christ by 
 Luke alone". But the text is doubtful (2699 foil.). 
 
 1 [2223 a] 'Eai> yap /xi] Trt<rTevcrriTe 8ti iyw elfu dirodaveicrde iv reus a/xaprlaii 
 vfiQv. As to "the beginning" and "that which I also speak," see 2154—6 and 
 2225. 
 
 2 Is. xliii. 10 — 13, comp. xlvi. 4, xlviii. 12 (2224a). 
 
 :t l's. cii. 27 (lit. Heb.) R.Y. "Thou art the same." 4 Deut. xxxii. 39. 
 
 5 [2223 /'J Philo i. 258 on 'iari ti sal i/wapxti rb tQiv 6\wv atriov, and he 
 paraphrases Sri 'E7W eifu lotTe as Ttjk ifii^v virap^iv deaaaaOe. 
 
 6 [2224 r/] In Is. xlviii. 12, where I. XX om. the phrase, Aq. Syni. and Theod. 
 render I HE by iyw el/u, and Aq. is so consistent in his general renderings that 
 he may be presumed to have been consistent in this particular one. 
 
 7 Levy C/i. i. 195*. s Ps. cii. 27. 9 Lk. xxiv. 39. 
 
 184 
 
ELLIPSIS [2226] 
 
 [2225] That John, when writing "believe that I AM," did not 
 mean exactly "believe that I am the eternal God," may be inferred 
 from several facts, (i) Christ's hearers (until they heard the words 
 " before Abraham J ") did not take I AM in that sense. Else they 
 would have stoned Jesus at once. (2) The words are put by the 
 Synoptists into the mouth of any false Messiah that might say, in 
 effect, " I am the Deliverer." (3) John always represents the Son as 
 claiming to reveal the Father and to be one with the Father, but never 
 as claiming to be the One God. It is not so easy— probably it is 
 impossible — to define exactly John's positive meaning: but some light 
 may be thrown on it by the first of the passages in which Isaiah uses 
 the phrase. It runs thus in Hebrew " Ye are my witnesses, saith 
 Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen, in order that ye may 
 know and believe in (lit. to) me, and may understand that I [AM] HE 2 ." 
 The Targum has (after "Jehovah ") "my servant Christ whom I have 
 chosen that ye may know and believe before me and may understand 
 that I [AM] HE that is from the beginning." Thus, if we, as it were, 
 interrogate the speaker in Isaiah as to the meaning of I HE and ask 
 "What art thou?" the Targum answers "HE that is from the be- 
 ginning." But this is curiously like the question and answer in John 
 after Jesus had insisted on the necessity of believing " that I AM." 
 The Jews had asked "Who art thou?" and the first word of Christ's 
 reply is "[In] the beginning (rrjv dp^r/V) 3 ." 
 
 [2226] There are several interesting resemblances between the 
 Hebrew doctrine of the I HE (or the Greek doctrine of the I AM) 
 in Isaiah and the Johannine doctrine about the unity of the Father 
 and the Son. For example, "My Father worketh from the beginning 
 
 1 viii. 58. - Is. xliii. 10. 
 
 3 [2225 a] The Targ. paraphrases I HE elsewhere as follows, Deut. xxxii. 
 39 (Heb. "I, I, HE") (Jer. 1) "I [am] He who Am and Was, and Will be" 
 (Jer. Il) "I in my word [am] He" ; Ps. cii. 27 "Thou [art] He that created us" ; 
 in Is. xliii. 13 Heb. "From the day I HE" is (Targ.) "From eternity I HE"; 
 in Is. xlvi. 4 "Even to old age I HE " = Targ. "Even to eternity I HE." Perh. 
 the Targumist regarded "from eternity" and "to eternity" as attributes, and 
 therefore did not in these last two passages insert such predicates as "that created 
 us" or "that is from the beginning" etc. Comp. Is. lii. 6 "Therefore my people 
 shall know my name, therefore [I say, they shall know] in that day that I [AM] 
 HE that speaketh, behold me" (Ibn Ezra "when I shall proclaim, Behold it is 
 I "). Swete punctuates theLXX otl eyw elfu avrbs 6 \a\Qv Trdpet/xi, but there are 
 many ways of combining the words. The Targ. is (Walton) "scietis, quoniam ego 
 sum qui loquebar et Verbum meum permanet." 
 
 I8 5 
 
[2227] ELLIPSIS 
 
 and I work," "I— and yet not I, but I and the Father that sent me," 
 combined with the present passage ("I AM.... From the beginning 
 that which I speak unto you") appear to represent the Son as "from 
 the beginning" at one with the Father in "working" the work of 
 supporting and redeeming man. So in Isaiah, we find, in one and 
 the same context, "I AM," together with "from the beginning" (in 
 Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek 1 ), and "I will work-, who shall hinder 
 it?" Another passage introduces "speaking," "I [AM] HE that 
 speaketh 3 ." 
 
 [2227] One of the most spiritually minded of the early Rabbis, 
 Abba Saul, who flourished about 130 a.d., extracting the words 
 I AND HE out of a passage of Scripture where they have no 
 existence, paraphrases them thus, "I will be like Him [i.e. God]: as 
 He is merciful and kind, so will I too be merciful and kind 4 ." 
 Commenting on the Isaiah passage (Is. xlvi. 3) that describes Jehovah 
 as carrying His people, Ibn Ezra says "The idols of Babylon are 
 carried by their worshippers but I, the God of Israel, carry the 
 Israelites." This conception of man as being in " the arms " of God, 
 his Father — and not as crouching under " the arm " of God, his 
 Chastiser, pervades the whole of the Fourth Gospel. It may be 
 taken as certain that the evangelist attaches some meaning of this 
 kind to the Greek words I AM in virtue of their association with the 
 thought of God carrying man in His bosom. It would be bathos 
 to suppose that Jesus, after saying " I am the bread of life " and " 1 
 am the light of the world," now comes down to the bare " I am " 
 implying nothing more than mere existence, conceivably bad as 
 well as good. 
 
 1 [2226«] The Ileb. is (Is. xliii. 13) "from the day" (R.V. txt "since the 
 day was"), which is rendered by LXX " from the beginning." The Aramaic has 
 here "from eternity," and inserts in xliii. 10 "he that is from the beginning." 
 
 - [2226A] The Heb. of Is. xliii. 13 "work" is regularly rendered ipyd^ofiaL 
 (though LXX renders it "make (ttoiQ) " here) which is the word in Jn v. 17 ".My 
 Father worketh and I work."' 
 
 [2226rJ The curious juxtaposition of "know" and "believe" in connexion 
 with I AM in Is. xliii. 10, and the phrase (Is. lii. 6) "[they shall know] in that 
 day that I [am] he that speaketh" may be compared with the Johannine form of 
 Peter's confession (Jn vi. 68—9) "Thou hast words of eternal life, and we know 
 and believe that thou art the holy one of God." 
 
 1 Is. lii. 6. 
 
 4 See 1022. Bacher {Die Agada, ii. 367) shews that some versions have "Be 
 thou like,"' but prefers the above. 
 
 186 
 
ELLIPSIS [2228] 
 
 [2228] Much more probably we may suppose I AM to come 
 here, absolutely, — as a climax after the previous declarations about 
 the " bread " and the " light " — conveying a great mass of meaning 
 that would not be fully intelligible to any readers that had not 
 pondered on the meaning of the divine I AM, and perhaps on 
 the meaning of "I 1 ." On the one hand I AM means more than 
 "I am the Deliverer"; on the other, it means less than "I am 
 the eternal God." Taken by itself, "Believe that I AM" might 
 mean, as it means in Deuteronomy, "Believe in the unity of the 
 Supreme God, the Deliverer of Israel": but, taken here, along 
 with other declarations about what Jesus IS, it seems to call 
 upon the Pharisees to believe that the Son of man is not only the 
 Deliverer but also one with the Father in the unity of the Godhead. 
 Many may be unable to believe that our Lord actually uttered these 
 precise words in this sense and may yet find it quite possible to 
 believe that they represent the essence of His doctrine, namely, that 
 the Father is revealed to men in the ideal of humanity (with which 
 He is at one) and not in a written law. Others may go further, and 
 may believe that Jesus felt Himself to be thus absolutely at one with 
 the Father. 
 
 1 [2228 a] The doctrine of Epictetus (ii. 22. 15 — 20) concerning the "I" is 
 worth noting in this connexion. Wherever the " 1 " and the " Mine" are, there, 
 he says, will be every creature's inclination (compare "Where your treasure is 
 there will be your heart also") : Every creature loves its own " profit (av/jLcpepovY' 
 above all things, "This, i.e. profit, is father and brother and kindred and country 
 and God." If therefore a man "identifies 'profit' with piety and honour and 
 country and parents and friends, these are saved, all of them" ; if not, they are 
 outweighed by "profit." This identification of the "profit" of the "/" with 
 Goodness, is what a Jew might express mystically by saying "/ am He." 
 Epictetus adds (id.) that we must needs desire to destroy anyone — brother, 
 father, child — that comes between us and "profit" ("Unless a man hate his 
 own father. ..he cannot be my disciple") but that if the "I" is identified with 
 virtuous purpose, he will become a perfect friend, son, and father (Mk x. 30 "he 
 shall receive a hundred fold... mothers..."). 
 
 [2228 fi] The Synoptic form of these doctrines may have influenced Epictetus 
 and may have led him to think that virtuous philosophers might find their Son of 
 man in themselves, each man in his own heart : " I will not ' lose my soul that I 
 may find it.' I will worship my own soul, my own higher purpose, my spirit 
 contending against the flesh." John may have written with some regard to such 
 conclusions, putting the Synoptic doctrine in a new aspect, or developing it in an 
 old aspect neglected by the Synoptists, in order to shew that the regeneration of 
 man, if it was to be based on "I," must be based on a different one from the 
 philosophic "Ego." 
 
 187 
 
[2229] ELLIPSIS 
 
 (rj) Ellipsis of ecTi 
 
 [2229] In ii. 4 ri e'/xoi xal croi, and in xxi. 22 ti tt/jos a-e; there 
 is an ellipsis of iari Ti tt/dos ere (of which Wetst. «^ &c alleges 
 comparatively few instances) presents no difficulty, as meaning 
 "What [is it] in relation to thee?" i.e. What does it concern thee? 
 Wetst. quotes Glycas, Annal. iv. p. 255, Anthol. mss. i. 1, and 
 Epictet. (but without reference) /xrj ■n-po<ri\6ij<;- ovScV eVn 77-po's o-e (sic), 
 and tl 77-pos i/xe ; 
 
 [2230] Ti ifjLol kolI croi might, theoretically, be rendered "What 
 does this concern me and thee?" for ti p.01, by itself, might mean 
 "what does it concern me?" as in Epictet. iii. 22. 66 (foil, by infin.). 
 But, as a fact, both in Hebrew and Greek (Wetst. on Mt. viii. 29) 
 "What [is there] to me and thee?" always implies "to me and thee 
 in common" so that the meaning is, "What have we to do with one 
 another?" [Wetst. compares Josh. xxii. 24, 2 S. xvi. 10, 1 K. xvii. 18, 
 2 K. xvi. 10, 2 Chr. xxxv. 21, Joel iii. 4. But in Josh. xxii. 24, LXX 
 omits kui, 2 K. xvi. 10 is a repetition (by error) of 2 S. xvi. 10, and 
 in Joel iii. 4 LXX has (as Heb.) ti fyiets e/W;] It occurs in 
 Aristoph., Demosth., Epictet., Achill. Tat., Anacreon etc., and none 
 of Wetstein's numerous quotations adds an explanatory phrase except 
 Synesius, o^'/aw -yap 8rj «ai <pi\oo-o<f>i<i. tl 7rpos dA.A77A.ous ; The phrase 
 was so common that no contemporary (2642 a) Greeks could doubt 
 that 7rpos a\\ij\ov<; had to be supplied 1 . 
 
 [2230 (i)] The ellipsis of co-ti in the phrase €ti /aikooV is found 
 in no Gospel but the Fourth, xiv. 19 " Yet a little (Iti fxiKpov) and 
 the world no longer beholdeth me : ye (emph.) behold me." The 
 Epistle to the Hebrews, quoting from prophecy, says, "Ye have 
 need of patience, that having done the will of God ye may gather 
 
 1 [2230a] In v. 36 " The witness that I have is greater than [that of] John," 
 iyu 5e ^ u T V V fJ-aprvpiav fxelfa rod 'I., there is, perhaps, no ellipsis of ttjs 
 fxaprvpias before rod 'I. Somewhat similarly we sometimes substitute the 
 person for his work in vernacular English (as well as in Latin ami (Ireek) 
 especially when speaking about a picture or poem, "This is rather like Gains- 
 borough," "better than Linnell," "almost equal to Tennyson," "He was better 
 than his word," " How very like /lint to say that !" etc. Winer explains in the 
 same way (Mt. v. 20) " Except your righteousness (lit.) abound more than the 
 scribes," and ^ives frequent instances in Greek and Latin. Probably the meaning 
 here is all the stronger for the omission of Tij'i p.. : " The witness that I have is 
 above the level of John." 
 
 icS8 
 
ELLIPSIS [2230 (iii)] 
 
 in (KOfxiaijcrde) 1 the promise, For yet a little, just a little, [and] lie 
 that cometh will come 2 ." This illustrates the regular use of the 
 phrase in O.T. in predictions announcing the approaching doom 
 of the enemies of Jehovah and the deliverance of His people, who 
 are exhorted to wait "yet a little 3 ." The ellipsis of «m after hi 
 is not mentioned in the Thesaurus and appears to spring from 
 Hebrew sources. 
 
 [2230(h)] Similar ellipses of "are," with mention of time, occur 
 in O.T. in connexion with the judgment of Jehovah that will surely 
 come to pass in " yet seven days," " yet forty days," " yet a year " etc. 4 
 Compare the thought in iv. 35 "Say ye not, 'Yet are four months 
 and the harvest cometh '? Behold, I say unto you, lift up your eyes 
 and contemplate the lands how that they are white for reaping. 
 Already doth the reaper receive hire and gather fruit for life eternal." 
 As the Gospel connects this numbering of " months " with a sub- 
 sequent mention of "hire," so does Isaiah, "Within yet a year as 
 the year of a hireling," and elsewhere he says, "Within three years, 
 as the years of a hireling, and the glory of Moab shall be brought 
 into contempt 5 ," meaning apparently that Israel counted the days 
 "like the days of an hireling, as a servant that earnestly desireth 
 the shadow, and as an hireling that looketh for his wages 6 ." 
 
 [2230 (iii)] As regards the period of "four months," it appears 7 
 that the Jews divided the agricultural year into six periods of two 
 months, the first four being " seed-time," "winter" "winter-solstice" 
 "harvest." It might therefore be common for farmers and labourers 
 
 1 [2230 (i) a] Not quite the same as "receive," see L.S. quoting Dem. 304. 
 26 rous napTTotis KeKOfxiade " ye have reaped the fruits," and Herod, ii. 14 Kapirbv k. 
 "gather in corn." 
 
 " Heb. x. 37 tri yap p.iKpbi> oaov oaov, 6 epxbp-evos ?/£« quoting from Is. xxvi. 20 
 airoKpvfi-qOi /xinpov oaov oaov and from Hab. ii. 3 foil. (LXX). 
 
 3 [2230 (i) b] Comp. Rev. vi. 11 " that they should rest yet a little time" and 
 see Is. x. 25, xxix. 17, Jer. Ii. 33, Hos. i. 4. 
 
 4 [2230 (ii) a] Gen. vii. 4 (R.V.) "For yet seven days and I will..." tri yap 
 i]p.epu>v i-KTa iyui (Heb. lit. "to days" and om. "and"), Is. xxi. 16 "Within yet 
 a year as the year of a hireling and all the glory of Kedar shall fail," In iviaurbs 
 ws i. p.iaduTov, €K\el\p(i. ij 56S;a t. vlQv K., Jon. iii. 4 "Yet forty days and Nineveh 
 shall be overthrown," LXX (by error) £ri rpeis r)p.tpai nai X. KaraarpacpriaeTai. 
 
 5 Is. xvi. 14. 
 
 (! [2230 (ii) ^] Job vii. 1 — 2. So Ibn Ezra (Is. xvi. 14) lt As the years of a 
 hireling, who daily counts when the end will come ; so the prophet is satisfied, 
 when he sees that the time of the calamity of Moab approaches." 
 
 7 Hor. Heb. on Jn iv. 35, quoting Baba Mezia 106 b. 
 
 189 
 
[2231] INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES 
 
 at the conclusion of "seed-time" to say " Yet four months [i.e. winter 
 and winter-so Is tice\ and the harvest cometh," and from agriculturists 
 the saying might pass into a proverb inculcating patient expectation. 
 It is to be noted that Jn iv. 35 foil, is the only place in this Gospel 
 where "hire" is mentioned. The meaning may be paraphrased 
 thus: "Do not the farmers say, Four months precisely, as the days 
 of a hireling — and then cometh the harvest? But I say to you, 
 Lift up your eyes, and see the harvest already white, and the hire 
 of the reapers already present 1 ." 
 
 Imperative, see Index 
 Infinitive, see Index 
 Interrogative Sentences 
 
 (i) Interrogative particles 
 
 [2231] John's use of the interrogative ov 2 , oi^i, 7rws, iroOev, and n a 
 seldom causes ambiguity and requires little comment. But his uses 
 of oi firj and ovkovv are unique in N.T. as follows : 
 
 1 [2230 (iii) a] Comp. Jas v. 7 " Be therefore long-suffering. ..the husbandman 
 waiteth..." In Jn iv. 35 TeTp&ii-qvbs i<m, there is no ellipsis; hut the thought 
 is similar to that of the ahove quoted passages from O.T. 
 
 - [2231a] In xix. io e/j.01 ov ActXeij; "To me thou speakest not!" ov has the 
 force of alpha privative, "Thou refusest to speak to me!" As regards ov\i — 
 which (1861) is never used by Mk and is more freq. in Lk. than in Mt. and Jn 
 taken together — there are abundant instances in N.T. of its use interrogatively as 
 in Jn xi. 9. In vi. 42, W.H. has T ovyp ( mar g- oi>x) ovrds ecnv '\r)oovs 6 vlbs 
 'luarjcp...; Comp. Mk vi. 3 oi>x ovrds ioriv 6 t^ktujv...; teal ovk...; Mt. xiii. 55 
 ovx ovtos £<ttlv...; Kai...oi>xl-.-; Lk. iv. 22 oi'xi vios eariv 'lwar)<p ovtos ; In 
 .Mt. v. 46, 47, vi. 25, xii. 1 1, the par all. Lk. rejects of>xl. Rut Lk. freq. has ovxi 
 interrog. elsewhere, in traditions peculiar to himself, and also in the parall. to Mt. 
 x. 29. On ewx 1 ' negative, see 2265 (i). 
 
 :; [2231 /'| On xii. 27 ri eiVw, see 2512 b — r, which (the view taken in 933 being 
 retracted) accepts the ordinary rendering " What should 1 say...?" In iv. z- t tI 
 XaXels, A.V. and R. V. give " Why" without alternative, and Westcotl makes no ' 
 comment. SS however has "//'//,?/ wast thou saying?'" The Latin mss. also 
 have "quid loqueris" (following "quid quaeris") clearly meaning "what" (but 
 Chrys. has ovk -qpwTriaav rr\v airlav). 
 
 [2231<r] As !.. tlir interrogative use of rl generally, it has been noted (939/') 
 that Jn never uses iVa tI. Aia rl he never uses without a negative. Ti, "wAy?" 
 he u 1 frequently. "On, interrogatively used sometimes in I. XX, In never uses 
 thus. 
 
INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES [2232] 
 
 (a) Oy mh 
 
 [2232] xviii. n "The cup that my Father hath given me shall 
 I not assuredly drink it (ov fir} tt«o cwto)!" See 933—6, 1007, where 
 it is maintained that this rare interrogative is rather an exclamation 
 than an interrogation, and that it means literally "I am of course not 
 to drink it [according to your desire]!" This view is confirmed by 
 many details in this section shewing John's proneness to the exclama- 
 tory interrogative ; and it also helps to explain (1508) one aspect of 
 the meaning of iv. 48 "Except ye see signs and wonders ye will 
 assuredly not believe (ov ^ TriarevariTe) ! " addressed to the nobleman 
 from Capernaum. Chrysostom suggests that "ye" may mean "ye 
 citizens of Capernaum," and that our Lord is chiding and stimulating 
 his faith as being weak like that of his fellow-citizens. But the words 
 
 [2231 1/] As regards otl, the LXX uses it to express a great number of Hebrew 
 particles, and it often represents Heb. "Why?" "For what?" "Is not?" etc. 
 But there is often v.r. tl otl; and, where otl introduces a speech, confusion may 
 arise from the use of otl recitativum, e.g. Gen. xviii. 13 elwev K. wpbs 'A. "On 
 eyeAao-ei' 2. (D tl otl) " Wherefore did S. laugh?" Comp. Judg. ii. 2 v.r. ore, 
 Judg. iv. 14 v.r. ovx l5ov (where Swete marks no interrog. and on may mean 
 "for indeed"), 2 S. vii. 7 v.r. tl and tI on, xii. 9 v.r. tl, 2 K. viii. 14 (Swete 6' 
 tl, called by Blass " v.I. (in AB) for rl," but Swete gives no v.L), Job xxvii. 12 
 v.r. Ota tL de etc. The instances are extremely numerous. 
 
 [2231c"] These special circumstances differentiate LXX Greek (and Greek 
 influenced by LXX) from all other Greek, as to the use of 8n in particular and 
 interrogative and relative particles in general. Blass says (p. 176) "the employ- 
 ment of ocrrts or even of o's in a direct question is quite incredible, except that b, tl 
 appears to be used as an abbreviation for tl 6, tl ' why.' ' Blass (p. 331) mentions, 
 as quoted against him, (1) Plut. De Sera Vind. 14 p. 558 E: but this is best punctu- 
 ated to ye aa(pes...ov5' ...ao-(pa\ws elirelv Hxop.ev, otov, 5ia tl..., rj ttclXlv 5l rjv airiav 
 
 (2) 2 K. viii. 14 (see 2231 d) which should not be mixed with non-LXX Gk, 
 
 (3) [Justin] Cohort, ad Graec. 5 ad fin., where the txt is doubtful, but there is 
 high authority for paraphrasing thus, '■''For the same reason for which (di r\v clLtLciv) 
 you say Homer speaks the truth when he is on your side don't you think he speaks 
 the truth when we prove (a.irofyyva.fxi'vujv for airo<p7)i>a/j.evos) from Homer a view 
 opposite to yours?" (4) Euseb. P.E. vi. 7. 12 (Giff. p. 2$jd) T i2v de eveKa Tavra 
 irpoffeurqveyKa. tu \6yLt> — otl ere eKwecpevyev ..., rendered by G. "But do you ask 
 the reasons for which...": but I should prefer: "And now to come to the reason 
 for which I have introduced these matters — [it is] because...." To these may be 
 added Euseb. P.E. vi. 7. p. 256 c, eKetvb fj.0L \{ye...apd ye tl ia/xev eyto re klu 06; 
 — (pai-qs av — tovto de bwbdev Lo-fxev ; where I should suggest a repetition of X^ye. 
 "Tell me this. ..Do we exist, you and I — yes, you say of course — but [tell me] 
 whence we know this." Gifford renders, in note, "But do you ask whence do 
 we know this?" The facts confirm Blass's conclusion. 
 
 IQI 
 
[2233] INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES 
 
 apply to men of the world generally, "Ye that are rich and great will 
 not believe without signs and wonders ! [Is it to be so with thee'?]' 
 
 (j3) Oy'koyn 
 
 [2233] xviii. 37 (R..V.) "Pilate therefore said unto him, Art 
 thou a king then (ovkovv /Sao-tXevs el crv;)?" Ovkovv, unaccented, may 
 mean (1) "Not therefore," (2) "It is not, then?" (3) "Then it is 
 so [is it not?]" In this last sense, in which it is commonly 
 accented ovkovv, it drops the negative and interrogative force, 
 so that it can be used, in the sense "well then," even with 
 an imperative, as in Kings (Heb.) "Be content, take two," where 
 Symmachus has " Well then, take," ovkovv (A olkow, sic) XdfSe 2 . 
 In such cases it means, "You'll do it, then, won't you?" It may 
 be paraphrased as "come" when Persephone coaxes her husband 
 to make Protesilaus young again, " Come, husband, prithee do thou 
 cure this ill, also 3 ." 
 
 [2234] In xviii. 37, the force of ovkovv cannot be understood 
 without reference to context (and perhaps to the Synoptists). All 
 the four evangelists agree exactly in words and order as to the 
 question addressed by Pilate to Jesus, "Thou art [it seems] the king 
 of the Jews 4 !" But as to our Lord's answer, "Thou sayest [////V] 5 ," 
 the Synoptists assert that it followed at once, whereas John says that 
 
 Jesus answered at once, "Sayest thou this from thyself ?" 
 
 Moreover, according to John, this answer provoked a contemptuous 
 reply from Pilate, which led to Christ's explanation: "My kingdom 
 
 1 [2232 «] Comp. 1 Cor. i. 26, which says that "not many mighty, not many 
 noble," are chosen, after stating that (i. 22) "Jews seek signs and Greeks wisdom." 
 '-' [2233a] 2 K. v. 23. Other copies have iirieiK&s XdySe, " kindly take." 
 
 3 [2233/'] Lucian, De A/or/, xxiii. 3 (i. p. 428) ovkovv, w avep, ai> ko.1 tovt" 
 lavai Steph. quotes also De Mort. x. 4, xxiii. 2 with imperatives. 
 
 4 [2234(7] Mk xv. 2, Mt. xxvii. 11, Lk. xxiii. 3, Jn xviii. 33 ZSu el 6 /3. r. 
 'Ioi'Sat'wi' ; 
 
 5 [2234/'] 2ii Xiyeis, but Jn has dirb aeavrov <ri> tovto \eyeis at once, and 
 afterwards (xviii. 37) — in answer to the question, ovkovv fJaoihevs e I o"l) — cri) \iyeis 
 on /3. elfii. On <ru \4yeis, as a formula of assent, see WetsL on Mt. xxvi. 25. His 
 instances of "vos dixistis" are from Talmudic sources. They express assent to 
 bad news (" ' Niim mortuus est Rabbi?' Respondit ille, ' Vos dixistis ' ") which 
 a messenger shrinks from repeating to a questioner. So in Eurip. Hippol, 352 cov 
 rdd' ovk Cfxou k\v(is and fr. 379 (not in Hind.) <rv 5i \e"yeis tcuV, ovk eyw. I lis only 
 instance from Ok prose is Xcn. Mem. iii. 10. 15 avrds, ^(pt]> tovto \eytis, where 
 there is no bad news in the context. The use in the Gospels is prob. from 
 Jewish sources. 
 
 KJ2 
 
INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES [2235] 
 
 is not from this world." Then, when Christ had thus admitted that 
 He had, in some sense, a "kingdom," Pilate replies — dropping "Jews" 
 and "the" — "Well then (ovkovv) [we will not dispute about details, 
 such as "the king" and "the Jews"] thou art a king." To this, and 
 only to this — according to John— does Jesus assent by replying 
 "Thou sayest that I am a king." 
 
 (ry) Mh 
 
 [2235] M77' ("it is not so, is it?" "can it be that?") is used 
 interrogatively in the Fourth Gospel 1 more frequently than in all 
 the Three Gospels taken together : but whereas the Three (Mark 
 only using it once) restrict it to the words of Jesus, John almost 
 restricts it to the words of others. There are but two instances 
 of it in Christ's words, one being vi. 67, " Can it be that (fjnj) ye also 
 (*ai viAels) desire to go away 2 ?" 
 
 1 [2235 a] It occurs about 17 times injn. Mk uses it only in ii. 19 (Mk xii. 1 -, 
 being (933//) not to the point). In Jn v. 45 /xtj done'ire, imperative, SS takes /u.y 
 as interrogative, "Can ye suppose?" 
 
 2 [2235 b] The other is xxi. 5 llaidia, p.rj ti irpoacpdyiov %x €T€ S Field says (ad 
 toe) "^x e ' s Tl > is the usual question... answering to our 'Have you had any sport?'" 
 By adding yu.77 to the usual phrase, the negative expectation is emphasized, "You 
 have caught no fish, have you ?" But ought we not to read /mrjri (2702) ? 
 
 [2235 <] On ^x ere > Wetst. ad loc. quotes conclusively Schol. on Aristoph. 
 Nub. 731, and Field adds, from Nonnus, 77 'p ^x°^ v n J where Schol. has apa 
 ed7ipa.<Tau.ti> ti ; but the statement quoted by some from Euthymius that iraidia is 
 a term freq. applied to labourers (Zdos yap tovs epyariKoiis ovtios 6vop.d^eiv) is not 
 proved (so as to be applicable to xxi. 5) by Aristoph. Ran. 37, Nub. 132 iraidiov, 
 " boy ! " rightly explained by Steph. as " servulus." A Greek could say iraidiov 
 to the " boy [at the door] " of the house he was visiting, but not iraidia to strangers 
 fishing. Chrys. and a omit iraidia. Acts of John § 2 represents Christ Himself as 
 appearing on the bank to James as a iraidiov. See 2701. 
 
 [2235(/] On irpocxcpayiov, Field, quoting A.V. "any meat," and R. V. "aught 
 to eat," says " Rather, ' Have ye taken any fish ? ' ' Steph. shews that irpoacpdyiov 
 was a vernacular word for irpoo-6\pijua, oypdpiov (or 6\f/ov, which Clem. Alex. 104 
 substitutes (2307(7) when quoting this passage): and these words, though meaning 
 literally "[relish] to food," were frequently used for "fish," in places where the 
 habitual relish was "fish." In Oxyr. Pap. 736, irpoo-<pdyiov is rendered "relish'' 
 — after "beer, leeks,... asparagus, a cabbage" — "a relish half an obol," and again 
 ''relishes for the women on two days two and a half obols." Similarly 739 "« 
 relish for the builder" thrice, 498 "each of us shall receive one loaf and a relish 
 per diem." In 736, the editors also give "sauce (6\papiov) one obol. ..sauce (oxpov) 
 one obol, sauce (ox^apiov) one obol." These entries are on three consecutive days, 
 and — vegetables being excluded here by the mention of them in the context — it 
 would seem probable that oypov means nearly the same thing as 6\pdpiov and as 
 irpocKpdyiov, namely "fish" in some form. Comp. Fay um Pap. cxix. 31 "forG.'s 
 
 A. VI. 193 13 
 
[2236] INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES 
 
 (ii) Interrogative tone 
 
 [2236] There is frequent ambiguity in sentences where the 
 interrogation, if it exists, is expressed not by a particle, but by tone 1 . 
 In the first two of the following instances there is a protasis with 
 a suspensive 6'n, in the third there is not : i. 50 (R.V. and A.V.) 
 "Because (on) I said unto thee I saw thee underneath (A.V. under) the 
 fig-tree believest thou ? thou shalt see greater things than these " ; xx. 29 
 (R.V. txt and A.V.) "Because (on) thou hast seen me thou hast 
 believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen and [yet] have 
 believed" (R.V. marg. "hast thou believed]"); xiv. 1 (R.V.) " Ye 
 believe (marg. Believe) (Trio-revert) in God : believe (irKjrevere) also 
 
 2 j? 
 in me . 
 
 [2237] The following facts bear on the last (xiv. 1) of these 
 ambiguous instances. The meaning of the ambiguous form of the 
 2 pers. pi. in -ere, when it may be (theoretically) either interrogative 
 or affirmative or imperative, is largely determined by special custom. 
 ®e\ere, (3ov\ea6e, ooKelre, would naturally be interrogative, "Do ye 
 desire?" "Think ye?" 'AKovere and iSXerrere would naturally be 
 imperative, "Hear ye," "See ye." Apart from such special custom, 
 the ordinary meaning of -ere would be — where the context does not 
 decide otherwise — affirmative in classical Greek, because the ititer- 
 rogative force, if intended, might have been expressed by an interrogative 
 particle, and because the imperative might (in many cases) be 
 expressed by the unambiguous aorist, e.g. mo-revo-are*. 
 
 birthday feast send (?) fish (d>\f/dpia) (sic) (edd. delicacies)... and an artaba of wheaten 
 bread"; and Oxyr. 531 roh b\papiois e'^XXafas ^uas (?) "you won me over by the 
 fish (edd. dainties)." The editors add that certain "cloaks" mentioned in the 
 context may have been "in exchange for the b\J/apia.^ Either interpretation would 
 be compatible with the rendering "fish." Possibly, as "pickles" with us means 
 "pickled (vegetables)," so the three Greek words above mentioned came to mean 
 in certain localities, "[/ish] for eating [with bread]," but different terms may have 
 been applied to different kinds of fish, fresh, salt etc. Oxyr. l^ap. 736 perhaps 
 resembles Jn xxi. 5 — 9 in using 1st npoo<t>a,-)iov and 2nd b\p<xp<.oi> to mean nearly 
 the same thing. But in Jn the word may have a symbolic meaning (2703). 
 
 1 [2236^;] This is much more frequent in Jn than in the Synoptists, e.g. xiii. 6 
 ffi'i fxov vlwTfis roiis 7ro5as; " Thou dost wash my feet ! " 
 
 2 [2236/'] i. 50 "On elirbv aoi on elSbv oe vwokoltw t?i$ o-vKr/s Triorevets; fieli'dJ 
 rovrwv 6\f/r], xx. 29 "On ewpaK&s fie TreirlarevKa's : fj.aKa.pioi 01 /.'A] ISbvres ko.1 
 irtorevoavTis, xiv. 1 Trio-revere et's rbv debv, ko\ eh (fue mo-revere, marg. Trto-reOere, 
 th rbv Oebv Kal els ifJ.? wiarevere. 
 
 :| [2237 « ] The unambiguous aorist imperative, though theoretically somewhat 
 different in meaning, differs sometimes little (in practice) From the present 
 
 l"l 
 
INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES [2240] 
 
 [2238] riio-Tei'cTe is certainly imperative twice in Mark 1 and 
 thrice in John 2 (apart from the instance (xiv. i) under discussion). 
 St Paul's exhortation to the jailor in the Acts, "Believe in the Lord 
 Jesus 3 " is in the singular besides being in the unambiguous aorist. 
 But it reminds us how frequent would be the plural imperative use 
 of the verb among evangelists during the period of numerous 
 conversions in the early Church. 
 
 [2239] On the other hand, Tnarevere occurs in Matthew's version 
 of Christ's words previous to His healing two blind men — theoretically 
 capable of meaning "Believe" or "Believe ye?" or "Ye believe \_I 
 suppose" — before the words "that I am able to do this 4 ." Here 
 it might have been plausibly argued that Jesus used the imperative 
 to stimulate their faith, as He stimulates that of Jairus ("Be of good 
 cheer, only believe 5 "): but this would be incompatible with the 
 answer of the blind men, "Yea, Lord," which necessitates in ttio-tcvctc 
 a meaning either directly interrogative ("Do ye believe?") or 
 indirectly ("Ye believe [I assume before going further]?"). The 
 latter is frequently used in English {e.g. "You will come with me?" 
 "You will come with me, then?" for "You will come with me [will 
 you not?]"). 
 
 [2240] This last disconcerting instance from Matthew shews the 
 difficulty and the danger of laying down a rule including all books 
 of N. F. Each writer may have his own usage. But the usage of 
 John (and of Mark, with whom John curiously agrees in some idioms) 
 makes it probable that in the third Johannine instance above quoted 
 (xiv. i) TTiareveTe is imperative, "Believe in God,... fi ." 
 
 imperative. Comp. Mk v. 36 irlcrtve — Lk. viii. 50 iriaTevoov, and Sir. ii. 6 
 ■Kiartvcov avrf, ii. 8 ■m.rjTe'uaa.Te avrw, xi. i\ wlareve ry Kvpiy, with little apparent 
 difference of meaning. Some writers may be more strict than others in dis- 
 criminating between the two. Moreover, in particular verbs, e.g. Hpxo/Mxi, trie use 
 of the present and of the aorist imperative may vary according to special circum- 
 stances (2438^). 
 
 1 Mk i. 15, xi. 24. 2 Jn xii. 36, xiv. 11 {bis). 
 
 3 Acts xvi. 31 irLarevaov. 4 Mt. ix. 28. 
 
 5 Mk v. 36, Lk. viii. ,^o. Comp. Mk xi. 24 "whatsoever ye pray... believe 
 (iricrTeveTe) that ye have received them." 
 
 K [2240a] Chrys. ad loc. says, "ILiffTetiere...ical els ep.€ TrttfTetfere." tovt4<jti, 
 irdura. TrapeXeutrerai ra dava (Cramer, wavTa (p-qal irapeKOfiu 8eirai (?) to. deiva). 
 'H yap ei's e/j.e Triaris kclI t6v yeyevvTjuoTa SwarcjT^pa rCiv etnbvTWv iari (Cramer 
 rvyxdva) xai ovdtv edaei. KpaTrjaou tCjv dvax e P 1 ^"'- On this Erasmus says that it 
 favours the rendering "Creditis in Deum et in me credit! s. Atque ita legisse 
 
 195 J 3— 2 
 
[2241] INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES 
 
 [2241] The other two instances (i. 50, xx. 29) differ from the 
 third, and agree together, in being preceded by a protasis with 
 suspensive on ("Because I said unto thee...," "Because thou hast 
 seen..."): and this leads us to ask what is John's usage after other 
 Johannine instances of suspensive on. We shall find that there are 
 four, and that the verb in the apodosis is always affirmative 1 . This 
 turns the scale in favour of an affirmative in i. 50 and xx. 29 
 "Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig-tree, thou 
 believest*." "Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed' 2 : !" 
 
 [2242] Similarly in the Acts, Paul says to Agrippa "Thou 
 believest (7rtcrTcveis) the prophets [is it not so?]," and goes on to 
 add the answer to this suggested question, "I know that thou 
 believest 3 ," and the Epistle of St James addresses a controversialist 
 ironically thus, "Thou (emph.) (av) [of course] believest that there 
 is one God 4 ?" — assuming, before the writer goes further, that this 
 must be so, but putting the assumption as an affirmation with an 
 interrogative tone. In the Fourth Gospel, 7rto-Tcrj£is is used by 
 Jesus to Martha, "thou believest this [is it not so?] 5 ," and, with 
 
 videtur ex interpretatione sua Chrysostomus, quasi Jicfes quam habebanl. . .illis abunde 
 prsesidio esset. " But might it not be consistent with an imperative rendering: 
 "Be not troubled. Continue to believe.... That is to say, Your tenors will all pass 
 away. For the belief in me and in the Father is stronger than your enemies"? 
 Erasmus says that Cyril interprets both verbs imperatively. SS and a have 
 "creditc.et creditis," i.e. "believe in God and then ipso facto ye will believe in 
 me"; but if this had been the meaning, would not Jn have written "the Father" 
 (instead of "God")? The Vulgate and f have " creditis... credite " j Diatess., 
 Syr. (Walton), b, d, and e have "credite...credite." Erasmus enumerates four 
 possible interpretations (1) "creditis... credit is," (2) "credite...credite," (3) "creditis 
 ...credite," (4) "credite... creditis." To this may be added (5) (W.H. marg.), 
 "credite, in Deum et in me credite" taking the 1st irLa-revere absolutely; and possibly 
 (6) "creditis in Deum? Et in me credite," "Do ye believe in God? Then 
 believe also in me." The passage is one of the most conspicuous instances of 
 Johannine ambiguity. 
 
 1 Jn viii. 45, xiv. 19, xv. 19, xvi. 6, comp. Gal. iv. 6. 
 
 2 [2241 a J But the tone in i. 50, xx. 29 is quite different from that of ordinary 
 affirmation, e.g. xiv. 19 "Because (on) I live, ye also shall lire" where the 
 sentence ends and the reader rests on "shall live" as a natural consequence. In 
 the two instances above mentioned, the sentence goes on to a contrast, and there 
 is an implied exclamation: "Thou believes! |l>ut on how slight a ground]!" 
 "Thou hast believed [it is true, but not with the highest belief]!" 
 
 •'' Acts xxvi. 27. 
 
 4 [2242*/] Jas ii. 19. W.H. punctuate interrogatively, Mayor prefers an affir- 
 m.ition. The emph. aii seem-, to mean, ironically, "thou, the orthodox disputant." 
 
 5 xi. 26 "...he shall never die. Thou believest this?" 
 
 I96 
 
INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES [2243] 
 
 a different shade of meaning, crv irio-Tevzvi to the blind man : "He 
 [Jesus] said, Thou (emph.) believest in the Son of man 1 ." This 
 apparently refers to the preceding facts — to the blind man's defence 
 of Christ against the Pharisees, to his avowed belief in well-doing, 
 and to his confidence that " God heareth " those who do His righteous 
 will. If so, the meaning is, " Thou \I am sure] believest in the Son 
 of man 2 ," and there is little or nothing of the interrogative tone. 
 
 [2243] In xiii. 12 — although R.V. and A.V. agree in the inter- 
 rogative — "He said unto them, (R.V.) Know ye (yivcoo-Kere) what 
 I have done to you?" the imperative is somewhat more probable, 
 in view of xv. 18, "If the world hateth you, (R.V. marg.) know ye 
 (yivoWre) that it hath hated me..." (1901, 2665—7), i.e. "understand, 
 recognise, that the world hated me." The LXX usage rather favours the 
 imperative 3 . In any case, we could not explain yivwaKeTe in xiii. 12 
 
 * »*■ 35- 
 
 - [2242 /'] It may be said that Jesus could not have meant this, as the next 
 words of the blind man are "And who is he, Lord?" But it may be replied that 
 the blind man virtually believed in the ideal Son of man already, and that the 
 Logos was supposed by the evangelist to discern this belief even before the blind 
 man expressed it in the words (ix. 38) "I believe." 
 
 3 [2243a] Tivuo-KeTe does not mean "know" but "begin to know," "come to 
 know," "recognise." It is therefore quite different from eyvuiKare (which is probably 
 never imperatively used). Ytuwaisfre is imperatively used in the LXX, after eav 
 yap a-rroo-TpacprJTe, in Josh, xxiii. 13. It is also imperative in Dan. iii. 15, 3 Mace, 
 vii. 9 (and the sing, imperat. yivwuKe occurs in LXX 4 times) ; the only indicative 
 instances are either with vfiels inserted (Gen. xliv. 27) or in the phrase "Do ye 
 know so-and-so?" (Gen. xxix. 5, Tob. vii. 4). In the Synoptists, the imperative 
 and the indicative are about equally balanced. In 1 Jn ii. 29, yivdoaKere is taken 
 by Westc. as prob. inoperative, but by Lightf. (on Gal. iii. 7) apparently as 
 indicative. In 1 Jn iv. 2, the mood is doubtful, but taken by Westc. as indicative. 
 In Jn xiii. i«Nit is generally taken interrogatively; it certainly cannot be 
 affirmative. In'xiv. 7 and xiv. 17 it is preceded severally by aw' dpn and v/ieis 
 and is indicative. In Heb. xiii. 23 "know ye that our brother Timothy hath 
 been set at liberty," yivuxrKere is almost certainly imperative, and the only two 
 Pauline initial uses of the word (2 Cor. viii. 9 y. yap, Gal. iii. 7 7. &pa) indicate 
 that y. would seldom be placed at the beginning of a clause indicatively without 
 some word such as yap, apa, vpeis etc. to denote that the word is used affirmatively 
 or argumentatively, or to emphasize fact. Indeed, in one of these two passages 
 (Gal. iii. 7), R.V. txt and A.V. have the imperative. In Phil. ii. 22 tt\v oe 8oki/j.7]v 
 avrov ytvuiffKtTe, the verb is non-initial, and the meaning appears to be " Ye are 
 alive to his tried worth " (not quite the same as eyvuKare) : Chrys. paraphrases it 
 as v/xds avrol (v.r. avrbv) ewiaraade. But even there it is not certain that the 
 Apostle is not bespeaking respect for the somewhat retiring Timothy, whose quiet 
 unselfish labours might fail to obtain due recognition even from those who (like 
 the Philippians) were familiar with them: "For all seek their own interests, not 
 
 197 
 
[2244] INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES 
 
 like Trio-TeviTe above, as '• Ye know [do ye noff\? And the rendering, 
 "Understand the meaning of what I have done to you," makes 
 excellent sense. Origen (ad loc.) allows both renderings. 
 
 [2244] In two instances, a conditional clause ("if. ..as you cannot 
 deny") prepares the way for something incongruous with that 
 condition, which incongruity is expressed by an interrogative or 
 exclamation of amazement: vii. 23 "If circumcision is received on 
 the sabbath — [in the face of that fact] are ye angry with me (ifxol 
 XoXuTe) for healing on the sabbath?" x. 35 — 6 "If he called them 
 gods... and the Scripture cannot be broken — [in the face of that fact] 
 do ye (emph.) (ifxeis) say (Xeyere), Thou blasphemest?" Here the 
 emphatic "ye " means " ye the guardians and interpreters of Scripture." 
 Only under special circumstances could v/xas Ae'yere, "ye (emph.) 
 say," at the beginning of a clause, be used interrogatively. 
 
 [2245] An interrogative or exclamatory tone may be suggested 
 by initial words that imply incongruity or the need of explanation, 
 "From Nazareth can any good thing come 1 !" "Thus answerest thou 
 the High Priest 2 !" "Your king am I to crucify 8 !" " Our fathers 
 worshipped in this mountain, and [yet] (2136) ye say (u/xei? Aeye-rc) 
 that in Jerusalem is the place 4 !" Thus, an initial av A.e'yei?, where 
 there is no incongruity between the person and the utterance, would 
 naturally mean "thou (emph.) sayest"; but an incongruity would 
 make all the difference, e.g. "Dost thou [the General] say, 'Flee'?" 
 "Dost thou [the Priest] say, 'Murder'?" Also such a sentence as 
 "From thyself sayest thou this or did others say it to thee?" may be 
 
 those of Jesus Christ. But as for his tried worth, I would have you recogiiise it, 
 because, like child with father, he did laborious service with me for the Gospel." 
 It must be borne in mind that the pres. imper. yivwaKcre "be recognising,'" "try 
 to recognise," would naturally be distinguished from yvtorc "recognise [once for 
 all]," by a careful writer (2437 -9). 
 
 [2243 />] In Euripides, ylvuiaKt freq. means "recognise [the facts of life etc.],"' 
 Inns fr. xxi. 1 y. TavOpuweia (coin p. Hec. 227, Ale. 418, Hel. 1257) whereas 7. in 
 2nd pers. indie, does not occur except interrog. Her. 630. Also, in Xenophon 
 and Lucian, the imperat. ylvwoKe (Steph.) is freq., especially in the phrase ovtoj 
 ylvuxjKt "make up your mind to this," which Lucian has 111 2nd pers. pi. (i- 337, 
 Pluto § 1) " Make up your mind to this that I shali not stop for a moment (oOtu) 
 ywuicTKeTe dis ouoe iravcrofj-^vov /xov)." Clem. Alex. 759 quotes the Preaching of 
 Peter thus, Ilifrpos b> t£ Krjpuy/xaTi \iyei, YivuxTKere ovv on efs 6e6s i<rrw..., which 
 can hardly be otherwise than imperative. 
 
 1 i. 46. 2 xviii. 22. :l xix. 15. 4 iv. 20. 
 
 I98 
 
INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES [2246] 
 
 interrogative, a question being suggested by the words "from thyself" 
 followed by the alternative "or from others 1 ?" 
 
 [2246] In xvi. 32, a contrast is implied between ap-rt, "at the 
 present moment" and the "hour" that "is coming and hath come" 
 (1915 (i) foil.). 'I<W here, as in the only other Johannine instance 
 where our Lord uses it, is almost equivalent to the Greek Se, "but 2 ." 
 As in the First Epistle to the Corinthians (" For the moment (dpTi) 
 we see through a mirror darkly but then face to face 3 ") so here, the 
 antithesis, having an affirmative in the second clause, requires us to 
 suppose an affirmative in the first clause also, thus, " For the moment 
 (apTt) [indeed] ye believe, [but] behold the hour cometh...vvhen ye shall 
 be scattered every man to his own." This rendering agrees with 
 xvi. 27 "Ye have believed''' and xvii. 8 "They [have] believed." Our 
 Lord recognises that the disciples did really and truly " believe." 
 They had said, however, too confidently (xvi. 30) "Now (at last) 
 (vvv) we know... herein we believe" ; to which Jesus replies, in effect, 
 " Do not say Nozv at last, say rather, For the moment. Ye believe for 
 the moment, but the impending hour of trial will dissipate your 
 belief." 
 
 1 [2245 a] xviii. 34 'Att6 aeavrou crv tovto \eyei$, 7} aXXoi elirov croi irepl e/xov ; 
 This is clearly interrogative. But in xviii. 37 — in answer to Pilate's second 
 question, "Well then, thou art [it seems] a king}" — -when Jesus replies 2.v \eyeis 
 on patrtXevs elfju, there is no reason to suppose that this is interrogative (as it 
 is punctuated in W.H. marg.). A distinction is clearly drawn between " the 
 king of the Jews" and "a king." The former our Lord puts aside with contempt 
 as a question dictated by "others," i.e. the chief priests. The latter was of 
 a different kind. Everyone knew, even the boys in the streets of Rome, that the 
 wise and virtuous philosopher claimed to be in some sense "a king," and the 
 Book of Revelation (Rev. v. 10) claims that the followers of Christ are to be 
 "kings and priests." To the latter, then, Christ assents in the words "thou 
 sayest that I am a king." Comp. Lk. xxii. 70 "Ye say that I am [a king]." 
 Mt. xxvi. 64 "Thou saidst [it]," <rv diras is parall. to Mk xiv. 62 eyw et'/xi. At 
 the same time it must be admitted that (2234 <^) the use of ci) Xiyeis, outside N.T. 
 (so far as Wetstein's evidence goes) generally implies bad tidings. It is a phrase 
 that might be explained (as a saying of Christ) by various contexts. In the 
 bringing of bad news, it means (1) "Thou sayest this [not /]" ; but where there 
 is no bad news, it might mean (2) "Thou [of thyself] sayest this, unprompted 
 by others." Jn combines (r) with (2) taken interrogatively. 
 
 " [2246 a] Jn iv. 35 "Do not ye say...? Behold, I say unto you," i.e. "Ye 
 are in the habit of saying, 'The harvest is coming.' But I tell you it is come." 
 There, the first clause is, in effect, not a question, but the Hebraic interrogative 
 (comp. "Is it not written?" etc.), which is a Greek affirmative. 
 
 3 [2246^] 1 Cor. xiii. 12. "Apri is contrasted (Jn xiii. 7) with /xera ravra, 
 (xiii. 37) with a preceding vcrepov, and (xvi. 12) with a preceding hi. 
 
 199 
 
[2247] INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES 
 
 [2247] In almost all the instances of affirmative, or exclamatory 
 interrogation, it would be better for an English translator to imitate 
 the Greek by leaving the sentence affirmative so far as concerns the 
 words, trusting to context and punctuation to suggest the interrogative 
 tone: " Thou (emph.) washest my feet!" If this were done, many 
 sentences would be left less definite than in our R.V., but they would 
 be closer to the meaning of the original. 
 
 (iii) Questions without interrogative particle 1 
 
 [2248] The list of interrogative sentences in the footnote 
 appended to this section will be limited to those that have no 
 interrogative particle. Some have been discussed under ko.1 meaning 
 "and yet" (2136 — 45). In iii. io, oi is in such a context that 
 it might possibly be called an interrogative particle, "Thou art the 
 teacher of Israel; and [yet] dost thou not know this?" But on the 
 other hand the whole of the sentence may be regarded as 
 exclamatory, and oi as merely equivalent to alpha privative (" The 
 teacher of Israel. ..and ignorant of this!"). Hence the instance is 
 included below-. The dozen or more of interrogatives with oi are 
 excluded as they do not throw light on ambiguity 3 . 
 
 1 [2248 «] These are punctuated as in W. H. But in the preceding remarks, 
 reasons have been given for punctuating many of them differently. Greek has 
 no note of exclamation. That being the case, an editor of N.T. has to choose 
 between two defective representations, a note of interrogation or a full stop. 
 
 2 [2248/0 In vii. ro, (R-V.) "Did not M. give you the law, and [yet] none 
 of you doeth the law?" is prob. preferable to W.H.'s text, which ends the 
 question at "give you the law," and makes the following words a statement. 
 In vii. 35, R.V. ("Whither will this man go that (otl) we shall not find him?") 
 gives the impression of meaning "so that we shall not find him." But that is 
 not the meaning of the Greek. Jesus had previously said (vii. 34) " Ye. ..shall 
 not find me." The Jews now say in consequence "Where is he going? For 
 {according to his account'] Ion) we shall not find him." The initial on. means 
 "{We say tAt's] because" or "for" and introduces the reason for asking "Where 
 i> he going?" (2179). 
 
 :i [2248c] i. 21 ■fipdiTTjaav clvtov Ti ovv ; [<rt>] 'H. d: (marg. T: ovvav; 'H. «;)... 
 '0 it i>o<pT)TT)i tlov; i. 46 direv ai'rw X., E\ X. ovvarai ti ayadbv elvai; i. 50 turev 
 avrco "On elwbv vol otl elbbv ae vttok&tco ttJs crvKrjs iruTTeveis ; ii. 20 e lirav... If acre- 
 P&kovto. Kai ££ Zrtaiv olkoOolltiDij 6 yaos orroj, Kai crv ev Tpiciv j)txepaLS eyepeis avrbv; 
 iii. 10 direv ainw 2i> el 6 5i5d<TKa\os tov T. Kai ravra ov ytvwffKeis; v. 6 \tyei...Qe'\eis 
 vyir)S yevioOai ; vi. 6l elirev...'TovTo v/xas o-KavOa\ii'ei; edv ovv dfwprjre... ; vii. 23 
 el nepiTO/J.r]v \a/x[3dvei...'iva /U17 \vdrj 6 vopos MajiWws, epLoi x°^°- Tf 0Tl ^°" a-vDpioirov 
 iiyiri ewoirioo, iv aaf-ijidTip ; viii. 57 dirav ...wevTT)KOvTa trr) oifirw !x e ' s Kal x - 
 ewpaKas; ix. 19 ripJirrjcrav avrovs \iyovres Ovt6s eoTLV 6 vlbs iifJMV, 6v bfteis Xtyere 
 
 200 
 
INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES [2250] 
 
 (iv) Indirect interrogative 
 
 [2249] This is rare in John. He prefers the direct interrogative 
 even where it involves such a repetition as (xiii. 24) "Simon Peter 
 beckoneth to him and saith to him, 'Say Who is it? about whom he 
 saith [this],' " where many mss. have (A.V.) "beckoned to him that he 
 should ask who it should be {iwdkaQai tl<s av ei'77)," an alteration made 
 (no doubt) for style. But he uses the indirect form in two passages 
 as follows. 
 
 [2250] (1) vii. 16 — 17 "My teaching is not mine but [is the 
 teaching] of him that sent me. If any man have a will to do his 
 will, he shall know concerning the teaching, whether (-n-oTepov) it is 
 from God, or \j.vhether\ I am speaking from myself" lloTepov is not 
 found elsewhere in N.T. 1 But it is here used deliberately to 
 prepare the way for the weighty statement of an alternative that 
 might at first sight seem superfluous — " speaking from oneself" Why 
 is not John content to say "He shall know if [i.e. whether^ it is from 
 God 2 ," and there to stop? The answer is, that John desires to 
 emphasize " speaking from oneself " 2s being a crime. Some might 
 urge that, according to the Synoptists, Christ taught "with 
 authority," and that, in the Sermon on the Mount ("Ye have heard 
 that it hath been said to them of old. ..but I say") He "spake from 
 
 otl TixpXbs eyevvr)drj; ix. 34 tlwav . . .' Ei> dfiapTlais av eyevvr)6rfs oXos, KcU av 
 diodaKeis rffids; ix. 35 elireu 2i) irtaTeveis els tov vVov tov dvdptbirov; x. 35 — 6 el 
 eKeivovs elwev deovs,...6i> 6 warr/p y)y iaaev... vfiels Xeyere Sri BXaatprjfiets 8tl elwov 
 vlbs tov Oeov elfu; xi. 8 Xeyovaiv . . .'Papfiei, vvv e^rjTovv ae XiOdaai ol 'lovSaloi, Kai 
 7rd\tc virdyeis e/cet; xi. 26 ov fir) airoddvy els tov alQva- marei/eis tovto; xiii. 6 
 Xtyei.^Kvpie, av fiov virrTeis tovs 7r65as; xiii. 12 elrrev ...YivtbaneTe (2243) tL 
 irewolriKa vfiiv ; xiii. 37 — 8 ttiv ^vxw fiov virep aov 6r)aw. drroKplveTai 'Irjaovs 
 Trji> ipvxriv aov virep ifiov Orjaeis ; xiv. 9 Xeyet.. .ToaovTov XP 0V0V I 160 VfiGiv elfil Kal 
 ovk ^yvuiKas fie, <$L\iwire; xvi. \g elTrev...llepi tovtov fyrelre fier dXXrfXuv qti 
 elrrov...; xvi. 30 — 1 maTevofiev on drrb 6. ei;r)Xdes. drreKpidri avTols 'I. "Apr: 
 TriaTtvere; xviii. 22 eliruv Ovtojs diroKplvri t<£ dpxiepel; xviii. 33 etrrei' . . .2i» el 
 
 ftaaiXevs tQv 'lovoaiwv; xviii. 34 dTreKpidr)... Awb aeavrov av tovto Xeyeis rj dXXol 
 elrrov aoi rrepl ifiov; xviii. 37 drr eKpl8r]...1,v Xiyeis 6tl j3aaiXevs eifii; (so marg. but 
 text, affirmative), xviii. 39 fiovXeade ovv dwoXvaw vfj.li> tov /3. tQv 'I.; xix. 15 
 Xeyei...Tov [jaaiXe'a vfiwv aTavpwaoj; xx. 29 Xeyei... "Qti ewpaKas fie rrerrlaTevKas ; 
 xxi. 15 Xeyei.,.^,i/iwi> 'Iwdvov, dyarras fie irXeov tovtwv; xxi. 16 Xeyei... ~Z.Lp.wv 
 Iwdvov, dyarras fie; xxi. 17 Xeyet... Zifiwv 'ludvov, (piXeis fie; 
 
 1 [2250 a] In LXX, it occurs only in Job, and there always (12 times) in 
 direct interrogation. 
 
 2 Comp. Jn ix. 25 "If (i.e. whether) (el) he is a sinner I know not," also 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 16 etc. 
 
 20I 
 
[2251] INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES 
 
 himself." John represents Christ as affirming, some seven or eight 
 times 1 , that He is not sent "from himself," and that He neither says 
 nor does anything "from himself." Not even the Holy Spirit speaks 
 "from itself 8 ." The spontaneous or originating power of the Son, 
 and of the Spirit, springs from the Father, or from the Son in union 
 with the Father. To do anything "from oneself" in this Johannine 
 sense— that is, apart from the fountain head of life, order, and 
 harmony — is always evil 3 . 
 
 [2251] (2) x. 6 "This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they 
 understood not what things they were that he spake unto them 
 [IkCivoi Se ovk lyi'wcrav rivo. r)v a eAdAei aurois)." The apparently 
 superfluous words in "what things they were that" (instead of "what 
 things" or "the things that") are intended to emphasize the absolute 
 ignorance of the persons addressed 4 . Jesus had been "talking 
 (AaAew)" about a shepherd that rules the flock with his voice and not 
 by coercion. Those whom He was addressing had no conception of 
 ruling except by Law and punishment. The evangelist might have 
 expressed this by the phrase used in the First Epistle to Timothy 5 , 
 "did not understand about what things (irepi tuw) " Christ was 
 teaching. But John wishes to say more, namely, that the very 
 language was foreign to them. It might as well have been Iberian or 
 Gallic. The thought must be compared with that in viii. 43 "Why 
 do ye not understand my speech (AaAiai/) ? Because ye are not able 
 to hear my Word (a«ov€tv t6v \6yov Tor kp,6v)" i.e. ye have not the 
 spiritual sympathy that would give you a key to my language 6 . 
 
 1 v. 30, vii. 17. 18, 28, viii. 28, 42, xii. 49, xiv. 10. 
 
 2 xvi. 13. 
 
 3 [2250 /'J It is worth noting how indignantly Pilate — a mere puppet in the 
 hands of the chief priests, whose charge against Jesus he at first assumes to be 
 true (xviii. 33), instead of first attempting to ascertain whether it is true — disowns 
 the notion suggested to him by Jesus that he is not speaking "from himself" 
 (xviii. 34 " sayest thou this/rom tliysclfV). 
 
 * I 2251 <i] In vi. 64 i)8ei yap eif apxns '\t]<tovs rivts dalv oi wtj ntarevovres Kai 
 Ws {(ttiv 6 irapaoibawv avrdv, the meaning is that Jesus could distinguish from the 
 c rowd of apparent believers the real non-believers and even the future traitor— not 
 that He knew all about them. "From the beginning" may mean "from the 
 time when the Gospel "l the Cross began to be preached publicly in Capernaum, 
 when Bchism and desertion first appeared among the disciples " (see 2254). 
 
 • 1 Tim. i. 7. 
 
 8 [2251 /'| AaXtd occurs, elsewhere in X.T., only in Mt. xxvi. 73 " thy [C.alilaean] 
 dialect," J 11 iv. 42 "thy talk," i.e. the talk of the Samaritan woman. In classical 
 
 202 
 
MOOD [2253] 
 
 Mood 
 
 (i) Imperative, Indicative, Infinitive and Subjunctive, see 
 Index, also Tense (in Contents) p. xxi. 
 
 (ii) Optative 
 
 [2252] The optative mood is practically non-existent in the 
 Gospels except in Luke. For example, the optative of ylv^adai 
 occurs in Lk. (2), and that of elvat in Lk. (7), but neither of these 
 occurs in Mk, Mt., J11. In Jn xiii. 24 the v.r. irvOio-Oai ti's oV tl-q (not 
 in W.H.) is a corruption. In Mark, the forms iv. 29 jrapaSoi, v. 43 
 and ix. 30 yvol, viii. 37 801 are subjunctive: but xi. 14 xapirov cWyoi 
 has a true optative corresponding to Mt. xxi. 19 Kapw6<; yivrjTai. 
 Compare 2 S. i. 2 1 /xt; KaTafirj Spocros, B (caTa/3oi, A KaTafirjTu), and 
 Deut. xxxiii. 24 "let him be," LXX co-rat; also Oxyr. Pap. 742 "va 
 7T(tAiv <£[i]Aos rjjxtiv Trapabot. 
 
 Negative Particles 
 
 (i) M^ 
 
 [2253] In later Greek, fxrj encroached on ov, especially in 
 connexion with participles 1 . In John, paq for ov is not so frequent 
 
 Gk \a\ew means "talk freely," as at table, or in one's family, or in gossip 
 abroad. In N.T., it means "talk freely," sometimes in bad sense, 1 Tim. v. 13, 
 Jude 15, 16 or with suggestion of bad sense ; but much more often of the free and 
 public proclaiming of the truth of the Christian Gospel, as freq. in the Acts and 
 the Pauline Epistles, and also of spiritual song and prophecy. Hence John — who 
 deprecates the view that Christ taught secretly or privately — uses this word more 
 freq. than Mk and Lk. taken together, and assigns it to Christ 33 times in the 
 first person, whereas it is never thus used by any Synoptist (exe. Lk. xxiv. 44, 
 after the Resurrection). Comp. In xviii. 20 "I have spoken freely to the world 
 and in secret spake I never (lit. nothing)." The word is used in Mk xiii. 11, 
 Mt. x. 19, to represent the unpremeditated speech that was to flow from the 
 disciples (when put on their defence before kings and rulers) under the influence 
 of the Holy Spirit, when they would not speak " from themselves" but the Spirit 
 would speak for them. That exactly represents the Johannine use of AaXe'w when 
 used by Jesus concerning His own teaching. 
 
 1 [2253a] Winer, p. 606 n. "In modern Greek the participle invariably takes 
 fir/" A striking instance of /jltj for ov is Mt. xi. 18 (Lk. vii. 33) y\dev yap T. 
 /x-fjre (Lk. fir)) eadlwv fxrire irlvwv , and Mt. xxii. 12 7rws ei<Tr]\6es w5e ju.tj ^x a "' &*" 
 Oiifxa ydfiou; Lucian (iii. 104 Indoct. §5) koX 6 Kvj3epvdu ovk eiSws /ecu 'nnreveiv /xt) 
 fiefxeXeTTiKuis is an excellent instance of the context that might in a few rare cases 
 cause 6 ov to be used, namely where 011 = alpha privative, '■'■absolutely ignorant of 
 steering and not having given much pains to riding." 
 
 203 
 
[2254] NEGATIVE PARTICLES 
 
 as in the Synoptists. But it is probable that vii. 15 "How doth this 
 man know letters not having learned (107 fxcfxaOrjKw^)?" does not 
 imply doubt as to the negation ("if as we are given to understand he 
 has not learned ") but means " being, as he is, one that has not 
 learned,"' "one of the illiterate class 1 ." In vii. 49 6 o^Ao? ovtos 6 /at/ 
 ytvwo-KOiv, John could not have used ov without limiting the assertion 
 to a particular crowd pointed out, whereas the meaning is "This 
 multitude [these and their like, this rabble] that knoweth not the law 
 are accursed." In iii. 18 "He that believeth not is already condemned 
 because he hath not believed (on /x?) 7r€7r<.'o-T€v/<ev)," the unbelief, 
 though implied as a fact, is stated, not as a fact, but as the ground 
 for condemnation, and the meaning "condemned for not having 
 believed " (2187) approximates to "pronounced guilty of not be- 
 lieving." See 2695. 
 
 [2254] The words of Christ, vi. 64 "There are among you some 
 that do not believe (elalv e£ vfx<2v rive? di ov 7ri(TTevovaiv) " are followed 
 by the comment "For Jesus knew from the beginning (lit.) who are 
 those that are not believing (tiVcs eurlv ot to) 7rto-Teuovres) and who 
 is he that shall betray him (kcu tis Icttlv 6 7rapa8ojcrwi' auYov)." It 
 had been previously stated, before any mention of Christ's preaching, 
 that many in Jerusalem, being impressed by His "signs," "believed" 
 in Christ after a fashion, in whom Christ Himself (ii. 24) did not 
 believe — presumably knowing that they did not really believe. 
 From the first, then, Christ had this power of distinguishing unreal 
 from real belief, so that He could answer with an affirmative the 
 question "Knowest thou who are they that do not really believe?" 
 But, since that time, the Twelve had been appointed and the Gospel 
 of the Bread of Life had been preached in Capernaum. And, from 
 the beginning of this Gospel, Judas (it would appear) had shewn 
 signs of his future treason. Here it is added that Jesus noted these 
 signs and knew to what they pointed. (See 2251 a.) We are not to 
 suppose, with some ancient Greek commentators, that "from the 
 beginning" means "from the foundation of the world 2 ." As to the 
 
 1 [2253/'] This utterance however takes place at Jerusalem, among strangers, 
 ii"! in .Nazareth or Galilee: and therefore it is not quite certain that the other 
 meaning i^ wrong. Winer (p. 607) quotes Philostr. A poll, iii. 22 5s koX ypd<pei fxi] 
 txadiiv ypafJi/nara. 
 
 - [2254</| Chrys. dvuOev, Cramer irpo KaTa(3o\iji kovixov. 'E£ apxys, "from the 
 beginning," is similarly used in xvi. 4, and air' dpxTJs in 1 Jn ii. 7, 24 etc. 
 
 204 
 
NEGATIVE PARTICLES [2256] 
 
 change from ov iriaTevovmv to p.rj TTLarevopres, it is what might have 
 been expected in consequence of the change from the indicative to 
 the participle. On x. 12 o...ovk wv 7rotyu.7/v, see 2704. 
 
 (ii) Ov p-TJ with Future and Subjunctive 
 
 [2255] Ov }*.■>] is comparatively rarely used with the future in N.T. 
 In John it occurs fourteen times with subjunctive 1 and thrice with 
 future, as follows : iv. 14 ov p.rj Saf/rjaei eh t. aiwva, vi. 35 6 ep)(6p.evo<; 
 7rpos ep,e ov p,y Tr£ivdo~7] k. 6 TTto-Tevwv eh ep,e ov /xr] oa^rjfrei tromoTe, 
 X. 5 aAAorpiw 8e ov /xrj d.KoXov6rjo-ovcriv d\\d <f>€v£ovTai. The second 
 instance (vi. 35) invites inquiry, in view of the parallel ire.iva.o-y and 
 Sii//??o-ei. But a review of N.T. usage indicates no settled or general 
 distinction of meaning. Compare Heb. viii. 12 ov p-y) /xvrja$u>, 
 quoting Jer. xxxi. 34 correctly, with Heb. x. 17 ov p.r) pLvrjo-8rjo-op.ai 
 quoting the same incorrectly: also Mt. xxiv. 35 ov p.r) -n-apeXOuio-iv 
 with parall. Mk xiii. 31 (W.H. marg.) ov p.i) Trape\evo-ovTai (W.H. 
 txt ora. ixr]) and parall. Lk. xxi. 33 ov pi) 7rape\evo-ovTat. In John's 
 three instances there occur severally (1) eis rbv aliZva, (2) irwwoTe, 
 (3) a following future (<f>cv£ovTai). These facts suggest that he had 
 in his mind an emphasis laid rather on futurity, than on certainty 
 (which would have been indicated by the subjunctive). 
 
 (iii) El oi 
 
 [2256] Et ov never occurs in John, as an undivided phrase, except 
 in antithesis (twice) v. 47, "If ye fail to believe (ov TTLarevere) his 
 writings how can ye [succeed in] believing my words," x. 37 "If I fail 
 to do {ov 7j-ou5) the works of my Father... but if I [succeed in] doing 
 them...." In both cases ou has the force of alpha privative, or 
 may be treated as part of a compound verb, the hypothesis being 
 positive but the compound verb negative. It is not the same as 
 a negative hypothesis ("except ye believe," "except I do"). In iii. 12 
 ov TTLo-TtveTe is divided from el, "If I have told you earthly things 
 and ye disbelieve (ov 71-10-7 eveTe)." 
 
 1 [2255 a] This includes xx. 25 ov fxr) iriGTevow, which, so far as the form is 
 concerned, might be future. On xi. 56 rl doKei 6fuv on ov /xtj ^Xdy... see 2184. 
 On xviii. 11 ov /xi] irioi see 2232. In the Pauline Epistles ov /xrj occurs only six 
 times: two of these instances are from LXX: one of the two (Gal. iv. 30) is in the 
 
 future. 
 
 205 
 
[2257] NEGATIVE PARTICLES 
 
 (iv) Ou...ov8€i's' 
 
 [2257] This particular phrase with the double negative, which 
 Mark frequently uses in narrative but only once (Matthew and 
 Luke never) in Christ's words 2 , John uses, never in narrative, but 
 frequently in Christ's words 3 . It is never ambiguous. 
 
 (v) Oi)T£...Ka( 
 
 [2258] This construction is of the nature of a Latinism in 
 3 Jn io "he neither himself (ovre auros) receiveth the brethren and 
 those that desire [to come] he hindereth," where the sentence is long 
 and periodic. It is quite different in Jn iv. 1 1 "Neither (oure) a bucket 
 hast thou — and the well is deep," where it is strange that more Greek 
 mss. have not adopted the obvious alteration introduced by D, ovSe, 
 "not even a bucket" (so too SS). But oirre...iccu is highly character- 
 istic of the style of the woman's talk, which is somewhat flighty, 
 passing from "neither bucket hast thou [nor rope to let doivn the 
 bucket]' — which she had at first in her mind — to the thought of the 
 "depth" of "the well." The construction is not alleged to occur 
 in N.T. outside these two passages (Winer p. 619, Westc. on 
 3 J" i°)- 
 
 [2259] In v. 37 — 8, R.V. punctuates "Ye have neither (ome) 
 heard his voice at any time, nor (ovt«) seen his form. And (W) ye 
 have not his word abiding in you," but W.H. better "Ye have 
 neither at any time heard his voice nor seen his form, and [as 
 a consequence, or, besides] ye have not his word abiding in you: 
 [I say this] because... ye believe not." Perhaps R.V. was influenced 
 by the supposition that "because ye believe not" introduced the cause 
 why the Word was "not abiding in them," but see 2178. "And," 
 introducing the consequence, or accompaniment, of two negations, 
 is perfectly regular; "nor" (in the place of "and not") would 
 not have expressed the meaning. 
 
 1 [2257 a] This does not include o6...o&k4ti, which does not occur in Jn but 
 occurs 6 times in Mk (in Mt. and I.k. once, parall. to Mk xii. 34) nor oidiv...oi 
 M-v, which is in Lk. x. 19. On oi...rts sec 2586^— £. 
 
 Mk 111. 27 ov Suvarai ovdds eh tt\v oiKlav...lcrxvpov ei<re\dwv...8iapTrd<rai.. 
 1 2257 /q Jn v. 10 ov dvvaTcu 6 vibs iroiclv d(p' eavrov ovb'tv, v. 22 ovde yap 6 
 Tro.Ti)[> Kpivei ovoeva, v. ^o ov SiVa^at eh/d; iroieiv dv' ifiavrod ovStv, vi. 63 7/ <ra/)£ ovk 
 w(pe\d ovdti>, viii. i,s iyw ov xpivu oiSiva etc. (about 12 times). It is also used in 
 the words of others, iii. 27, vi. 33 etc. Jn lias once oiSiiru oiSels in xix. 41 
 w>r)(iuov Kaiubv iv y ovbinw ovods r,v TeOeinhos, which resembles l.k. xxiii. 53 
 p-vri/xari XaijevTy ov ovk rjv ovdeis oOirw KeLp.ivos. 
 
 206 
 
NEGATIVE PARTICLES [2262] 
 
 (vi) Ov (or, |j.t|) combined with -n-ds 
 
 [2260] A distinction must be drawn between (i) ou...7ras, (2) ttS? 
 ...ov, and (3) ou Tras. The first two belong mostly to Hebraic, the 
 third— in which ttSs follows ov without any intervening word except 
 perhaps the verb "to be "--belongs mostly to Greek idiom. In (1) 
 and (2) the meaning of -5s is generally to be expressed by "any," in 
 (3) by "every." But in John a literal translation is sometimes 
 preferable as will be seen below. 
 
 [2261] In Hebrew, when "not" and "all" occur (as mentioned 
 above) in the same sentence, the "not" goes with the verb in 
 a manner unusual in Greek and English, (Gen. ii. 5) "all plants 
 of the field were not as yet," i.e. no plants yet existed; (Gen. iv. 15) 
 "for the not-smiting him of all finding him," i.e. that none finding 
 him should smite him; (Ex. xii. 16) "all work shall not be done" 1 etc. 
 The last sentence might well be understood to mean "all kinds 
 of work must not be done, but only the following": and, generally, 
 the Hebrew idiom might produce ambiguity, which we escape in 
 English and Greek by saying "not any (or, no) work" — and in Greek 
 sometimes by repeating the negative ("no work shall not be done"). 
 In the Synoptists, we have but few instances of either (1) ov...nas or 
 
 (2) 7TUS...OU". 
 
 [2262] In John's Gospel, and perhaps in the Epistle, there are no 
 instances of ou...7ras meaning "not any," but 7ras followed by ov 
 (or, fxrj) is very frequent in both. It is partly explained by the 
 writer's love of universal propositions, especially in connexion with 
 the Church ("all that thou hast given me," "every branch in me," 
 "everyone that believeth 3 "). These are connected mostly with 
 affirmatives, but (a) sometimes with negatives followed by affirma- 
 tives thus: iii. 16 "in order that everyone (iras) that believeth should 
 not (fxij) perish but should have eternal life," vi. 39 "in order that 
 
 1 [2261 a] Gesen. 482*7. Ex. xii. 16 Tlav Zpyov \arpevrov ov troi-qo-ere tv aureus, 
 tt\t)v bcra... Comp. Ex. xx. 10 ov woiricreis iv avrrj wdv Zpyov. 
 
 • [2261/5] See (i) oi'...7ras in Mk xiii. 20, Mt. xxiv. 22 "not.-.a^ flesh," 
 Lk. i. 37 " no\....aiiy word," (2) 7ras... ov in Mk vii. 18 rrdv...ov ovvarai, Mt. xii. 25 
 irdca . . . oiKia nepiffdeicra...ov aTadr/fferai (parall. Mk iii. 25 iav olKia.../j.epio'6rj, ov 
 dvvriaerai arrival), Lk. iv. 33 (pec). 
 
 a [2262a] In Is. xxviii. 16 "he that believeth," Heb. and LXX om. "all," 
 but Rom. x. 1 1 inserts it, thus, lias 6 Trio-revuv eir' avri3. Parallel passages in 
 Kings and Chronicles freq. differ in inserting or omitting Heb. " all " : and LXX 
 freq. differs similarly from Hebrew. 
 
 207 
 
[2263] NEGATIVE PARTICLES 
 
 everything that he hath given to me I should not (^) lose [aught] 
 from it but should raise it up": (6) sometimes with negatives implying 
 a negation of death or darkness, xi. 26 "everyone that liveth and 
 believeth in me shall surely not (ov fxij) die," xii. 46 "in order that 
 everyone that believeth in me may not (fx-rj) abide in darkness 1 ." 
 
 [2263] On the other hand, the Greek usage of ov ttS.<;, "not 
 everyone" is frequent in traditions that say, in different forms, what 
 the Lord says in the Sermon on the Mount, " Not everyone (ov ttSs) 
 that saith unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of 
 heaven 2 ." So in the Epistle to the Romans, "Not all that are from 
 Israel" are really Israel, "nor yet (ovoe), because they are the seed 
 of Abraham, are they all children " ; the Gospel was preached to 
 them "but not all hearkened 3 "; so to the Corinthians, "Not in all 
 [men] is knowledge," "Not with the most of them (ov/c lv toi? irXdoo-iv 
 avroiv, Clem. Alex, -n-aaiv auroTs) was God well pleased." And in the 
 Fourth Gospel Jesus says to the disciples (xiii. 10, 11, 18) "Ye are 
 clean but not all" "Not all of you are clean," " Not about you all do 
 I speak." Some uses of the phrase "not air may be derived from 
 Attic and colloquial Greek, as in the famous saying, familiar to us 
 through Horace, but Greek in origin, "The voyage to Corinth 
 is not every man's*." How naturally it might occur to evangelists 
 
 1 [2262 b] In the Epistle, the negation is sometimes a negation of truth, life, 
 light etc., ii. 21 "every lie is not of the truth," ii. 23 "everyone that denieth the 
 Son hath also not the Father (oOdi rbv varepa ?x f 'b" "*• 6 "Everyone that sinneth 
 hath not seen him " (antithetical to iii. 6 " Everyone that abideth in him sinneth 
 not"), iii. 10 "Everyone that doeth not righteousness is not of God," iii. 15 (lit.) 
 "Every murderer hath not eternal life" (a sentence hardly English, and certainly 
 not Greek, in form), iv. 3 "Every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God." 
 lias is followed, as in the Gospel, by negation of death, darkness etc. in 1 Jn iii. 6, 
 o, v. 18. In 1 Jn ii. 16 "everything that is in the world" is separated from " is 
 not from the Father" by an intervening appositional clause — "the desire of the 
 flesh and the desire of the eyes and the vain glory of life." To the negations of 
 good may be added 2 fn 9 "Everyone that. ..abideth not in the teaching of Christ 
 hath not God." 
 
 - Mt. vii. 21. 
 
 3 [2263 a] Rom. ix. 6—7, x. 16, 1 Cor. viii. 7, x. 5. It is also used in 
 Ml. xix. 1 1 "Not all are capable of receiving this saying," 1 Cor. vi. 12 "not all 
 things an- profitable," x. 2;, "not all things are profitable... not all things edify." 
 In the two passages lasl quoted there is an antithesis to a previous "all," in "all 
 t/iings are lawful." And such an antithesis is generally implied in the Greek 
 idiom "[All may do that, but\ not all can do this." 
 
 1 [2263 /'| Lewis ami Short quote Aul. Gell. i. 8. 4 oi wavTos avSpbs els 
 K61UVO0V iffO' o w\oOs, and sec Steph. vi. 567 on iravrds (oti. 
 
 208 
 
NEGATIVE PARTICLES [2263] 
 
 failing to make converts, or finding converts relapse into unbelief and 
 hostility, is shewn by St Paul's prayer "that we may be delivered 
 from unreasonable and evil men; for the faith [of Christ] is not 
 the portion of all (ov yap tto-vtuiv rj ttlcttls) 1 ." 
 
 1 [2263 <] 2 Thess. iii. 2. This traditional use of ov irdvTes to describe the 
 falling away of Israel after the flesh, and the defection of converts, and the 
 practical failure of mere professors, may have a bearing on the difficult and 
 doubtful Johannine utterance about "antichrists" in 1 Jn ii. 19 "They went out 
 [at first (but see 2110 a— b) as our soldiers] belonging to our camp (lit. from us, 
 e£ 7]fj.wv) : but they were not [really] belonging to our camp ; for, if they had been 
 [really] belonging to our camp they would have remained on our side {fxe/j.ei>r}Keio-av 
 &v fied' riixuiv) : but [their not remaining was foreordained] in order that they 
 might be manifested [shewing] that not all are (or, they are not all) belonging to 
 us (d\\' tva. (pav(poj6i2(nv otl ovk eiaiv iravres it, rjfxwv)." 
 
 [2263 d] Westcott paraphrases this, "that they may be made manifest that 
 they are not, no not in any case, however fair their pretensions may be, of us." 
 The words I have italicised indicate that he takes the negation as universal, "not 
 any of them." He gives, as a reason, that "when the iras is separated by the 
 verb from the ov, the negation according to the usage of the New Testament 
 is always universal." This is true; but does it apply when the verb is elvai, and 
 in such a writer as John, who nowhere else uses the Hebraic ov...iras? If, for 
 example, John had written in xiii. 1 1 ovk eare iravres Kadapoi (instead of oi>xl 
 ir. k. eare) should we have translated this, "Ye are not any of you clean"? I am 
 disposed to think that 1 Jn ii. 19 does not afford a unique instance of the Hebraic 
 ov...iras, and that the words refer to the departure of "Israel after the flesh," 
 and of other temporary converts, very much as the Epistle to the Romans mentions 
 it. If so, there is a confusion between (1) (pavepwOuaiv 6tl ovk elolv il- ij/mlov, and 
 (2) (pavepudrj otl ov iravres [oi SoKOvvTes] elalv e£ ij/xcov. One thought is "they 
 were not really ours"; another, "not all that seem to be ours are really ours." 
 Origen illustrates the "going out" of Judas by the "going out" in the Epistle. 
 Now concerning Judas it is said in the Gospel "not all of you are clean," and 
 "not all" is repeated in this connexion. This seems to confirm the view that 
 "not all" in the Epistle is similarly used as meaning that "many are called 
 but not all chosen." 
 
 [2263 £ ] In viii. 35 " the slave doth not abide in the house for ever (6 5e dov\os 
 ov /xtvei iv ry olklo. eis tov alGva)," if we are to adopt here the meaning of 01' (or 
 fx-q, /xTj/ce'rt etc.)... els tov aluva everywhere else in N.T. (Mk iii. 29, xi. 14, Mt. xxi. 19, 
 Jn iv. 14, viii. 51, 52, x. 28, xi. 26, xiii. 8, 1 Cor. viii. 13) it should mean "never." 
 Then the sentence would mean "The slave, e.g. Ishmael, shall never {be allowed 
 to] abide permanently in the house" with allusion to the tradition quoted by St Paul 
 (Gal. iv. 30, " cast out the handmaiden and her son"). The preceding words are 
 " everyone that doeth sin is a slave [of sin]," but SS, D, b, and Clem. Alex, omit 
 "of sin," which may be a gloss added to explain "slave." With this omission, 
 the whole may be paraphrased, "Whosoever doeth sin is not a son but a slave. 
 Now the slave, who is not under grace but under law and constraint, has no 
 abiding-place, and never shall have, in the family of the Father." 
 
 [2263/] The following words, "But the Son abideth for ever [in the house 
 of the Father], if therefore the Son shall free you, ye shall be really free," may 
 
 A. VI. 209 14 
 
[2264] NEGATIVE PARTICLES 
 
 (vii) Ov, V. r. oinrw 
 
 [2264] In vii. 8 (R.V. txt and W.H. txt) "I go not up yet to 
 this feast," the reading, 'T go not up to this feast" is very strongly 
 supported. W.H. and R.V. place it in their margin, and it is now 
 confirmed by SS. Porphyry 1 attacked Christ for the change of 
 purpose implied (by "go not up") in this passage, when contrasted 
 with vii. io — 14 "then he also himself went ///...now about the 
 middle of the feast Jesus went up to the temple and began to teach." 
 Chrysostom and Ammonius the Elder (Cramer) write apologetically 
 on it without any apparent knowledge of such a reading as ovirw". 
 It is almost incredible that ovttoj, if genuine — a reading that supplied 
 so obvious an answer to all objections — should have been unknown 
 to these commentators, and should have been supplanted in so 
 many versions and mss. by the difficult reading ov. 
 
 [2265] The explanation of "I go not up to this feast," and its 
 reconciliation with what follows, must be sought perhaps in the 
 
 be paraphrased, "But the son and heir, like Isaac the child of promise and grace, 
 abides for ever in the house : if therefore ye shall receive into your hearts the Son 
 of God and the Spirit of Sonship, then shall ye be really free, being freed from all fear 
 of being 'cast out,' and knowing that ye are the heirs and inheritors of the House." 
 If the positive " abideth for ever''' had preceded the negative " abideth not for 
 ever" it might have been argued (though not cogently) that in this particular place 
 " not. ..for ever " must be taken in an unusual sense because of antithesis. As it 
 is, there is no basis for any rendering except " never" for ov...els rbv alwva. 
 
 [2263^'] Cyril (Cramer ad loc.) explains ov p.£vei els t. aiwva by adding "for 
 he will hurry into the outer darkness (Spa/xelrai. yap as to e^wrepov ckotos)." 
 Ammonius says, 6 p.7] ptvuv els rbv alQva Kal ibaavrus fx^v <* 6 ' SovXbs ecrri rrj 
 <pvcrei...TrdvTa yap 5ov\a tov KTiaavros, p.evei 5£ els rbv aluva daavruis ^x 0JV ° ^' os 
 us <pvaei debs, where the punctuation is doubtful but the phrase "all things are 
 slaves of the Creator" suggests that he did not read "slave of sin." Chrysostom 
 (Migne) thrice drops els rbv aluva after ov pLevei and interprets the words "the 
 slave doth not abide for ever," as implying a "gentle casting down {iipe'p.a xara- 
 ftdWei) " of the things of the Law and the sacrifices prescribed by Moses (comp. 
 Heb. iii. 5 — 6). Perhaps he took the words to mean, "The slave [even though 
 he be faithful, as one of the prophets, or as Moses himself, is still below the son 
 and heir, and] does not abide [as the son abides] in the house." 
 
 1 Diet. Christ. Biogr. " Porphyrias," p. 442 a, referring to Jerome, Dial. c. 
 Pelag. ii. 17. 
 
 - 1 2264./] Migne prints a quotation from Chrys. ovk dvaSalvu &pn, and then 
 (punctuating thus) llws ovv, (f^aiv, dvi^T}, elirwv, Ovk dvafialvw; Ovk elirev Kaddirai;, 
 Ovk availuivw a\\a, 'Svv, direv, Tovriari., fieO' vp.wv, where apparently the writer 
 does not mean that Jesus said vvv, but that He meant vvv. In Cramer, this 
 appears, witli ovirw, thus, Avrbs be" ttCcs avifiri, (frqalv, elirwv, " eylc oi%w dvafiaivu — " 
 It is clear thai neither ovirw nor vvv nor dprt was a part of the text thus com- 
 mented on. 
 
 2IO 
 
NEGATIVE PARTICLES [2265 (i)] 
 
 Johannine view of Christ's "going up" to Jerusalem as a whole. 
 Two acts of this kind have been mentioned (ii. 13, v. 1), the first 
 of which excites jealousy, the second hostility, and (v. 18) a desire 
 to kill Him, in "the Jews." In view of this hostility, Jesus is 
 regarded as now contemplating a time when He will "go up" to 
 a feast and die, but this has not yet come: "I go not up to this 
 feast, because my time is not yet fulfilled." Accordingly, though He 
 goes up later, He does not "go up" to keep the feast as a whole, and 
 does not enter the temple till the middle of the week. Ammonius 
 the Elder says, fairly enough, "He has not contradicted His words 
 by His actions, for He did not go up to keep the feast 1 .." But some- 
 thing more is probably intended to be implied : "When my hour 
 has arrived, then and not till then shall I really go up to the feast " : 
 and we are also probably intended to think of Christ's habitual 
 language about "going up," meaning, to heaven, or to the Father. 
 
 (viii) CK^C 
 
 [2265 (i)] Ov^i presents nothing remarkable in ix. 9 aAXoi eXeyov 
 Ovx', aAAa ofxoios avrui ea-riv : for its use before a pause, and especially 
 
 1 [2265 a] Ammonius also adds that He went up "not with joy as is customary 
 ■with feast-goers." Joy was particularly characteristic of this feast, the feast of 
 Tabernacles. Some authorities have inserted "this" in Christ's words to His 
 brethren "Go ye up to this feast," and have substituted "the" later on, "I go not 
 up to the feast," or have inserted "this" in both clauses. The difference, though 
 subtle, is important: "Go ye up to the feast, as usual; I shall not go up to this 
 feast, but to another, before long, when the time will have arrived for what some 
 call death, but what I call going up to the Father." On Christ's uses of avaj3aivoj 
 elsewhere, see i. 51, iii. 13, vi. 62, xx. 17 where it is used of "going up to heaven." 
 
 [2265/^] The remaining instance of ava.j3a.Lvcj in Christ's words is x. r "He that 
 entereth not through the door into the fold of the sheep but goeth tip from some 
 other quarter (avafiaivojv dWaxodev) — that [man] is a thief and a robber." Beside 
 the literal meaning we are intended to think of the two kinds of "going up" 
 mentioned in the Bible. Rezin and Pekah (Is. vii. 1) "go up to Jerusalem" as 
 enemies. When our Lord said (Mk x. 33, Mt. xx. 18, Lk. xviii. 31) "Behold, 
 we go up to Jerusalem," He added, in effect, that He was to "go up " as a sacrifice. 
 John is probably alluding to these two kinds of "going up." Jews would contrast 
 Hezekiah, who (Is. xxxvii. 14) ""went up unto the house of the Lord " to supplicate 
 as a mediator, with the Roman Emperors, who exalted themselves and sat in the 
 temple of God, setting themselves forth as God (comp. 2 Thess. ii. 4) and who 
 said (Is. xiv. 13) "I will go up into heaven." 
 
 [2265c] The "door" is probably the door of service (not, as Chrys., the door 
 of the Scriptures). The Shepherd goes in by the same door as that "of the 
 sheep," making himself one with them not as a mere act of "voluntary humility,' 
 but to guide them and protect them; the "robber" prefers to "go up" by the 
 path of what men call "glory," to make himself "a mighty hunter" of men. 
 
 211 14 — 2 
 
[2266] NUMBER 
 
 before a pause followed by aXXd, is frequent in Greek and in N.T. 
 But neither N.T. nor the Thesaurus affords a parallel to the following, 
 xiii. 10 — ii, "ye (emph.) are clean but not all (dAA' ovyl -n-avTes) . . . 
 for this cause said he (lit.) that ' Ye are not all clean,' on, Ou^i Tarres 
 Ka.6a.poL co-re 1 ." Oi\i is so frequently interrogative that, if the last 
 tradition were found as a detached Logion of the Lord, we should 
 certainly render it (as in Heb. i. 14 ot^i 7ravr€s elcrlv Aen-oupyi/ox 
 7rviVjxara) "Are ye not all clean?" But in Numbers ("I shall see 
 him but not now") LXX has /cai oux 1 ' 2 , as John has in xiv. 22 17/uv... 
 Kal ovxi tw Koa-fjoo. Greek writers seem to have differed among them- 
 selves — and John seems to have differed from most — in the use of 
 ou^/ and its equivalents 3 . 
 
 Number 
 
 (i) Plural referring to preceding Singular 
 
 [2266] This occurs when the speaker passes from considering 
 a multitude as a whole to considering them as units, vii. 49 "This 
 multitude that knoweth not the Law — [they] are accursed," xv. 6 "If 
 anyone abide not in me he is at once cast out as the branch [from the 
 vine] (to KXr}fxa)...and they gather them {i.e. such branches, aird)," 
 xvii. 2 "In order that all (sing.) that thou hast given to him — to [all 
 of] them (avroU) he may give eternal life " (see 1919 foil, and 
 2417—20). 
 
 (ii) Plural Neuter with Plural Verb 
 
 [2267] This construction, which is rare in classical Greek, is also 
 rare in John. 'ETrepiao-evcrav is supported by BD against SAL (-o-ev) 
 in vi. 13 "[the fragments] that (a) superabounded," where the 
 previous mention of "twelve baskets," and the desire to emphasize 
 
 1 [2265 (i) a] In 1 Cor. x. 29 ffvveid-qcriv 5e Xe-yw ovx'i tt)v eavrov..., dWd folloios, 
 as also in Lk. i. 60 ovxi, <x\Xd KkyO-qatTai, xii. 51 ovxi. Xe^w v/juv, d\X' fj Siafiepia/xov, 
 Rom. iii. 27 ovxi, dXXa did i>6/j.ov irlarews. The anomaly here is that d\\d 
 precedes. Lk. xvii. 7 — 8 Tls...£pei...dW ovxi ipei.. .is interrogative. 
 
 - [2265 (i) />] Numb. xxiv. 17, LXX deifa avrui kclI ovxi vvv. representing the 
 Hel>. vaio by kcU. I have not found ovxi in the Egypt. Pap. Indices. 
 
 3 [2265 (i)< ] Steph. (v. 2351) shews that Xenophon regularly says Ovk, dXXd 
 whereas Epictetus says Oia dXXd. It has been shewn above (2231 ti ) that where 
 Mt. has ovxi interrog, the parall. Lk. sometimes differs. On the other hand where 
 Lk. xii. 51 has the negative o^x'i X^w iVtV, dXX' ij dia/j.epio-fxdv, the parall. Mt. x. 34 
 has ovK.dWd. Mt. never uses ovxi otherwise than interrogatively. Mk does not 
 use it at all. Steph. quotes I'orphyr. for a freq. and peculiar use of oi'X' St. 
 
 212 
 
NUMBER [2268] 
 
 plurality may explain the plural (if genuine). In xix. 31, Iva p.}} 
 IX€Lir] €ttl tov crravpov to. a(op.ara...iva KaTtayiUcriv avrwv to. CKeXy] /cui 
 dpOuHTii; is, if genuine, an extremely remarkable variation of singular 
 and plural verbs with neuter plural subjects— and that too in similar 
 construction and order (iVa p*r) fx.fivrj...Lva KaTeaywcriv). But (in spite 
 of the genitive avruv, 2419 b) o-Ke'A.77 may be accusative : " that they 
 might have their legs broken and be taken away." In the parable of 
 the Good Shepherd, ivpojBara is at first regarded as the flock that 
 (x. 3 — 4) " hears " and " follows " the shepherd. Then the reason 
 is given (x. 4) "they know (olSao-iv) his voice," and, having thus 
 dropped into the plural, the writer continues to describe them 
 individually: x. 5—8, "they will not follow," "they will flee," "they 
 know not," "the sheep heard (pi.) them not (ovk rjKovaav avr<2v to. 
 7rpd/3ttTa)." Finally the writer returns to the singular with ovk Iutlv — 
 an emphatic phrase frequent in classical Greek — describing the 
 "hireling" as one (x. 12) "whose own the flock is not (ov ovk Zo-tlv 
 
 to. 7rp6j3aTa tSta)." 
 
 (hi) Special words 
 
 (a) Ai'mata (i. 13) 
 
 [2268] Concerning those who (i. 12) "received " the Logos it is 
 said that "he gave them authority to become children of God," and 
 that these (lit.) "not from bloods (ai/xarajv), nor yet from will of 
 flesh, nor yet from will of man (avSpos), but from God were begotten." 
 The plural of "blood," both in classical Greek and in Hebrew, 
 almost always means "bloodshed 1 ." But Horce Hebraicce {ad loc.) 
 calls attention to a passage of Shemoth Rabba (referring to Ezekiel), 
 where Jerusalem is described as a babe born in uncleanness, but 
 purified by Jehovah ; and in Ezekiel the Hebrew four times uses 
 the plural "bloods' 2 " in such a way as to indicate that it might mean 
 
 1 [2268 a] Geseii. 196/', and Steph. al/j.a: but Steph. does not quote Eurip. 
 Ion 693 (Chorus) aXKwv rpafieis a<p' ai/jL&Tuv where the context indicates that the 
 meaning may be "born from another mother." Macarius (§27, p. 117) speaking 
 of Peter, to whom "flesh and blood" did not reveal the Messiahship of Jesus, has 
 ovk e£ aifj.&Tui' ovde aapKCov . . .Traidevdels . . ., d\\' ££ ayiov irvevfj.a.To% naddiv.... 
 
 2 [2268/'] Ezek. xvi. 6 (lit.) "in thy bloods" (thrice) LXX ev ry ai>art...e/c rod 
 aifxaros <rov (and om.) (Field, 6 "KjSpaios iv rrj uypaffiq. crov) rep. xvi. -22 LXX iv 
 ti£ ai/jLari crov. 
 
 213 
 
[2269] NUMBER 
 
 there, as Chrysostom says it means here, " the fleshly pangs of 
 childbirth 1 ." 
 
 [2269] An objection that may be raised against this view is that 
 it represents the evangelist as describing at great length (saying in 
 effect "begotten of no mortal mother, nor of any fleshly union, nor 
 of any mortal begetter," dvSoo's as distinct from ywij) what might have 
 been expressed more briefly in one or other of the shapes in which 
 the best Greek MS. and the earliest Fathers quote it 8 . Possibly one 
 
 1 [2268 c] Chrys. tuiv aapKiKQv didivuv, and similarly Cramer Hesvch. refers 
 to ai/xaros and yeverjs in the Iliad vi. 21 r, as if the former meant birth from the 
 mother, the latter from the father— no doubt erroneously as to Homer's meaning, 
 but perhaps instructively as to the various meanings conveyed by al/xa to Greeks 
 in later times. 
 
 [2268,/] In LXX, no attempt is made to render literally the Heb. pi. "bloods" 
 in the Pentateuch, but alpara, "bloodshed," is freq. after Judges. "His bloods 
 be upon him" is ^oxos 'icrai. in Lev. xx. 9 etc., but "AX\oj has alfxa there and 
 aifxara in Lev. xx. 1 r. In the obscure passage about (Ex. iv. 25, 26) "a husband 
 of bloods? connected with circumcision, LXX has aip.a, but the rest of the 
 translators have aip.6.Twv in one or both of the verses. 
 
 2 [2269 a] Codex 13 omits (but ins. in marg.) ovde e/c OeXr/uaTos dfdpos, which is 
 also perhaps omitted in a paraphrase by Clem. Alex. 460 top ovk it, aip.dTuv ovde 
 (k deXri/xaros aapKos, ev iruevfiari be dvaytwupfvuv. Irenaeus (iii. 16. 2 and iii. 19. 
 2) twice omits e£ aifiAruv, and has once "from the will of God." Tertullian (De 
 Came Chr. 19, and comp. 24) quotes the text several times, but scribes have 
 conformed some of his quotations to the received text. The most trustworthy is 
 perhaps "Quid utique tarn exaggeranter inculcavit, non ex sanguine, nee ex carnis 
 voluntate, aut viri, natum ? " Origen (on Josh. i. 2) has "neque ex voluntate 
 viri "' before "neque ex v. carnis." Hippolytus (vi. 9, Dunck. i. p. 236) has e'£ 
 aipdroiv Kal (widv/jLtas aapKtKTJs. Irenaeus and Tertullian must have read, with b, 
 iyevv-qdr) (natus est) for eyeuv-qdriaav: for both of them take the passage as 
 describing the birth of Christ, and Tertullian accuses the Valentinians of altering 
 the text so as to apply it to the above-mentioned "credentes" instead of Christ. 
 SShas "in blood." 
 
 [2269/;] Justin Martyr has several passages that indicate an ancient tradition, 
 "Not of man's seed but of God," referring to Christ, and some of these mention 
 "■blood." In the following extracts, yevridrivai is rendered "generated," to dis- 
 tinguish it from yevi>Tj0T)i>ai, "begotten": Apol. 21 "That the Logos, which is the 
 firsl begotten offspring {yivvr)p.o.) of God, has been generated (7 tyevrjo 6 at) without 
 sexual union (£rrifju%las), Jesus Christ our teacher..."; Apol. 22 "But even if [or 
 But if also, referring to previous el nai koivws] \\v say that uniquely, contrary to 
 common birth {ylvtciv). He has been generated (yeyevrjaOai) from God [asj God's 
 Logos, as we said above, let this be in common with you (icotvdv tovto Iotu vp.lv) 
 who say that Hermes is the LogOS that brings messages from God"; Apol. 32 
 
 "For the phrase (Gen. \lix. ti) 'blood of the grape 1 was significant of the fact 
 
 that ll<- that was to appear would indeed have blood, but not from human seed 
 but from divine power...: for as not man, but God, hath made (Trarolt]Kfi>) the 
 
 214 
 
NUMBER [2269] 
 
 of the two clauses BeXyj/xaTOS cmp/co's and 0e\rjjxaTO<; av&pos may be 
 an interpolation ; but e£ alfidrtov is too original a phrase to be thus 
 explained. It points to some allusive meaning such as that in 
 Ezekiel above mentioned, which was interpreted Rabbinically as 
 referring not only to the blood attendant on childbirth, but also 
 to what may be called the Jewish sacraments of Circumcision and 
 Passover, by which the Israelites were "brought into covenant 1 ." 
 If that allusion is included here, the meaning of "not from bloods" 
 is twofold, ist, "not from mortal generation," 2nd, "not from 
 such sacramental regeneration as Jews could offer to Gentiles through 
 the Law." 
 
 blood of the vine, so this blood also was hereby indicated as to be generated 
 (ilxrivveTo...yevrjae<ydai) not from human seed but from [the] power of God." 
 
 [2269c] Justin's Dialogue has similar passages: Tryph. 54 "Christ hath 
 indeed blood, but not from seed of man (dvdpixnrov) but from the power of God 
 (tov deov). For as not man, but God (lit.) begot (eyivurjo-ev) the blood of the vine, 
 so [the prophet] indicated beforehand that the blood of Christ also would be not 
 from human birth (yivovs) but from [the] power of God. Now this prophecy... 
 demonstrates that Christ is not man from men begotten (yevvndeis) in the common 
 way of men (/card to koivov tGiu avdptlsTrwv) " ; Tryph. 61 "[The Logos] may be 
 called by all [these] names from the fact that He ministers to the Father's desire 
 and purpose and from the fact that He has been generated by the Father by will 
 (/ecu 4k tov and tov Trarpos deX-qaei yeye uria 6ai) " ; Tryph. 63 "since His blood 
 (lit.) has not been begotten from human seed (ws tov a'ifxaros avTov ovk e£ dvdpw- 
 ireiov cirepfiaTos yeyevfrjp.€vov) but from [the] will of God (dXX' e/c 6e\rjfiaTos dfov) " ; 
 Tryph. 76 " For the phrase (Dan. vii. 13) ' like a son of man ' makes it clear that 
 He was to appear and to have been brought into being (cpaiv6p.efoi> kcli ywo/xevov) 
 a man, but not from human seed... He was indeed to have blood, but not from men ; 
 even as not man, but God, begot the blood of the vine." 
 
 [2269 1/] These passages indicate the existence of early discussions about 
 "blood," in connexion with the birth and nature of Christ. [The mention of 
 (Lk. xxiv. 39) "flesh and bones" (without "blood") suggests that there were 
 other discussions about the nature of His body after the Resurrection.] Justin 
 appears to have laid great stress on these ; and they seem to have influenced 
 Irenaeus, Tertullian, and others, to such an extent that they have modified John's 
 text, perhaps taking aip.a.Twi> to mean, " not from ordinary blood" or " not from 
 mortal blood." But, in fact, the Johannine tradition teaches that the truth applies 
 to all the children of God, so that "blood" in any sense, may be excluded from 
 a consideration of the nature of the birth. 
 
 1 [2269 e] Hor. Heb] on Jn i. 13 says, "The Israelites were brought into 
 covenant by three things ; by circumcision, by washing, and by offering of 
 sacrifices," and quotes Shemoth Rab., sect. 19, and Gloss, in Vajikra Kab. fol. 191 
 as to " the blood of the passover mingled with the blood of the circumcised." 
 
 215 
 
[2270] NUMBER 
 
 (/3) 'Ima'tia 
 
 [2270] 'I/tana (pi.) occurs in John as follows, xiii. 4 "he layeth 
 aside his garments," xiii. 12 "he took his garments," xix. 23 "the 
 soldiers therefore... took his garments," xix. 24 (quoting Ps. xxii. 19) 
 "they parted my garments among them." In the last passage, the 
 writer distinguishes Ifxaria from the x^ojV (i.e. undergarment), and 
 describes the former as being divided into four pieces. Although 
 the word is in the plural— meaning "the upper clothes," all except 
 the tunic— yet the plural might apparently denote " cloak " when, 
 as would be the case with the poor, the " upper clothes " consisted 
 of a cloak alone, and not of a cloak and doublet. Hence " garment " 
 is parallel to "garments" in the Synoptists, and Matthew in one 
 passage interchanges singular and plural 1 . All the Synoptists use 
 the plural to describe the parting of Christ's " garments " among the 
 soldiers. John does the same, but he indicates that the plural 
 means a single cloak in seams capable of being divided equally 
 among four soldiers. John adds a negative detail about "not 
 rending the tunic 2 ," but casting lots for it; and he quotes the 
 Psalmist's prophecy "They parted my clothes (i/idno) among them, 
 and on my clothing (i^aTto-/xoV) they cast [the] lot." This prophecy 
 may have afforded John an additional reason for preferring the 
 plural IfidrLa, even though our Lord wore nothing but the cloak 
 over the tunic 3 . 
 
 1 [2270 </] Mk v. 28 Iftarlw = Mt. ix. 21 i/xariov : Mk v. 27 has i/xariov (but 
 ib. 30 i/xari^v). Mk v. 27 — 30 has pi. in speech, sing, in narrative. 
 
 2 [2270 />] The only Synoptic mention of "tunic" in the Passion is in 
 Mk xiv. 63 "he rent his tunics," where the parall. Mt. xxvi. 65 has "garments." 
 But this applies to the Highpriest. Luke omits it. In Acts xvi. 22 Treptp^afres 
 avTwv ra i/xaria, two or three scribes have eavrwv, supposing that the praetors rent 
 their own garments (2563 c); but the meaning is that they caused the garments 
 to be rent off from the Apostles. "Rend (garments) " in Mk-Mt. is Siapr/aav, but 
 in Jn ffx^w. 
 
 '■' [2270(1 I" iii- 33 vSara iroWd, the pi. of vdup, being freq. (Steph.) in non- 
 hebraic Greek as well as in I, XX, calls for little comment except as to the com- 
 bination "many waters," which occurs in N.T. only here and Rev. i. 15, xiv. 2, 
 xvii. 1, xix. (). In Rev. xvii. 1 (Jer. li. 13, I. XX pi.), it is used of turbulent forces 
 (as in Is. viii. 7, I. XX sing.). The first use of II eh. " many waters" (( iesen. c,i ; a) 
 refers to the waters -1 Meribah (Numb. xx. n, I. XX sing.). In the Psalms 
 xxix. 3, xxxii. (1, lxxvii. 10. \iiii. 4, cvii. 23, cxliv. 7, r5aro 7roX\d denotes Stormy 
 
 violence, ovei which Jehovah rules, or from which tie delivers the Psalmist. In 
 
 Ezek. xvii _:, 8, x\\i. 5, " many waters " (I. XX OSup iro\v sing.) denotes fertilising 
 streams, hut in Ezek. xxvi. 19 il.XX sing.) it denotes destroying inundation. 
 
 2l6 
 
PARTICIPLE [2272] 
 
 Participle (1894*) 
 
 (i) Causal 
 
 [2271] This is more frequent in John than in the Synoptists. 
 The Johannine phrase "answered and said," as distinct from the 
 Synoptic "answering (diroKpiOeis) said," shews that John avoids the 
 participle as a substitute for "and." But he frequently — or at all 
 events more frequently than the Synoptists — uses it for " because." 
 
 [2272] In iv. 6 " Jesus, therefore, because he was wearied {kikott- 
 laKws) by the journey, was sitting, just as he was (ovtws) by the 
 well," K€/<o7n.aKws must be interpreted in the light of the fact that the 
 word occurs in John only here and in the context (iv. 38) " I have 
 sent you to reap that over which ye have not wearied yourselves : 
 others have been weary" The "weariness " is that of the labourers 
 in the harvest of God. And the " weariness " of the Messiah, 
 thirsting, and preaching the Gospel in "the heat of the day 1 ," 
 prepared the way for the work of the Apostles in later times, 
 as described in the Acts (viii. 25). The phrase "just as he was" 
 indicates (from the human point of view) fortuitousness, or at all 
 events (1916 — 7) absence of premeditation. But the narrative 
 suggests that what might be called "casual" in all these details was 
 really foreordained. On another occasion, when our Lord was 
 apparently even more exhausted so that He fell asleep, Mark — and 
 Mark alone 2 — says that the disciples conveyed Him "as he was (ok 
 rjv) " in the boat ; and then He arises out of sleep to manifest 
 Himself as Lord of the winds and waves. So here, the weariness is 
 represented as the instrumental cause of an apparently casual 
 consequence. It would have been somewhat too logical, and perhaps 
 almost stilted, to say " because (on) he was wearied " ; but the participle 
 suffices to suggest it. And the story as a whole makes us feel that 
 the journey itself, the intense weariness, and the sudden sitting down 
 to rest just before the coming of the Samaritan woman, were all 
 foreordained to divine ends. 
 
 ' : [2272 «] Mt. xx. 12, comp. Jn iv. 6 " it was about the sixth hour," i.e. noon. 
 The "weariness" was not accidental but providential, like the journey itself 
 (iv. 4 "there was need (£Sei) that he should go through Samaria"). In Jn (as 
 in Rev.) del always refers to spiritual decree or spiritual necessity, iii. 7, 14, 30, 
 iv. 10, 24, ix. 4, x. 16, xii. 34, xx. 9. 
 2 Mk iv. 36. 
 
 21/ 
 
[2273] PARTICIPLE 
 
 [2273] In the same narrative (iv. 9) " How is it that thou, being 
 a Jew, askest drink from me, being a Samaritan?" the participles 
 might be most obviously explained as "though thou art," and 
 "though I am." But an explanation more in accordance with 
 Johannine usage would be to render the participles by "since" 
 having regard to the negative implied in the question : " Thou hast 
 no right, since thou art a Jew, to ask drink from me, since I am 
 a Samaritan." So, in English, we should say, "You, being under 
 age — what right have you to vote?" or "how is it that you vote?" 
 In iv. 39, "because of the word of the woman testifying (rrj<; y. 
 /xaprvpovar)<; . . .) " means "testifying as she did," suggesting "because 
 she repeatedly testified 1 ": and in iv. 45, "having seen" means 
 "because they had seen." It would be impossible to find such 
 a group of causal participles in the Synoptists. In xxi. 12 etSore? 
 probably means "because they knew," not "though they knew" 
 (1924a). 
 
 (ii) Tenses of (see also Tense, 2499—510) 
 
 (a) TycpAoc con (ix. 25) 
 
 [2274] In ix. 25 "One thing I know, that [though] being [once] 
 blind, now I see (rv<p\bs <Sv dprt fikeirw)," the present participle 
 is perhaps used for brevity and ttotI is omitted because it has already 
 been used (ix. 13 toV irore rucpAoV). Compare ix. 17 "they say to the 
 blind man " for " to the once blind man." But the writer may possibly 
 intend to suggest that the blindness had been so recently cured that 
 it was almost present, " being [up to this moment] blind." 
 
 1 [2273a] iv. 39 (A.V.) "the woman, which," (R.V.) "the woman, who." 
 Possibly R.V. took it as tt?? 7. rrjs /mapr., which Shakespeare would have rendered 
 "the woman that" but which A.V. (according to its custom) renders "the 
 woman which" R.V. , which generally follows A.V. in this use of "which,"' 
 deviates here,' and adopts " who," presumably meaning "and she" or "for she. - ' 
 According to a convenient usage generally adopted in the English of Shakespeare 
 and Addison, and one that would conduce to clearness in modern English, "7i>//<?" 
 should introduce a non-essential statement about the antecedent ("I heard it from 
 the policeman, who heard it from the postman"). "That" should introduce 
 a statement that is I s-cntial to the complete meaning of the antecedent ("I heard 
 it from the hoy that cleans the hoots"). See the author's How to Write Clearly, 
 Seeley and Co., and comp. 1493 a, 1564/'. 
 
 218 
 
PARTICIPLE [2275] 
 
 (ft) '0 con 6N rco oypANco (iii. 13, R.V.) 
 
 [2275] In iii. 13 "No man hath ascended to heaven save he 
 that descended from heaven, [even] the Son of man," R.V. text adds 
 "who is in heaven," 6 wv eV tw ovpavw. W.H. reject the addition 
 (without marginal alternative), pointing out that it is omitted in many 
 early quotations in which the insertion of the words — had they been 
 recognised by the quoters as genuine — might be described as 
 " morally certain 1 ." Without this addition the words appear to mean 
 that the real and spiritual ascension to heaven has always been the 
 result of a descent from heaven. The descending influence was 
 referred to earlier in reverse order, (i. 51) "the angels of God 
 ascending and descending on the Son of man," where it seems to 
 mean the prayers of the Logos going up to heaven and returning to 
 earth. Here the meaning seems to be that the Logos has always 
 been descending on man to lift man up to God. This Logos, the 
 express Image of God, is here identified with the incarnate Image of 
 God, the "Son of man." 
 
 1 [2275 a] W.H. point out that Origen's alleged quotations of the clause are 
 only from the Latin of Rufinus, and elsewhere Origen omits it. They think the 
 interpolation " perhaps suggested" by i. 18 6 wv els tov koKttov t. irarpSs. Possibly 
 "the Son of man" seemed a weak ending, unless it was defined in some way 
 as meaning the Divine Ideal of Man, the Man in Heaven. Some Greek conflation 
 of oyc Toy &NOY (*'■*■ "the Son of man") and ownenoynco (i.e. "who is in 
 heaven ") may have favoured the interpolation. A* omits con. 
 
 [2275 b] In v. 35 ene'tvos y)v 6 \vx"os 6 Kaiofxevos Kai <palvuii> there are perhaps 
 two allusions. The first is to Christ's doctrine about lighting the candle (\vx"os) 
 and putting it where all may see (Mk iv. 21, fpxerai, but Mt. v. 15 has Kaiovaiv 
 and Lk. viii. 16 axj/as), and prob. to a proverbial distinction between the candle 
 that has to be thus daily "lighted" (6 Ka.i6fj.evos) or "continually burns," and the 
 sun, which needs no such lighting (comp. Philo i. 485 " for the one [the eye 
 of the soul] is like the sun but these [the bodily eyes] are like candlebearers 
 (Ai;X"oi'<xots))." The second may be to Sir. xlviii. 1 "his word [i.e. the word of 
 Elijah] burned continually like a torch (ws Xaiiiras iKaiero)" ; but there the 
 Hebrew ("His words were like a burning furnace"), and the Greek context, 
 indicate that kcu'w has a different meaning from that in Mt. Does Kaiofievos here 
 mean "continually burning" or "lighted day by day"? In view of Kaio/xevos 
 "steadily burning" in Lk. xii. 35 /\vx v0L Kaidixevoi, Rev. iv. 5 Xafitrddes irvpbs 
 KaLO/jitvai evihiriov r. dpdvov, xxi. 8 r% Xi/J-vri rrj Kaio/xevr) (comp. Rev. viii. 8, xix. 20) 
 and exaiero in Sir. xlviii. 1, we are justified in concluding that the present participle 
 means continuousness (" steadily burning") : but the verb itself (" burn ") and the 
 context, suggest that the continuousness is only for its appointed hour, and that 
 the "candle" not only " burns''' but also " burns away." 
 
 219 
 
[2276] PARTICIPLE 
 
 (7) 'H eKMAzACA (xi. 2) 
 
 [2276] In xi. 2 " Now Mary was the [Mary, or, woman] that 
 anointed..." it is correct, but not enlightening, to say that the 
 Anointing " presented itself to the writer as a past event 1 ," and thus 
 to explain the aorist participle used concerning an act that the 
 evangelist records later on. Every event in the Fourth Gospel 
 "presented itself to the writer as a past event." But, as to this 
 particular event, the Anointing of Christ by a Woman— probably 
 well-known, in some form, to all Christians at the end of the first 
 century, but connected by Luke alone with a " sinner " — the Fourth 
 Evangelist takes this opportunity (afforded by the necessity of 
 mentioning Mary in connexion with Lazarus) to say, before he comes 
 to the Anointing, that this same Mary was the Mary (or, woman) 
 whose story was in everyone's mouth. It would have been tedious 
 to say " the woman that will presently be described by me as 
 anointing...." 
 
 (iii) Present with rfv 
 
 [2277] The Hebraic use of rjv SiSaWwv, K-qpvcrcrwv etc. for the 
 imperfect, "he was teaching, preaching etc." is quite distinct from 
 such phrases as rjv ckci KaOrj/ievos " there happened to be on the spot 
 sitting " (where rjv is separated from the participle) and also from rjv 
 with the perfect passive participle. In N.T., when rjv is separated 
 from the present participle, it is often better to supply some 
 predicate from the context and to take the participle as in classical 
 Greek, especially in those Gospels where the Hebraic participle is 
 rare. In John, it is very rare. But there are approximations to the 
 Hebraic participle in xiii. 23 i)v avaKtijuevos (which however resembles 
 both in meaning and in sound the passive pluperfect) and in xviii. 30 
 €t /xrj rjv ovros kcxkov ttolwv, where perhaps the intention is, not to 
 represent Hebraically the imperfect iKanoTroUi ("if he had not been 
 doing mischief") but to suggest "if he had not been a man 
 continually doing mischief," i.e. an habitual mischief-worker (SS, l>, 
 and/, " if he had not been an evildoer-"). John's general separation 
 
 1 Winer, p. 4.31. 
 
 - [2277 a] In Jn iii. 22 — 3 "Jesus and his disciples came into the land of 
 Judaea and there (iicei) he tarried with them and was baptizing (^/SAuTifei'). Novi 
 there was also John (rjv hi Kai [6] ' 1 . 1 baptizing (j8a7rWf«»>) in Action," the context 
 suggests the meaning "Jo////, a/so, was in that neighbourhood, namely, in Aenon," 
 so that it is not quite like the r\v K-rjpvacwv or Sibaaxuv of Mark and Luke. 
 
 220 
 
PARTICIPLE [2279] 
 
 of participles from iyevtro and rjv favours their separation in 
 i. 6 " There came [into being] (eyeVe-ro) a man (avdpwTros), sent from 
 God (aTrtaTaXfjievos irapa Oeov)," where (1937) eycvero is contrasted 
 with tjv above, av6pwTro<s with Ao'yos above, and air. -k. Oeov with rjv 
 •n-pos tov 6e6v above. The same applies to i. 9 " There was [from the 
 beginning] the light, the true [light], which lighteneth every man, 
 coming as it does (ipxop-evov) [continually] into the world." On this, 
 see 2508. 
 
 (iv) Agreement of 
 
 [2278] A singular noun, when plural in meaning, is often the 
 subject of a plural verb, but is not so often followed by a plural 
 participle, as in xii. 12 6 o^Aos -n-oXvs 6 €\6<jjv...a.Kovo-ai>T€<;...€\a.f3ov. 
 In eXafiov alone there would have been nothing remarkable, nor in 
 aKowai/Tcs if it had followed IXafiov : but, coming before the plural 
 verb, the unusual plural participle suggests a desire to emphasize the 
 plurality of the crowd, — a desire also apparent in the extraordinary 
 phrase 6 o^\os ttoXvs (1739 — 40). In i. 48 -n-po tov ere <S?LXnnrov 
 (f>wvrjo-ai oi'Ta vtto ttjv o-vKrjv cTSoV ere the participle may agree with the 
 first or second o-e, see 2372 <£. 
 
 (v) Prefatory use of 
 
 [2279] John uses prefatory participial clauses, to an extent 
 unequalled in the Synoptists, to prepare the reader for some 
 especially solemn utterance or act of Christ's. A combination of 
 this use with the genitive absolute is particularly noticeable in the 
 preface to the Washing of Feet : xiii. 1 — 4 "Now before the feast... 
 Jesus knowing that his hour had come. ..having loved his own. ..he 
 loved them to the end. And, while supper was going on (Sel-n-vov 
 yivofxivov), the devil having now put it into the heart... knowing that 
 the Father had given him all things into his hands, and that..., he 
 riseth from supper." Similar phrases introduce some of the most 
 important events in Christ's life 1 . 
 
 1 [2279 a] The conversion of the two disciples that constitute the firstfruits of 
 the Church is preceded by i. 38 orpcMpth 5e 6 T. ical deauja.fj.evos, the cure of the 
 
 impotent man by v. 6 tovtov Idujv 6 'I /cat yvovs on..., the feeding of the five 
 
 thousand by vi. 5 ewdpas ovv rous 6<p9. 6 T. Kal Beaadfiefos oti..., the spiritual 
 explanation of the doctrine of the flesh and blood by vi. 61 eldws de 6 1. iv eavru) 
 ort... (referring to the "murmuring" of some of the disciples), and Christ's last 
 
 two utterances on the Cross by xix. 28 — 30 nerd ravra eL8ws 6 I. on ifdy] ore 
 
 ovv gXapev to o£os 6 T., where we have the subject preceded first by a participle 
 and then by the equivalent of one. 
 
 221 
 
[2280] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 Prepositions 
 
 [2280] For a brief comparison of the Johannine with the 
 Synoptic use of prepositions in general and statistics bearing on 
 the comparison, see 1881 — 5. The following remarks will deal with 
 particular prepositions in alphabetical order, including some passages 
 that may be of interest (apart from grammatical usage) because 
 of their bearing on Johannine thought and purpose as distinct from 
 mere style. 
 
 (i) 'Ava 
 
 [2281] 'Avd occurs only once in John, as follows: ii. 6 "Now 
 there were six waterpots of stone set there after the Jews' manner of 
 purifying, containing two or three firkins apiece (^wpowat ava. /xti-p^ras 
 Svo r) rpcis)." 'Ava, with numbers, occurs elsewhere in N.T., though 
 very rarely 1 . In the Apocalypse, it occurs in connexion with the 
 "six" wings of the seraphs, whom Isaiah describes as with two 
 covering the face, with tzvo the feet, and with two flying 2 . Philo 
 (2283 b) speaks mystically of the number "six" as "composed of 
 twice three, having the odd as the male and the even as the female" 
 and as generating the things that are "perfected by the seven." No one 
 disputes that purifying vessels of the Jews may have held "two 
 or three firkins apiece" and that dvd /uci-py/ras Si'o t; i-peis means this: 
 but if the phrase is also symbolically intended 3 , the symbolism may 
 affect the grammatical interpretation of other parts of the narrative. 
 According to a literal interpretation — which must be presumed to be 
 part of the meaning even though the spiritual interpretation may be 
 the chief part — the stone vessels were first filled to the brim by the 
 attendants, and then they "drew" either (1) from them or (2) from 
 the well* and "carried" to the Ruler of the Feast, who said that "the 
 
 1 Mt. xx. 9, 10 "[one] denarius apiece,'" Lk. ix. 14 " by fifties,"' x. 1 " by 
 twos," Rev. iv. 8 "six wings apiece" xxi. 21 '■''each one (dva. eh) of the several 
 gates." In LXX, Oxf. Cone, mentions dvd (in any sense) as occurring — apart 
 from dva. fiiaov — only nine times. 
 
 - Rev. iv. 8, alluding to Is. vi. 2 (where dva is not used). 
 
 8 See Enc. 1796 — 7 ("Gospels" § 47)011 the apparent symbolism of Johannine 
 numbers generally and, in particular, the (xxi. 11) "one hundred and fifty three" 
 fish. 
 
 4 [2281 r/ ] Field [ad toe.) " Oi 7]VT\r}K0Tes rd vSwp. This is generally under- 
 
 tood "i dt iwing the water from the well, as in Ch. iv. 7. So Si Chrysostom : 
 
 el yap eVe/Wiv rives dvat<7X l ' , ' Tf ' v > V$ l ' vavT0 Tpbs avrous \4yeiv oi diaKovrjcdfitvoi' 
 
 222 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2282] 
 
 good wine" had been "kept to the last." (i) If the "drawing" 
 was from the vessels, of which the contents were all changed into 
 wine, then we have to suppose that 130 gallons of water were thus 
 converted 1 . (2) If, as Westcott explains it, the "drawing" was 
 from the well — which would be the usual sense of avrAe'w — then we 
 have to suppose the filling of the vessels to be a preliminary and 
 independent act, as though Jesus had said, "Before the water from 
 the well can be turned into the wine of the Gospel, it must first 
 be used to fill the vessels of purification of the Law." 
 
 [2282] The former interpretation ("drawing from the vessels") — 
 besides the difficulty of the supply of wine being very far in excess of 
 the need— describes the wine as being in the "stone vessels" of which 
 the interpreters of the Talmud said, "If anyone have water fit 
 to drink, and that water by chance contract a?iy nncleanness, let him 
 Jill the stone vessel with it 2 ." Westcott's interpretation avoids these 
 
 7]/j.els to i'dup i}VT\r)(ra.!/.ei> • rjfieis rds vSptas €PeTr\r)o~a/j.ev " But Migne omits 
 
 i]/j.eh t. v. eveTrXrjO-a/j.ei' and gives no v. r. The omission would leave the reader 
 free to suppose that the attendants, according to Chrysostom, could say "We 
 drew the -water [out of the vessels]" — which accords with the view taken by field. 
 He apparently thinks that other attendants (or perhaps women) would have 
 previously drawn water from the well for all the needs of the household, and 
 that "the attendants" merely filled the vessels to the brim with this water and 
 then "drew out" the water from the vessels. This is certainly more probable 
 than that the attendants were sent away from the house to draw water from the 
 well. Chrysostom clearly believes that the wine came out of the vessels — and not 
 direct from the well (as Westcott suggests) — for he meets the objection of sceptics 
 that perhaps these vessels had been used for vintage purposes and retained 
 a savour of wine. 
 
 1 A "firkin," ^677377x775, Heb. "bath," was nearly 9 gallons, so that the 6 
 vessels would contain 6x2^x9 gallons. 
 
 2 [2282 iz] Hor. Heb. ad loc. quoting Gloss, (apparently) on J\elim cap. 1, 
 hal. 1. The phrase " the stone vessel" suggests that one vessel sufficed most 
 households. And it seems reasonable to believe that this would often be the case 
 if the vessel held 22 gallons. As for the ^£77)777-775, Steph. says that the Attic 
 measure differed from the Roman or Italian, and also quotes Aristotle as mention- 
 ing a fierpTjrrjs MaKeSoetKos. The grammarian Thomas said, ap.<popevs Mye, /J.i] 
 <tt6.ij.vos /J.rj5e /j.erpT]Trjs, ei kcli Tives. It is applied, however, by Polybius ii. 15. 1 
 to wine in Gaul (tov 5' o'ivov tov /uerp^r^j') as though it needed no explanation. In 
 the Indices to Egypt. Pap. it does not appear except in the Fayum vol., where it is 
 used as a measure for oil, 95, 96 etc. Steph. describes it as " vas magnae cujus- 
 dam capacitatis nulla certa definitum mensura." It is made the subject of witticism 
 when a man gives another a /neTpriTrjs of wine on condition that it shall keep its 
 name because of ixeTpioTTjs, i.e. he is to drink moderately. On the other hand, 
 Xenarchus the Rhodian was called p-^Tp-qr-qs because of his vast drinking. 
 
 223 
 
[2283] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 two difficulties — but at the cost of converting the "filling of the 
 vessels" into a mere symbol, while still taking the rest of the story 
 literally. Nor is the symbol quite clear. The water of the Gospel, 
 the water that becomes wine, comes independently from the well or 
 spring. The preliminary water goes into the vessels of the Law and 
 stavs there. It does nothing. 
 
 [2283] On the whole it seems more in accordance both with the 
 literal and with the spiritual interpretation that the water of the Word 
 should be supposed to be placed first in the vessels of the Law. 
 Thence, having been transmuted, it is "drawn forth now (emph., vvv)" 
 at Christ's command, as the wine of the Gospel. To the objection 
 that such water was "unclean" for purposes of drinking, might not 
 the evangelist reply (like the voice that replies to Peter's objection 
 in the Acts 1 ) that what God hath "cleansed" is not to be called 
 "common or unclean"? According to this view, Christ, in this 
 symbolic story, transmutes the outwardly purifying element of the 
 Law into the inwardly purifying element of the Spirit. If some such 
 symbolism is really latent here, we should expect (according to the 
 principle of Philonian interpretation) to find traces of it in the 
 mention of the numbers "two" "three" and "six" here mentioned 
 by John. In a history, describing the sinking of so many triremes 
 or the destruction of so many soldiers, numbers would be simply 
 numbers. But in a symbolic story unfolding the future transmutation 
 of Law into Gospel, numbers (not necessary for the narrative) would 
 rarely be inserted unless they lent themselves to symbolism. From 
 the allegorizing point of view, the numbers "two," "three," and "six" 
 are easily capable of an appropriate meaning' 2 . 
 
 1 [2283 a] Acts x. 14. Comp. Ephrem p. 56 " Denique hoc miraculum fecit 
 ut res viles in delicatas permutando doceret eas non esse natura malas" — where 
 perhaps "viles" means "common," "cheap." 
 
 2 [2283/»] Philo says (ii. 281) "The number Six is even and odd, composed 
 of twice three, having the odd as the male and the even as the female, from which 
 [numbers] are the origins [of things] according to the unalterable laws of nature," 
 and "What things the Six generates these things the Seven exhibits when per- 
 
 d." In Isaiah's above quoted description of the seraphim (each of which had 
 "six" wings) giving glory to the Lord in the Temple, "six" might be taken as 
 symbolizing the created world giving glory to the Creator, and [saiah's mention 
 of the uses of each of the three pairs of wings would favour Philo's allegorizing 
 interpretation <>i the "two" and the "three" as making up the "six." A work 
 like the Fourth Gospel, which appears, even when narrating facts, to set them 
 forth with symbolism and allusion, might naturally illustrate this sign, apparently 
 
 224 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2285] 
 
 (ii) 'AvtC 
 
 [2284] 'Aim occurs only once in John as follows: i. 14 — 17 "And 
 the Word became flesh and tabernacled in [the midst of] us... full of 
 grace and truth... because from his fulness we all received and grace 
 in the place of {avri) grace: because [whereas] the Law through 
 Moses was given [by God,] the grace [of God] and the truth [of God] 
 through Jesus Christ came into being." 
 
 [2285] In classical Greek, avri is used in phrases describing the 
 lex talionis of "like for, i.e. in the place of like." The Thesaurus 
 quotes "man for man," "woman for woman," "insult for insult," 
 
 performed on the sabbath, by a numerical detail suggesting " two " and " three'" as 
 part of the preparation for what Philo calls "the Seven when perfected." 
 
 [2283 c] Origen (Philocal. i. 12) explains dva. fxerpriTas duo i) rpeh as referring 
 to three different aspects of the Scriptures, and he adds If U i/dpiai evX6yws dai 
 rots ev ti2 Kda/iu) Kadapi^o/xivoLS yevoixivu (Robinson yeyevrj/nfrip) ev If -fnxipais 
 apidfiw Te\el<p. By "perfect number" (Plato 546 B, and see Steph.) he means 
 a number that is "perfected," or "completed," by adding the terms of an Arith- 
 metical Progression. Thus 3, 6, and 10 are called perfect numbers, because 3=1 + 2; 
 6=1 + 2 + 3; 10=1 + 2 + 3 + 4. Philo (ii. 183) and Clement of Alexandria (782) 
 call 10 " the all-perfect or all-perfecting decad " {8eK&5i 7-77 TravTeXdy, i] Sckols 5e 
 ofioXoyelraL wavr^Xeios elvai (the fern, in -da should be recognised in L. and S.)), 
 but six is also a "perfect" number and one that would commend itself to a Jew 
 as symbolical of creation. Since six derives its "perfection" from the addition 
 of "two" and "three" to unity, it is all the more intelligible that Jn should here 
 introduce the "two" and "three" as well as the "six." It may be added that 
 Augustine interpreted the "one hundred and fifty three" in xxi. 11 as being a 
 "perfect number," the sum of 1 + 2 + 3... up to 17, where 10 and 7 represent 
 severally the " ten commandments " of the Law and " the seven spirits of God." 
 
 [2283 d] A number may be allegorized variously by different interpreters, and 
 the variation may be alleged as proof that no allegory or inner meaning was ever 
 intended. As an instance, however, to the contrary, see Gen. xiv. 14 "three hundred 
 and eighteen," allegorized by Barn. ix. 8 and Clem. Alex. 782 as referring to the 
 cross of Christ, but Hershon says: "Our sages say: 'He went in pursuit with 
 Eliezer alone, whose name has the numerical value of three hundred and eighteen.'" 
 The application of " numerical value " to names may be illustrated by the "number 
 of the beast " in the Apocalypse, 666, a sort of parody, thrice repeated, of the 
 "all-perfect number." 
 
 [2283 1] In renderings of O.T., neTp-qT-qs represents the Hebrew bath, a 
 measure of liquid, as follows: Ezek. xlv. 14 "the bath of oil. ..tenth part of a 
 bath out of the cor which is ten baths, even an homer ; for ten baths are an homer," 
 LXX thrice KorvX-q, Aq. (twice) fj.eTpr)Trjs, Theod. twice /3aTos: 2 Chr. iv. 5 "three 
 thousand baths," LXX fierp^Tas (Field) "AAXos- Kepania (comp. Is. v. 10 "bath," 
 Kepd/Aiov, Ot XoLTToi' fSdrov), parall. i K. vii. 26 " two thousand baths," LXX om. , 
 A citcTxiAtous X of ' s : ' Esdr. viii. 20 "an hundred measures (fierpTjTwv) of wine," 
 corresponding to Ezr. vii. 22 "an hundred baths of wine," aTrodr)Kui>, A /3a5wf. 
 In Dan. Bel 3 LXX has eXaiov (Theod. ofrov) /j.erpriTa.1 Iff. 
 
 A. VI 225 15 
 
[2286] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 "blow for blow" etc., and the Sermon on the Mount has "eye for an 
 eye," "tooth/*??' a tooth 1 ." But, apart from contexts suggesting end- 
 less vendetta, ovt'i might mean "[coming constantly] in the place of," 
 so as to denote "one thing \following\ upon another"; and Origen 
 actually paraphrases it so here, "a second grace upon (£tti) a former 
 grace," though both in the preceding and in the following context he 
 quotes the clause with avri*. 'Am' is used by Philo 3 similarly, but 
 somewhat differently, to describe the succession of the graces of God, 
 who takes away the old, and dispenses to us constantly "new in the 
 place of old." Elsewhere He is said to pour them on us in an 
 unceasing and continuous succession or orbit 4 . 
 
 [2286] There is probably in John, as in Philo, an intention 
 to suggest the notion of "exchange" rather than that of mere 
 succession. Both Origen and Chrysostom appear to discern, in this 
 passage, a taking away of the old grace, or gift of the Law ("the Law 
 was given"), in order to substitute the new gift of the grace and truth 
 that are in Christ. The Law was given to Israel through Moses 
 because (Deut. vii. 7) the Lord "loved" them and "chose" them, 
 that is to say, God gave it as a gift, or grace; but His full grace and 
 truth, latent under that Law, did not come into being till the Word 
 became flesh as Jesus Christ in order to "take away" the first grace, 
 i.e. the Law of Moses, so as to establish the second grace, i.e. the 
 grace of freedom, or sonship, — the grace of the Father as manifested 
 in the grace of the Son 5 . 
 
 [2287] "We all" is perhaps intended to mean more than the 
 "we" that is so common in the First Epistle ("we know," "we 
 are the sons of God" etc.). "We" means "we Christians." But 
 "we all" — like "every man" at the beginning of the Prologue — may 
 mean "every human being from the creation of man." All have 
 
 1 [2285 a] "De rebus adversis dicitur," says Steph. Comp. Theogn. 342 — 3 
 el fJ.r] tl xaKuiv dfMTravfxa /xepi/xve'wv evpoi/JLyv, Soirjv 5' dvr dviuiv dvias. Alf. quotes 
 Chrys. de Sacerdot. 6. 13 vol. i. p. 435 irtpav dvd' eripas fipovrLSa. 
 
 2 Orig. I hut ii. 95. 
 
 a [2285/'] I'hilo i. 254 rds irpwras del xa/"Tas, irplv Kopeadivras i^vfUpiaai (so 
 Wetst., Mang., by error, -eadev -Icre) tous Xaxforas, eirtirx^, *<*' rafxiewdfifvos, 
 eiacudis irtpas dvrl tKtivwv, ko.1 rpiras dvrl tuv devripwv Kai del vias dvrl ira\aio- 
 Tipiiiv, Tore p.(v 5ia<l>tpovoas, rorl 5' av Kal rds avrds eirtdlSuxri. 
 
 4 [2285<] Philo i. 34: 6 ttjv tCjv dwpewv cTrd\\r}\oi> (popdv aTravoTus avvdpwv, 
 6 ras x^P' Tas (X°l JL ^'' as d^\\r]\ioi> dva.KVK\ibv. 
 
 5 Comp. I lfl>. x. o "He taketh away the Erst that he may establish the 
 second." 
 
 226 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2289] 
 
 received, in various degrees and kinds, gifts from the Pleroma, 
 the Fulness of Him that filleth all in all 1 . 
 
 (iii) 'At6 
 
 (a) 'And and e« meaning " [some] of," see 2213 — 5 
 
 (/3) 'Ano, transposition of 
 
 [2288] 'Atto, meaning "off," is placed before ir-qx^v in xxi. 8 
 "about two hundred cubits off (euro -n-rj^v Sicucoo-iW)." It is a 
 natural transposition arising from the desire to give prominence to 
 the notion "distant," as in our "distant two hundred cubits," and 
 then, illogically, allowing the preposition that signifies distance to 
 govern "cubits." Similarly irpo is transposed in xii. i (lit.) " before six 
 days the Passover (-n-po t£ rjfxepwv tow iraa-x -)," for " six days before the 
 Passover," like the Latin '■''before the fifth day the Kalends" for "the 
 fifth day before the Kalends." Abundant instances will be found in 
 the Thesaurus, and there is nothing in the Johannine passages that 
 needs comment, except that the former transposition may be largely 
 the result of Latin influence, and that it is found in Revelation (xiv. 
 20) "at a distance of... furlongs (o.tt6 crraSiW...)." 
 
 (7) 'And and e« describing domicile or birth-place 
 
 [2289] 'Atto and Ik occur in i. 44 " Now Philip was from (ano) 
 Bethsaida 2 , from out (eV) the city of Andrew and Peter 3 ," and 
 
 1 [2287 a] "Grace for grace" may be a different aspect of the saying "He that 
 hath, to him shall be added," and of the Synoptic doctrine concerning "reward." 
 A "talent" given by the Master of the House may be called a "grace" given by 
 the Father. In the Parable of the Talents the Master gives the talents. The 
 servant returns the talents doubled. Lastly, the servant receives, in return, the 
 joy of his Lord. By calling the talent "a grace," a writer would indicate that the 
 transaction is one of free gift, on both sides, with no thought of bargain. The 
 child that returns to the Giver the grace or talent of childhood with interest, 
 receives the grace or talent of youth, and the youth, again, the grace or talent of 
 manhood, and, finally, that of old age. God, in each case, may be said either to 
 "take away," or receive back, the first grace, that He may "establish" the 
 second. 
 
 [2287 />] Perhaps, also, John wishes, at the outset of his Gospel, to indicate to 
 his readers why he will very rarely use the Synoptic word, niadds, i.e. "hire," 
 "wages," or "reward." It expresses a truth: but, if used too often and without 
 care, it might lead some to suppose that God bargains. The Fourth Gospel uses 
 the word only once, when Jesus says (iv. 36) "Already is he that is reaping 
 receiving wages" i.e. "The very act of reaping God's harvest is your 'wages,' just 
 as the very act of doing God's will is my 'meat.'" 
 
 2 Comp. xii. 21 TrpoaijXOap (i.e."'EX\vves) $t\t7T7ry ry a7ro B. rrjs Fa\i\aias. 
 
 3 [2289a] A.V. "of B., the city," R.V. "from B., of the city." The Latin 
 MSS. render a7r6 by "a," e/c by "de," "ex" (or om.). 
 
 227 15 — 2 
 
[2290] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 i. 45 — 6 "We have found. .Jesus son of Joseph, — him [that is] from 
 Nazareth ('I. viov tov 'Iwcn^ tov U7r6 ~Ka£ > apeT)...From out [Ik) 
 Nazareth can any good thing be 1 ?" These two passages, so far as 
 they go, suggest that (in both) d-n-o signifies domicile and Ik extraction. 
 In the former, Ik may be used to imply that Philip, though resident 
 in Bethsaida, had sprung "from" Capernaum, the city of Andrew 
 and Peter ; in the latter, to imply that the Messiah could not spring 
 " from " Nazareth (instead of Bethlehem). But this rule seems 
 broken in vii. 41 — 2 "But others said, Can it be that the Christ is to 
 come from out (Ik) Galilee ? Did not the Scripture say that//w« out 
 {Ik) the seed of David, and//w« (d-n-6) Bethlehem, the village where 
 David was (ottov tjv A.), the Christ is to come 2 ?" Here, where we 
 might expect "from out Bethlehem," to denote that the Messiah was 
 to be born there, the weaker preposition is substituted, perhaps 
 because the stronger has been already used to denote extraction from 
 the family of David. 
 
 [2290] Concerning xi. 1 (lit.) " Now there was one [lying] sick 
 (rjv 8e tis ao-0eiw) ~La.zams from Bethany (A. diro BrjOavLas) from out 
 (*k) the village of Mary and Martha her sister" Chrysostom says, 
 " Not at haphazard does the evangelist tell us whence Lazarus was 
 (-TToOei' -qv 6 A.), but for a certain cause, which he will subsequently 
 mention." By the " cause " Chrysostom (doubtless) means Christ's 
 special affection for the whole family at Bethany. For this reason, 
 we ought perhaps to connect " from Bethany," not with " Lazarus " 
 adjectivally, but with "was" predicatively, thus: "Now a certain 
 man, lying sick [at the time], Lazarus [by name], 7vas from 
 Bethany 3 ," which agrees with the construction in (2289) "Now 
 Philip was from Bethsaida." The writer proceeds on the principle of 
 
 1 [2289/;] The Latin versions here translate both airb and e/c by "a": and 
 "Joseph a Nazaret(h) (or, Nazara)" in a, b, e, and/, might mean "Joseph of 
 Nazareth"; ff has "Joseph qui est a Nazareth," which perhaps increases the 
 ambiguity. 
 
 -[2289c] Codex a, "de...de...a"; i, " ex...ex...(om.)"; /, "a...ex...de" ; 
 f, "de Galilaea...de semine David a Bethlehem de castello David venit." Mic. v. 
 2 lias ^k, not airb, in the prophecy about "Bethlehem" here alluded to. 
 
 3 [2290a] Comp. iii. 1 tjv de dfdpwiros, in tlcv <!>., X. ovo/xa avrw, apxuiv tGiv'I. 
 ovtos r/Xde, where apx a " / ' s certainly the emphatic, if not the predicative part, of 
 the sentence. In xi. 1, a, /»,/have "inlirmus Lazarus nomine (or, nomine Lazarus) 
 a Bethania," /'.<•. "a sick man, Lazarus by name, from Bethany"; <■ has "erat 
 autem quidam Lazarus a Bethania qui tenebatur inhrmitate magna"; all render 
 dir6 by "a," in by "de." But d has "de" for both. 
 
 228 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2292] 
 
 "narrowing down." As Lazarus has not been mentioned before, he 
 does not speak of "Lazarus from Bethany," but thus: (i) "one," 
 (2) "lying sick," (3) "Lazarus," (4) "domiciled at Bethany," 
 
 (5) "a native of the village of Mary and Martha." Then follow 
 
 (6) " Mary was the woman that anointed the Saviour's feet," 
 
 (7) "Lazarus her brother was sick," (8) "he whom thou lovest is 
 sick 1 ." It is not certain, he seems to say, that Lazarus was born in 
 Bethany ; but it is certain that he was born in the same village as his 
 sisters, and that he was living now at Bethany. The passage 
 suggests that the evangelist is writing cautiously, in view of differences 
 of opinion ; but it favours the conclusion that he uses divo to mean 
 domicile and e< to mean extraction. 
 
 [2291] xix. 38 "But after these things Joseph from (aVo) Arima- 
 thaea asked Pilate... 2 ." All the evangelists use aVo here. But the 
 parallel Mark and Matthew have "came" in the context of "from 
 Arimathaea" in such a way as to suggest that Joseph came from that 
 town for the purpose of presenting his petition to Pilate. Luke and 
 John make it clear that "from Arimathaea" indicates Joseph's 
 domicile, and does not mean that he came on that day from that 
 village 3 . 
 
 [2292] From the Johannine combinations of diro and e* above 
 we may conclude with certainty that John makes a distinction 
 between them. Light on his motive may be thrown by the following 
 facts. (1) Mark's only use of the phrase "Jesus from Nazareth" is 
 connected with " come," so that it is ambiguous, " There came Jesus 
 from (aV6) Nazareth of Galilee 4 ," where the parallel Matthew omits 
 "Nazareth" and has merely "from Galilee." (2) Matthew elsewhere 
 says that Jesus left "the [city] Nazara" (in which Joseph of 
 Bethlehem had settled on his return from Egypt 5 ) and settled in 
 Capernaum 6 , but that the multitude called Him (not " Jesus from 
 Capernaum " but) " the prophet, Jesus, the [man, or, prophet] from 
 
 1 [2290//) The process of "narrowing down," probably used unconsciously by 
 many, was recognised by the Jews {Sanhedr. 89 £) in God's command to Abraham, 
 (Gen. xxii. 2) "Take now thy son" (Abr. "But I have two"); "thine only son" 
 (Abr. "but each is the only son of his mother"); "whom thou lovest" (Abr. "but 
 I love them both"); "Isaac" (to which there is no reply except in act). 
 
 2 The Latin codices mostly render dwo by "ab," but e by "qui ab" perh. 
 reading 6 aw' 'A. with X. 
 
 3 Mk xv. 43, Mt. xxvii. 57, Lk. xxiii. 51. 4 Mk i. 9. 
 5 Mt. ii. 23 Nafa/><?T. 6 Mt. iv. 13 ttjv Nafaprf. 
 
 229 
 
[2293] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 Nazareth of Galilee 1 ." Luke never uses the phrase "Jesus//w# {or, 
 the [man] from) Nazareth " ; but, in his Introduction, he describes 
 Nazareth as the home of Mary and Joseph from the beginning 
 (although Jesus was born at Bethlehem), and, in the body of his 
 Gospel, on the only occasion on which he mentions Nazareth, he 
 says, "And he came to Nazara where he had been brought up 2 ." 
 The only mention of Nazareth in N.T. apart from the Gospels is in 
 the speech of Peter to Cornelius "Jesus the [man] from Nazareth 3 ." 
 [2293] This, then, is one of the very many instances where John 
 uses a phrase used by Mark and Matthew and disused by Luke — 
 probably because Luke thought it likely to make people suppose that 
 Jesus was born at Nazareth instead of Bethlehem. John takes up 
 the phrase diro N. and puts it before the reader, at the outset of his 
 Gospel, along with ex N., leading us to infer that Jesus might be 
 domiciled at Nazareth without having been born there. At the same 
 time he makes us applaud the faith of Philip, who could accept as 
 the Messiah "Jesus a son of Joseph," domiciled at Nazareth, on the 
 strength of His personality alone 4 . 
 
 1 Mt. xxi. 1 1 6 7rpo07jT7js 'Irjcrovs 6 dirb N. t??s PaXiXeu'as. 
 
 2 Lk. iv. 1 6 rjXdev els Nafapd, ov r/v redpa.LLp.ivos. 
 
 3 [2292 a] Acts x. 36—8, an inextricably confused sentence, or rather group of 
 clauses, in which — without any certain grammatical construction— rbv \byov, and 
 rb yevbp.tvov pvixa, and " beginning from {dirb) Galilee" occur in connexion with 
 "Jesus from {diro) Nazareth." Possibly there was some early confusion between 
 "Jesus beginning" and "the Word beginning," and between the "word" in two 
 senses. W.H. have a long marginal alternative. 
 
 4 [2293 a] 'Airb, of domicile, is not quoted in Steph. from secular authors, 
 though there are abundant instances of it as denoting a school or sect, "those from 
 (oi dirb) the Porch" (also " those from Aristarchus, Pythagoras etc."). Swete (on 
 Mk xv. 43) quotes Joseph. Ant. xvi. 10. 1 (301) TZvpvKXrjs dirb AaKedaiLLOvos. But 
 the quotation, after a parenthesis about the man's character, has £inb'r)fxr}(ras u>s rbv 
 'Bpwbi)v, which suggests that dirb A. e. may mean "having come from Lacedaemon 
 1 n a visit to Herod." Even if that were not the exact meaning there, dirb would 
 probably be influenced by the impending verb (like Soph. Elcctr. 135 rbv y e£ 
 'M8a..Mp.vas...dv(rTd(Tus, quoted by Jelf §647). Thayer quotes no instances from 
 secular authors. In l.XX, between "Jephthah the Gileadite" and "Elon the 
 Zebulonite," we have Judg. xii. 8 " Ibzan from Bethlehem" dirb (but A iic), and 
 sim. in 2 S. xxiii. 20 dirb (parall. to 1 Chr. xi. 22 virip by error, al. ex. dwb). Comp. 
 also the predicative use in j^'A- xii '- - "" V" WVP & a 7 ™ (A <*) ^apd\ dirb (A iic) 
 ovp-ov ffuyyevdas tov Aavd Kai ovofia. o.vt$ Mavwe, Judg. xvii. 1 kcu iytvero dvrip 
 dirb (A <!£) opovs 'Etppaip., Kai ovo/xa a.vr$ 'Meixaias. The variations of A are useful 
 as indicating that different writers might distinguish differently between dirb and 
 (k in phrases of domicile or extraction. 
 
 [2293/'] The difference between dirb and in may also be illustrated by the 
 
 23O 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2295] 
 
 (S) 'And, eK, and n^pA, with eSepxoMAi, see e«, 2326 — 8 
 
 (iv) Aid 
 
 ( I ) Aia with Accusative of Person 
 
 [2294] An action may be done Sia nva when it is done '■'■because 
 of a person" in various aspects of causation : (i) (motive) "because 
 of the doer's love of, or fear of, or, desire to please, the person," 
 (2) (action) "because the person helped, prompted, or constrained, 
 the doer." In the former aspect appear "The Sabbath was made 
 because of [God's love of] man 1 ," and similarly "because of the elect" 
 and "because of Herodias 2 ." The latter, if it occurs at all in N.T., 
 may be exemplified by the phrase "because of the multitude" which in 
 various contexts may suggest (1) because of some one's desire not to 
 jostle, or press through, the multitude, or (2) because the multitude 
 hindered, constrained etc. But in xi. 42 it means "for the sake of 
 helping the multitude 3 ." The Epistle to the Hebrews contains the 
 only passage in N.T. that combines the personal accusative and the 
 personal genitive thus : " It became him, i.e. the Father, because of 
 whom are all things and through whom are all things (SY oV to. ttclvto. 
 Kat Si' ov to. -rrdvTa), in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the 
 captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings 4 ." It is also 
 concerning the Father that the Epistle to the Romans says, " From 
 him and through him, and to him, are all things 5 ." But the Epistle 
 to the Colossians says concerning the Son, "All things through him 
 and to him have been created 6 ." 
 
 [2295] These quotations, by themselves, would suffice to make 
 it probable that, by the end of the first century, Greek Christians 
 would be weighing and discussing the exact phrases by which they 
 ought to express the mediatory action of the Son in the regeneration 
 of the world. Philo actually exhibits such a discussion concerning 
 
 unique phrase (Jn xii. 49) e£ i/xaurov ovk e\d\r]<Ta as compared with the usual ouk 
 cbr' ifxavTov \a\Q. The former goes back more definitely to the fountain-head. 
 It is also more emphatic and comes appropriately in the solemn protest that 
 concludes Christ's public preaching. 
 
 1 Mk ii. 27. 2 Mk xiii. 20, Mt. xxiv. 22, and Mt. xiv. 3. 
 
 3 [2294 a] Mk ii. 4, iii. 9, Lk. v. 19, viii. 19, dia rbv &x^ov. Comp. 
 Mt. xxvii. 19 5i' clvt6j> = (i) "because of my thoughts about him," or (2) "because 
 he terrified me in a vision." On xii. 11 "for the sake of [seeing] him [i.e. Lazarus] 
 Sl' avr6v) " (less probably " by reason of {their having seen] him ") see 1652 /;. 
 
 4 Heb. ii. 10. 
 
 5 Rom. xi. 36 e£ avrou ko.1 5i' avrov ko.1 els avrbv to. navTa. 6 Col. i. 16. 
 
 231 
 
[2296] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 the mediatory action of the Logos. He finds fault with Eve and 
 with Joseph for using the phrase "-through God (Sio. tov Oeov) 1 " — for 
 which he would certainly have rebuked the author of the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews, as implying that God was an instrument. Towards 
 the creation of anything there must be, he says, a combination of 
 several things. To make a house, for example, there must be 
 (i) builder, (2) materials, (3) instruments. In the abstract, he adds 
 a fourth term as follows : (1) the v<j> ov, "by what," to oItlov, "the 
 causal," (2) the e| ov, "from what," r, v\rj, "the material," (3) the oV 
 ov, " through what," to ipyakelov 2 , " the instrumental," (4) the BC o, 
 "because of what," 17 ama, "the cause (or, reason)." Applied to 
 the House of the Universe, the Causal is God, the Material is the 
 four elements, the Instrument is the Word of God 3 . 
 
 [2296] Philo lays great stress on this distinction between the 
 Instrument and the Cause or the Causal. "It characterizes," 
 he says, "those who love truth, and who desire true and wholesome 
 knowledge: but those who say they have 'obtained a thing through 
 God,' [wrongly] suppose the Causal, the Builder, to be a [mere] 
 instrument, and [suppose] the instrument, the human mind, to be 
 the Causal." The passage concludes with the assertion that salvation 
 is not " through God," but "[a gift] from Him (Trap airod) as being 
 the Causal 4 ." 
 
 1 Gen. iv. 1, xl. 8. 
 
 2 [2295 a] Philo i. 161— 2. Instead of to ipyaXttov, he regularly uses to 
 6pyavov, or to. 6pyava, in the context. Aristotle defined a slave as "a living 
 orjj-anon"' and Philo says expressly here opyava yap -r)p.eis, so that the term 
 includes "living instruments." 
 
 :i [2295/'] So far, so good; but as regards the Cause, the 5t' or afrla, the 
 parallel between the earthly house and the House of the Universe is not 
 maintained. For, in dealing with the former, instead of asking the question 
 "Because of what?" (Ata tl ;) he asks " On account of what?" (TiVos Suaca;)— 
 " On account of what [is the house built] except for shelter and safety..." Tivos St 
 ZveKa ttAV o-Kitrr)s kcll acr<pa\eLas Si' S tovto £<ttiv; The sense seems to require rd St 
 St' 8 to0t6 iaTiv, " and this constitutes the St' 6 or Why." In his description of the 
 necessary conditions for a material house, he enumerates only three, (i) architect, 
 (2) stone and wood, (3) tools. He omits tin- cause or motive. Also, in speaking 
 of tlu: House of the Universe, he says that ''the cause (cu'Wct) of it-, creation is the 
 / the trchttect." Apparently he makes the object of the human architect, 
 which he calls "shelter and security." parallel to the motive of the divine 
 Architect, which he calb Ili> "Goodness." 
 
 4 [2296(/| 0«5 oca tov 6eov, d\\a Trap' avrov, tbs atTtov, to o-wfraOat, where 
 ■jrapd implies proceeding from a perSun, whereas £k might mean "from a source." 
 The whole o( the passage indicates a controversial attitude towards loose thinkers, 
 
 232 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2297] 
 
 [2297] What, then, is the meaning of "because of the Father" 
 and "because of me" in vi. 56 — 7 "He that eateth my flesh and 
 drinketh my blood abideth in me and I in him. Even as the living 
 Father sent me and I live because of the Father (ha rbv Trartpa) so he 
 that eateth me, he also shall live because of me (£170-61 81' i/xe) 1 "? 
 Starting from the second clause we begin by assuming that this 
 is different from the corresponding phrase with the genitive in 
 the Epistle, 1 Jn iv. 9 "In this was manifested the love of God in us 
 because God hath sent his only begotten Son into the world that we 
 may live through him (^'o-w/xev 81' avrov)." The phrase £w Sia o-e 
 may mean "I live because of thee" in two senses : (1) "I live because 
 of thy' action in the past [whether that of parents in giving life, or 
 that of friends in saving it]," (2) "I live because I desire to serve 
 thee, must serve thee, for the sake of serving thee [in the future] 2 ." 
 
 who confused these distinctions. Taken all together, these extracts from Philo 
 strengthen the probability that John deliberately reserved the instrumental phrase, 
 di avrov, for the action of the Logos, or Son, both in the Gospel and in the 
 Epistle, so that he would not apply it to the action of the Baptist (2302—4). 
 But they also suggest that John would take pains to distinguish his doctrine of 
 the instrumental action of the incarnate Logos from that of Philo which contem- 
 plated no incarnation and perhaps no personality in the Logos. In any case the 
 facts make it absolutely certain — at least for those who regard the evangelist as 
 a careful writer (not to speak of his being more than usually careful) writing after, 
 and in the midst of, such discussions as these — that John would not use the Si' 6v 
 for the Si ou or vice versa. 
 
 1 [2297a] A.V. "I live by the Father. ..he shall live by me." A.V. mostly 
 uses " by " to translate Sid with personal genitive when it refers to the action of 
 the Logos. Apparently A.V. took Sid with accusative here as meaning the same 
 thing as Sid with genitive. 
 
 2 [2297/*] For (1) comp. Plut. Vit. Alex. § 8 (p. 668 d— e) concerning 
 Alexander, who said he owed life to his father, but good life to Aristotle, Si 
 ineivov /xkv £G)v did tovtov Si KaXQs fcDc, Dion. Hal. 1579 Sid tovs deotk (478 Si' 
 oi)s) /ue7as eytvbfxrjv (Sylb. " frequentius genetivum "), (?) Aristoph. Pint. 470, Plutus 
 says Si ifie re $Givto.s v/xds (ambig., perh. "to gain me"). In Hesiod Works 3 — 4, 
 ov re Sid fipoToi &vS pes... Aids /xeydXoio ^ktjti may mean "because of his action in 
 the past... and thanks to whom (or, at whose mercy) in the future." Timaeus 
 (quoted in Longinus iv. 3) says that Athens was punished as a whole, for the 
 mutilation of the Hermae, more especially Si' eva dvSpa, " because of one man," 
 (Roberts) "the infliction of punishment was chiefly due to Hermocrates the son 
 of Hermon, who was descended... from the outraged god." 
 
 [2297 c] For (2), Wetstein (on Jn vi. 57) quotes Xiphilinus in Caracalla p. 328 
 " I would fain live because of you alone (Si v/xa.s fiovovs £?jv eWXw) that I may be 
 continually heaping favours on you [all]," and Eustathius, who (on Iliad v. 875 
 ffoi Trdvres fiaxo/J-eada) says ijyovv Sid at, Sfioiov t<# 2ot ftD, rjroi Sid ae. This is 
 important as indicating that fai Sid at was a familiar phrase meaning " I live for 
 thy sake," i.e. to do thee service. Comp. Epictet. iv. 1. 150 (given by Wetst. as 
 
 233 
 
[2298] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 But in later Greek the second of these interpretations predominates, 
 especially with the word "live," and where the future is contemplated. 
 Moreover the first interpretation ("I live because of thy action in the 
 past") is scarcely to be distinguished from the genitival form "I live 
 through thy action in the past." Hence we infer that in the present 
 passage the phrase means — or perhaps it will be safer to say, includes 
 as its first meaning — "he also shall live to do me service, or, to do 
 my will." 
 
 [2298] Going back to the parallel and preceding clause, "I live 
 because of 'the Father," are we to infer that this means "I live to do 
 the will ^/"the Father"? This is certainly one aspect of the truth, 
 and it agrees with the tenor of the whole Gospel, and particularly 
 with the words "I am come down from heaven, not to do mine oivn 
 will, but the will of him that sent me 1 ." But Jesus also says "My 
 meat is to do the will of him that sent me 3 ," and this implies that 
 the Father gives the Son "meat," that is, supports and strengthens, 
 and causes the Son's life. Thus we have here the two aspects of 
 causation mentioned above. The first is (motive) "I live because 
 I desire to serve the Father" \ the second is (action) "I live because the 
 Father gives me life." 
 
 [2299] It is quite in John's manner to avail himself of this 
 twofold meaning in order to suggest to his readers something of the 
 manysided mystery of the relation between the Father and the Son. 
 Epictetus (2297 e) had implicitly denied that it was right for anyone 
 
 iii. 26) "For my part I had as soon not live, if one •were bound to live for the 
 sake of Felicion (Sia <t>i\7]Kiuiva) [i.e. to do F. service] putting up with his frowns 
 and fits of slave-like fury (5ov\lko0 (ppvay/xaros, i.e. such as one might expect from 
 a slave promoted to office)." Also Winer (p. 498) quotes Long. Pastor. 2 p. 62 
 (Schaef.) Sid rds vvfi<pas {£r)at. So the philosopher in Epictetus says to God " I 
 abide on earth merely /or thy sake (Sid at) " (2705). 
 
 [2297</] Comparing the two groups, we see that later Greek lakes Sid Tiva. 
 in the second sense, "to do anyone service," and especially in the phrase fw Sid. 
 Where the future is in view, 'Cw Sid would naturally have the second meaning. 
 
 [2297 e] At' d\\ov, (81' ovSeva etc.) without frrjv, occur in Epictetus in con- 
 nexion with his doctrine that we ought not to regard ourselves as unfortunate or 
 in evil case "because of another person," e.g. i. 9. 34 dXXos Si d\\ov ov Svarvxe'i, 
 and Ench. xxiv. 1 ot'' Svvaaai iv ko.k£ elvai 5t' dXXoi'. According to Epictetus, 
 5v(ttvxQ> Si fiXXoc means " I am made unfortunate because of [my thoughts about] 
 another." And this, he says, we ought never to say. This may include both 
 meanings " we arc nol to be unhappy because of what anyone has done in the 
 past," in " because ('/What anyone may experience in the future." 
 
 ' vi. 38. - iv. 34. 
 
 234 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2301] 
 
 to live "because of another.'''' But here John speaks of the disciples 
 as "living because of the Son" and of the Son as "living because of the 
 Father" in a manner that suggests that this is the highest kind of life, 
 hinting even at a reciprocal action, as though the Father also, from 
 the beginning, might have "lived because of the Son" — as we may 
 surely say that the Son "lived because of the Church." 
 
 [2300] This passage, also, partially answers the question, Why 
 does John altogether omit the Synoptic doctrine that the disciples 
 are to do this and that " for the sakeof(lv€Ka)" Christ} The doctrine 
 is here. It is implied that those who receive Christ's flesh and blood 
 are so impregnated with the common life of the Church that hence- 
 forth they "live because of (8id)" Christ. They do not serve Him 
 in this or that single act, by a separate effort on each occasion, 
 but spontaneously as the branch develops in the vine according 
 to the law of the vine — a metaphor not yet mentioned by John but 
 prepared for in the preceding words "He that eateth my flesh and 
 drinketh my blood abideth in me and I in him V 
 
 (2) Aia with Genitive of Person 
 
 [2301] Strictly described, the author of an action (mentioned 
 passively) is distinguished from his agent or instrument by two 
 distinct prepositions, as in Matthew, "that which was spoken by [v-n-6) 
 the Lord through (8id) the prophet 2 ." But Luke only once uses 
 this instrumental 8id in connexion with "prophets" ("written (lit.) 
 through (Std) the prophets"); and once he has "through (8id) the 
 mouth of his holy prophets" (avoiding personal instrumentality) 3 . 
 Where Matthew describes the Baptist as sending "through (Sia) his 
 disciples," Luke has "two (8vo Tivd<s) of his disciples 4 ." In the 
 Triple Tradition, this personal genitive with 8id occurs only in the 
 passages pronouncing woe on him "through whom (81 ov) the Son 
 
 1 [2300 a] Chrysostom comments thus : Kcu 'Iva fx-q AytvvrjTov vop.Lar)S TrpocredrjKev 
 evdvs to, &i.a tov Harepa, ov tovto deixvvs 6'ti evepyetas tlvos XP €L0LV ^X €l Tpbs 
 to £rjv...Ti odu io~TLt>, Aia Tbv ITaWpa ; Ttjc alriav ivTavda alviTTerai fxbvov. "O 5£ 
 \4yei toiovtov eo~TL, Ka#ws eo~Ti ^Qv 6 ITarr/p outo) Kayu fc2. He seems to take 
 did as " because of [the divine begetting]" (in sense (i) given above (2297)), and 
 to interpret the clause as meaning "because of the life similar to His own 
 transmitted to me permanently by the Father." 
 
 2 Mt. i. 22. Comp. ii. 5, 15, 17, 23, iii. 3, iv. 14, viii. 17, xii. 17, xiii. 35, 
 xxi. 4, xxiv. 15, xxvii. 9. 
 
 3 Lk. xviii. 31, i. 70. * Mt. xi. 2, Lk. vii. 19. 
 
 235 
 
[2302] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 of man is to be delivered up'." In John, Sia with genitive of person 
 is repeatedly used to denote the agency of the Logos or of Christ, 
 "All things came into being through him (oY avrov)," "The world 
 came into being through him," "The grace [of God] and the truth 
 [of God] came into being through Jesus Christ," "God sent not the 
 Son into the world to judge the world but that the world should be 
 saved through him 2 " etc. 
 
 [2302] There is ambiguity in i. 7 "This [man] came for witness 
 that he might bear witness concerning the light (<£orrck), in order that 
 all might believe through him (or; through it, oV avrov). He (eVetvos) 
 was not the light, but...." Is it meant (a) that all might believe 
 through John the Baptist, or (b) that all might believe through 
 the Light, or through the Logos in whom is "the Life" that is "the 
 Light of men"? 
 
 In favour of (a) are these considerations. (1) John frequently 
 speaks elsewhere of believing the Son, and on, or in, the Son, and of 
 believing in the Light 3 ; but (2) there is no other Johannine instance 
 of "believe through the Son, or through Him, or through the Light." 
 (3) The change from an unemphatic pronoun ("through him (avTov)") 
 to an emphatic "he (eKctvos)" may be illustrated by other instances 
 in N.T. 4 , so that there is no difficulty in supposing both pronouns 
 to mean "the Baptist." (4) In view of i. 17 "the Law was given 
 through Moses," where subordinate agency is clearly attributed 
 to Moses, why may it not be attributed to John the Baptist? 
 
 [2303] In favour of (b) are the following arguments. (1) This is 
 the first passage in which the word "believe" is mentioned. Now 
 belief, in itself, may be either good or bad, belief in the true 
 God or belief in false gods. Is it likely that the new "belief" 
 should be introduced by the evangelist, as being "belief through" 
 a "man"? (2) When first introducing a term, it is in accordance 
 with the evangelist's style to use it in a broad sense, which he 
 afterwards "narrows down"; and all that he may mean here is that 
 the belief is to be "through the Light" (not, like superstitious 
 beliefs, "through the darkness"). (3) "That all might believe 
 
 1 Mk xiv. 21, Mt. xxvi. 24, Lk. xxii. 22. Comp. Mt. xviii. 7, Lk. xvii. 1. 
 
 2 [2301 a] Jn i. 3, 10, 17, iii. 17 etc. In xiv. 6 "No man cometh to the 
 Father save through me," the context ("I am the way") may justify the 
 supposition that the phrase is metaphorical, and that the genitive is local, Si 68ov. 
 
 :1 xii. 36 7T. 645 t6 0UJf. 
 
 4 See Field, Otiutn (on 2 Tim. i?.«6). 
 
 236 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2304] 
 
 through John the Baptist" — even if we admit that this was the 
 will of God in sending the Baptist — is not so natural, in any 
 Christian writer, as "that all might believe through the Christ, 
 or through the Son," or "that Israel should believe through the 
 Baptist." 
 
 [2304] (4) In the Fourth Gospel, which consistently subordinates 
 the Baptist to the Messiah, and in which the former is called by the 
 latter a mere lamp (v. 35), is it likely that the evangelist should say 
 that this "lamp" was sent to bear witness concerning the Light "in 
 order that all men should believe — through the 'lamp'"? (5) The 
 agency attributed to Moses is merely the transmission (from God to 
 man) of the written Law, which the context contrasts with "Grace 
 and truth"; but the agency that would produce Belief is of a much 
 higher and more subtle kind. (6) The work to be accomplished 
 through the agency of the Baptist would be better described in his 
 own language ("in order that there may be manifested to Israel") as 
 the manifestation of the Son, through whom "all" were to believe 
 in the Father. (7) In xvii. 20 ("those who believe through their 
 logos or word," i.e. through the word of the disciples) the evangelist 
 avoids saying "believe through them" (although St Paul uses that 
 phrase 1 ) and this, too, although the disciples were destined to 
 receive the Spirit: much more does it seem likely that John would 
 avoid saying that "all men" were intended (in the divine Providence) 
 to "believe through the Baptist 2 ." (8) The pronoun auVos — with 
 the exception of the unemphatic and parenthetic "his name was 
 John" (ovofxa avrw 'I.), rendered in Latin as well as in English 
 "whose" — is used always in this Prologue for the Word, the Light 
 etc.; and the words or phrases "through him," "without him," 
 "in him," "it," "him" etc. occur so frequently that the interpretation 
 of a particular "through him "as referring to John the Baptist carries 
 with it a sense of incongruity. It may be added that the only 
 instance of 81' avrov in the Epistle refers to the Son ("that we may 
 
 1 1 Cor. iii. 5. 
 
 2 [2304a] The Epistles teem with phrases indicating that "through him (avrov)," 
 i.e. through Jesus, would be used in connexion with every gift of God to man, 
 and, although -jno-Tevio is not thus used, the adjective iri<rr6s in the First Epistle 
 of St Peter (i. 20 — 1) describes the Messiah "foreknown before the foundation 
 of the world but manifested at the last of the times for your sakes who through 
 him are made firm in trust to God (rovs hi avrov iner ovs els 6e6v)." 
 
 237 
 
[2305] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 live through Mm 1 "). There appears a preponderance of probability 
 in favour of the interpretation "that he might bear witness con- 
 cerning the Light that all might believe through that [Light] 2 ." 
 
 (v) Els (see also 2706 foil.) 
 
 (a) For mcTey'to eic, see 1480 foil. 
 (/3) Eic without verb of motion 
 
 [2305] This construction is used in the words of Christ, ix. 7 
 "Go wash to the pool of Siloam," repeated by the blind man thus, 
 ix. 11 "He said to me, Go to Siloam and wash 3 ." Motion is also 
 implied in xx. 7 "the napkin... apart, rolled up [and put] into one 
 place," which perhaps implies more deliberateness ("first rolled 
 up and then carried into a place apart") than would have been 
 implied by ev. 
 
 [2306] Far more important than these, are passages, in connexion 
 with some spiritual doctrine of unity, where John uses eis with a verb 
 that does not imply motion, such as xvii. 23 "that they may be 
 completely perfected into one (TeTtAaiojueVoi eis ev)." This is perhaps 
 little more than a brief way of saying "that they may be completely 
 perfected and brought into unity." But it is not so easy to explain 
 1 Jn v. 8 "Three are they that bear witness, the spirit and the water 
 and the blood, and the three are into the one (ol Tpels £t? to IV 
 elan)." Elaiv appears to be emphatic ("are essentially"), and the 
 writer seems to suggest (1) the reality of three witnesses tending "to" 
 one truths and (2) the reality of three essences harmonizing themselves 
 "into" one nature, namely, that of the crucified Son who first 
 
 1 1 Jn iv. 9 IVo frj(TU)/j.fv 5(' avTov. 
 
 '-' [2304 £] Origen, after an exposition of the words "he came for witness 
 to bear witness of the light," says (Iluet ii. 85 n) "we must next consider what 
 is to be thought about the words 'That all might believe through him.'" 
 Unfortunately what should follow has been lost. Cramer, however, prints, as 
 from Origer^, "That is to say, so far as He was concerned (farov i<j> eavT$) — even 
 though ' all ' did not ' believe.' For [similarly], if all men should not receive 
 the light that comes from the sun, one would not say, as a consequence, that the 
 sun did not rise for the purpose of universal enlightenment ; for the purpose of Him 
 that sent him was that all should believe (17 yap irpbdeais rod ir(^\pavTO% avrbv tjv 
 iri<TT(d<Tai iravra.%)." This rather suggests that < >rigen took 8l avrov to mean 
 "through the Light— so far as the Light is concerned." 
 
 :1 1 2305 </ 1 I' or \oveii> elf, see Epict. iii. 22. 71 'if' avro Xovcrrj efs OKa<py)v 
 (lit.) "to bathe the child into the tub." Nlwrw ek is not given by Steph. 
 On th for iv in the Synoplists and later Greek, see 2706 foil. 
 
 23S 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2307] 
 
 delivered up His Spirit to God and then poured forth from His 
 side "water and blood" for the sake of men. 
 
 [2307] As regards the phrase twice 1 used to describe Christ's 
 visitations after the Resurrection (xx. 19, 26) "and he stood (lit.) to 
 the midst of the disciples," it is preceded in the former case by 
 "Jesus came" and in the latter by "Jesus cometh," so as to preclude 
 the explanation that it is a condensed form of " came to, and stood 
 among, the disciples." And it is the more remarkable because, 
 concerning a similar visitation, Luke has (xxiv. 36) "And while they 
 were speaking these things he himself stood in the midst of them " ; 
 and the tradition about Jesus " in the midst " of the disciples is found 
 in the Epistle to the Hebrews 2 . The writer of that Epistle regards 
 Jesus as "singing the praises of God in the midst of the disciples." 
 Justin Martyr takes the same view. He mentions the "singing" 
 immediately after mentioning the Resurrection ; he says that Jesus 
 " stood in the midst of the disciples," and he appeals for confirmation 
 to "the Memoirs of the Apostles." His language indicates that he 
 has in view the manifestation to the Eleven described by Luke 3 . 
 John — on the supposition that he knew this traditional phrase 
 to have been connected with Christ's resurrection by Luke — may be 
 presumed to have had some good reason for departing from Luke's 
 
 1 [2307 a] In Jn xxi. 4 W.H. Zcttt} 'Irjaovs et's (marg. eirl) tov alyiaX6v, all the 
 Mss. (Alford) exc. BC have ewi. The Latin versions have "in," exc. it which 
 has "ad" corresponding to D eiri. In BC the juxtaposition of the two similar 
 syllables TceiC suggests that Tc may have been repeated as eis (comp. 2661 c) and 
 may have supplanted iiri. There would also be a temptation to alter Zctt] iiri to 
 &7T77 et's in order to assimilate the phrase to the two instances of 'iarr) eis applied 
 by Jn to manifestations after the Resurrection. Clem. Alex. 104 quotes freely as 
 follows : 4v yovv t£ evayyeXlqi, aradels, (prialv, 6 Kvpios eirl rf aiyiaXy wpbs tovs 
 /xa6r]Tds — aXievovres 8e 'irvxov — ivecpuvqctv (?) re, Ylaibia, p.rj tl (?) 6\f/ov ?X eT€ >* 
 
 - [2307/'] Heb. ii. 12 "He is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, 
 'I will announce thy name to my brethren; in the midst of the assembly (eKKX-qaias) 
 I will sing of (vfiv-hau) thee'" (Ps. xxii. 22). So Just. Martyr Tryph. 106 ko.1 6'rt 
 ev pimp rdv ade\(pu>v avrov t<TT7], tuiv aTroarbXuv ...ko.1 fj-er avrCov Siayuiv v/iftjcre 
 rbv deov, ws Kai ev tols airoixv-rnxovevixaai twu dwoaroXuv bTjXovTai yeyevr^fxevov, to. 
 XeiTroura tov xj/aXfxou eSrjXucrev. "Effrc 5e ravra. Air)yr]aop.ai to ovo/j.6. aov Toh 
 ab~eX<poh fiov, ei< fieay iiacXrio-las v/mvtjo-uj ae. The words " not ashamed to call them 
 brethren" are illustrated by Jn xx. 17 "Go unto my brethren, and say to them, 
 I ascend to my Father and your Father." This and Mt. xxviii. 10 are the only 
 passages in the Gospels where Jesus uses the term thus definitely (1749). 
 
 3 [2307,:] Mk xiv. 26 and Mt. xxvi. 30 place the "singing [of a hymn]" on 
 the night before the Crucifixion. Lk. xxii. 39 omits it there. 
 
 239 
 
[2308] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 language. Perhaps he wished to describe the Saviour, not as singing 
 praises to God, but as bringing strength to men ; and on that account 
 he first mentions the " coming " (1633 foil.) so as to suggest the 
 Helper, and then he mentions Him as " standing into the midst of 
 the disciples," so as to combine mystically the ancient notion of the 
 firm, erect, and immoveable Deliverer with that of the Spirit passing 
 " into the midst " of the Church, and " into the midst " of each of 
 the disciples 1 . This view is somewhat confirmed by the next 
 instance to be discussed. 
 
 [2308] i. l8 /iovoyci'7/s #€os o wv £ts tov koXttov tov 7raTpos is the 
 
 only passage where the Fourth Gospel uses eh with a form of elvcu. 
 SS has "an only [one] a Son from the bosom of his Father," and 
 codex a " nisi unicus Alius solus (? els) sinum patris ipse enarravit." 
 But there can be no doubt that ets t. koXttov is the true reading and 
 that it is intended to mean something different from (xiii. 23) eV t<3 
 
 Kokiru)'. In 1. 1, o Aoyos rye irpos tov 6e6v, koI #eos tjv 6 Aoyos, the 
 
 preposition 7rpos is used to describe " God, the Logos " as from the 
 
 1 [2307 <•/] The passage may be compared with 1 S. iii. 10 "And the Lord 
 came, and stood, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel " ( LXX Kar^ar-r], 
 but "Another" (Field) ia-r-riXwdt}). The Lord had been previously thrice 
 described (1 S. iii. 4 — 8) as simply "calling" Samuel; but the latter did not recog- 
 nise Him. Now at last, it is said, the Lord "came and stood, or took up his stand 
 (Gesen. 426)" — and now Samuel recognises and replies, "Speak, for thy servant 
 heareth." The Targum, understanding the meaning of the Lord's "coming" to 
 be, not that He really '■'■came," but that He revealed Himself as present, has "And 
 Jehovah was revealed and stood ready (Levy Ch. ii. 250 a) and called." Both in 
 Heb. and Aram, the word for "stand" here means "standfast, or ready." There 
 is little doubt that the Targum attached a spiritual meaning to the "standing" as 
 well as to the "coming." A whole treatise might be compiled about Philo's 
 views of God as ' ' standing (e<rr<2)Tci) " and unchangeable, and of the Logos as 
 "standing and health-giving" (i. 94 "None but the true God standeth" i. 93 
 "the standing, wholesome, and right Logos," comp. i. 269, 276, 425, 586, 591, 
 687, 688). Simon Magus (Clem. Alex. 456) claimed to be "the standing One." 
 Origen (Huel ii. 82 (comp. ii. 129)) says that this "standing" denotes Christ's 
 ■wporj-yovix4vT)v inroaracnv Si-qKOvaav eirl iravra rbv Kdfffxov Kara ras \pvxa.s rds \oyiK<is. 
 Comp. Log. Oxyrhynch. "I stood (?<rTr)t>) in the midst of the world (udo-fiov) and 
 in the flesh appeared to them." It- is quite characteristic of John that he should 
 introduce at tin- beginning and at the end of his Gospel similar yet varied traditions 
 about the Logos, "standing in the midst " (2646—9). 
 
 8 [2308</| Chrys., however, reprinted by Migne, after quoting the text 6 <2v 
 els at the head of his discourse, quotes it (/. 99) thus, (iwwv,. tiri'O wv 4v t<^ k6\tt^> 
 t. iraTi>/>s, and henceforth has, consistently, ev (once (p. 100) dis ev toTs k<4\7tois 
 
 OVTOS TOtS TTCLTplKOis). 
 
 240 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2310] 
 
 beginning "[looking] toward (irp6<;) God." In xvii. 21 and elsewhere 
 He is described as being "in " the Father and the Father "in " Him. 
 But the present passage describes Him as Only begotten, incarnate, 
 on earth, declaring the invisible mysteries of God to man. As He is 
 "Only begotten," the word "bosom" is introduced to suggest the 
 love of the Feather for the Son ; and as He is Mediator and 
 Interpreter penetrating from earth into (ek) the deepest secrets of 
 God in heaven, — where He IS, in Spirit, even when His body is 
 on earth — He is described as " He that IS into the bosom of the 
 Father." 
 
 [2309] As a whole, the evangelist's use of eis without verbs of 
 motion leads to the conclusion that when he uses it of divine 
 mysteries, he wishes to combine the notions of motion and rest as 
 belonging to God and to the manifestations of God. From God, 
 the Logos is ever coming to men and is also abiding in them. From 
 Man the Logos is ever going up to God and is also abiding in Him. 
 Hence concerning the Son incarnate on earth, but ever going up in 
 thought and word and act to the Father, the evangelist says that "He 
 IS to the bosom of the Father." Again, concerning the Son, when He 
 has ascended to heaven, but is ever coming down to the hearts 
 of men, it is said that He "came, or cometh, and stood to the midst 
 of the disciples.''' 
 
 (7) Eic, "to" or "into" 
 
 [2310] Eis is sometimes ambiguous, since it may mean " to" or 
 " into." In iv. 5 " He cometh therefore to a city (eis 7roA.1v)," eis has 
 not the same meaning as in iv. 8, 28 "had gone away, or, went away, 
 into the city (eis rrjv tt.) " : for the context indicates that in the former 
 passage eis means only "to the neighbourhood of." The ambiguity 
 might have been avoided by writing "He draweth near to a city 1 ," 
 but John prefers to give the meaning vaguely first and to "narrow 
 down " afterwards (2290). It follows that, in the account of the 
 Resurrection, (xx. 1) "she cometh to (epx eTat € '?) the tomb" may be 
 John's way of expressing what Mark and Luke express by the 
 preposition eiri, " up to" or " towards" where Matthew has " they 
 came to behold the tomb 2 ." John perhaps hardly ever uses «ri 
 
 1 [2310 a] Comp. Mt. xxi. 1 ijyyiaav eis 'I. /cat fjXdov eis B., Mk xi. 1 iyyifovcriv 
 eis 'I. eis B. Lk. xix. 29 has ko.1 iyivero ws -rjyyiaev eis B. preceded by xix. 28 /cat 
 etVwf raOTa iiropevero 'inirpoodev ava(3aivwi> eis I. 
 
 2 Mk xvi. 2, Lk. xxiv. 1, Mt. xxviii. 1. 
 
 A. VI. 241 l6 
 
[2311] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 of motion " up to " or " towards " a place (2336). After making this 
 general statement about Mary Magdalene, he leads us to suppose 
 that she did not go right up to the tomb but ran back — as soon as 
 she perceived that the stone had been rolled away — to tell the story 
 to Peter and his companion. 
 
 [2311] Mark and Luke describe the women as subsequently 
 " entering (elaeXOovo-aL)." Matthew omits this. John has an account 
 of the two disciples and Mary, in which the details — how the two 
 "began to come to (rjpxovTo e ^) " (R--V. "went toward") the tomb, 
 and the other disciple "came first," yet "entered not in," and how 
 Peter "cometh" and "entered," and then the other disciple 
 "entered" (he that "came first") and how Mary "stood outside" — 
 are fully described in such a way as to suggest that the Fourth 
 Evangelist desired to clear up obscurities in early tradition, and to 
 shew how it came to pass that Mary Magdalene — although she did 
 not actually " enter the tomb " — was the first to see the risen 
 Saviour ; and the unnamed disciple, though not the first to enter the 
 tomb nor the first to see the Saviour, was the first to " believe." 
 
 (6") ElC ZOOHN AICONION 
 
 [2312] In vi. 27 " work not for the food that perisheth, but for the 
 food that abideth unto eternal life (tt)i/ /xevovaav eis £. alwviov) " if John 
 had meant merely "abideth for ever," would he not have written, as 
 elsewhere (viii. 35, xii. 34), " abideth for ever (/xeVct ets toV alwva)," and 
 consequently does he not mean here "abideth with a view to eternal 
 life" i.e. in order to produce eternal life? That meaning is probably 
 included. But as the "bread" is itself called (vi. 51) "living," and 
 the "water" also (iv. 10, n) "living," the full meaning probably is 
 " abideth for life eternal" in the double sense of our English "for," 
 namely, (1) " lasting for " (2) "for the sake of" or "for the purpose of 
 producing." 
 
 [2313] Another interpretation would make a pause after 
 "abideth" (as in xv. 16 "That your fruit may abide)\" so that the 
 meaning would be, "Work not for the transitory but for the abiding 
 food — with a view to life eternal." The same doubt attends iv. 36, 
 " Already doth he that reapeth receive wages and gather fruit — with 
 
 1 [2313 r/ 1 Comp. 1 Pet. i. 23 "Having been begotten again, not from cor- 
 ruptible seed but from incorruptible, through the Word of God living and abiding 
 (5ia \6yov fwiros Otou nal /x^vovtos)" and I Cor. xiii. 13 "And now abideth faith, 
 
 hope, love." 
 
 242 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2316] 
 
 a view to life eternal 1 ," where the "view" is probably not man's view- 
 but God's. That is to say, the reaper is not described as working 
 with his eyes fixed on life eternal, but the fruit is regarded as stored 
 up, in the eyes of God (or according to the will of God), for eternal 
 life. 
 
 [2314] In iv. 14 "The water that I will give him shall become in 
 him a fountain of water leaping (a\\o/xevov) — unto (eh) life eternal" 
 some have taken the meaning to be "leaping into life eternal.' 1 '' This 
 would imply that the water was, at first, in the human being, stagnant 
 as in a cistern, and now became transmuted to a bubbling fountain. 
 But all the Biblical traditions about the divine " Water," and 
 especially those in John, suggest that the water from heaven is 
 " living " from the first. Moreover, though " leap into life " is good 
 English, the metaphor is not alleged to occur in Greek. Nor is 
 aWofxai alleged in the Thesaurus to be elsewhere applied to water. 
 The Greeks have an abundant vocabulary to express a bubbling 
 fountain 2 — but (so far as is known) they never use aAAo/xai thus. 
 
 [2315] But a clue to the Johannine expression may be found in 
 the fact that the evangelist always connects the "water" of heaven 
 with the Spirit, directly or indirectly, and that he does this expressly 
 in the words (vii. 38) "He that believeth on me. ..rivers from his 
 belly shall flow— of living ivater" where he explains that this was 
 "said about the Spirit" which was to be transmitted from Christ to 
 the disciples and through them to the world in a continuous stream. 
 Now aAXo/Aot, or €<£<zAA.o/acu, in LXX, is applied to the action of 
 a "spirit of God" " forcing its way" or " falling violently " on Samson, 
 Saul, and David 3 . 
 
 [2316] These passages suggest that "leaping" is used in the 
 Gospel with some special reference to the action of the Spirit. As 
 the Spirit, when likened to wind, may be said to " blow " or "breathe" 
 where it listeth, so, when likened to water from heaven — which leaps 
 
 1 [2313 /'] "H5rj 6 deptfav /xardbu \ap.(3di>et. Kal crwdyei Kapirbv els ^wtjc a'ubviov. 
 In xii. 25 eh fujr]i> alwviov <pv\d£ei, the nature and the position of the verb make 
 the meaning certain. 
 
 2 [2314 a] E.g. in Prov. xviii. 4 "the wellspring of wisdom is [as] a flowing 
 brook " LXX dvawjidvei (al. dvawT]8Q)v), Aq. Sym. dvafi\vfav, Theod. av p.(3 pu>v. 
 Steph. quotes no passage except this to illustrate the use of dWo/xai " de aqua 
 scaturiente." 
 
 3 [2315 a] "AXKonai in Judg. xiv. 6, 19, xv. 14, 1 S. x. 10, e<pd\\o/xai. in 1 S. x. 6, 
 xi. 6. In 1 S. xvi. 13 "The Spirit of the Lord leapt on David from that day 
 forth," LXX has e^Aaro, Aq. has ivrjvXladr], Sym. wp/j.ijaei', Theod. ewecpavev. 
 
 243 l6—2 
 
[2316] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 down upon the earth and fertilises it — the Spirit may be said to 
 " leap " with a mighty rush ; and indeed this notion of rushing down 
 mightily is connected by Luke with the Pentecostal descent of the 
 Spirit manifested in tongues of flame 1 . It is possible that there may 
 be a double meaning in the word here. Superficially, and literally, 
 it is intended to convey to the Samaritan Woman (or to readers in 
 her position) the notion of a fountain "leaping up" (as in Numbers 
 xxi. 17, "Spring up, O well") in opposition to a deep well. But 
 mystically it appears to mean water "leaping down'' to convey life, 
 or else "pulsing" with life, the water of regeneration' 2 . 
 
 1 Acts ii. 2. 
 
 2 [2316 a] The noun a\pLa (Steph.) is used for the pulsation of the heart and 
 also for the first "leaping" of the unborn babe in the womb, corresponding to the 
 verb ffKiprao) in Lk. i. 41 icrKlpr-qaev to /3pec/>os iv rrj /coiXia avrrjs /cat cirXTjtrdr) 
 irvevfj.a.Tos ayiov 77 'E\«crd/3eT. It is, perhaps, a general belief that, in the Dialogue 
 with Nicodemus, the words (Jn iii. 5) "unless a man be begotten from Water and 
 Spirit" mean "unless a man's body be baptized in material water and his soul 
 be regenerate from the Spirit." But the meaning appears to be " begotten from 
 spiritual water" the water of inward generation. 
 
 [2316/$] Origen often quotes iv. 14, sometimes blending it with vii. 38 "rivers 
 of water," and seeming to interpret aWo/xevou in different ways, occasionally alter- 
 in<* els to eirl to suit his interpretation. A passage in his Coram, ad loe. has ixctte 
 TT7)yr)v ...avafi\v(x06.veiv kv avrui &vw tttiSwvtwv vdaruv ...aWeaOcu ko.1 Tr^SaV eVt to 
 avwTepov. eiri ttjv aiibviov farjv. But he proceeds to quote Cant. ii. 8 "leaping upon 
 the mountains, skipping upon the hills," Trrjdwv ewi to. 8pr) 5to.\\6/j.evos iwl roi>s 
 povi>ovs, which he explains of the Bridegroom— presumably the Holy Spirit, or 
 the Word — "leaping" now upon the more exalted, now on inferior, souls; 
 "Similarly here the fountain created in him that hath drunk of the water that 
 Jesus giveth leapeth to eternal life." Then he adds "But perhaps also it will 
 leap after (TTT/S^crei ^to.) the eternal life, [namely] to (els) the Father [who is] 
 beyond the eternal life. For Christ is the life. But He that is greater than Christ 
 is greater than life." Later on, he looks favourably on Heracleon's explanation of 
 " leaping." 06k airiOavwi 5e to aWofxhov onq^rjixaTO, ko.1 tovs /xeTaXa^dvovras tov 
 avwdev iinxopvy 01 '^'' 01 ' v\ov<rius ko.1 avrohs «'k/3\iVoi ds ttjv eTipwv aidbviov fajTje to. 
 tirLKexopvyy/J-tva ainoh. Heracleon's rendering of eis a. j"., "701th a view to 
 produce eternal life" in others, agrees with the doctrine in vii. 38; but it will be 
 rved that he does not paraphrase ak'kop.e'vov by ava.jl\vo-ai but by iic(i\&<rat. In 
 Saul of Tarsus, for example, the water of life became a fountain— not merely 
 "leaping [up]" to his own eternal life, but— "leaping [out]" to the eternal life of 
 the Gentile world. 
 
 [2316r] Comp. Aboth ii. 10— n (ed. Taylor), where Rabban Jochanan, 
 ing his five best pupils, calls Eliezer son ol Hyrcanus "a plastered cistern, 
 which loseth not a drop," and Eleazar son of Arak " a welling spring." He gave 
 the palm to Eliezer, bul the spiritually minded Abba Saul (1022) said, "If all the 
 w ise oi I Mr] were in one >i ale of the balam e, and Eliezer son of I [yrcanus with 
 them, and Eleazar son of Arak in the other scale, he would outweigh them all." 
 
 244 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2317] 
 
 (e) "Oyontai eic (xix. 37) 
 
 [2317] El's Ttva is used with ISelu, opav and fiXirreiv to mean 
 "looking to" a person for help or encouragement, or in regard and 
 deference 1 . Et's is also used thus in LXX, sometimes without a verb 
 ("our eyes [are] to the Lord") but sometimes with one, about 
 "looking to" Jehovah, to Abraham etc. 2 Hence in xix. 37 "And 
 another scripture saith, They shall look to (oif/ovrat eh) him whom 
 they pierced" we must be prepared to find the "looking" of 
 a reverential kind. The " scripture " is from Zechariah's prophecy 
 about "looking" and "mourning," where LXX and the other 
 translators differ greatly 3 , and quotations from Revelation, Barnabas, 
 and Justin indicate early Christian divergences as to traditions about 
 "looking to" or "looking at" Jesus, and "mourning 4 ." 
 
 1 [2317 a] Steph. (bpaw, 2137, 2139, and eh 292) quotes abundant instances. 
 
 - [2317/;] With e>/3\eVw in Is. xvii. 7, xxii. n, li. 1, 2. The Heb. prep, 
 "to" corresponding to et's (Gesen. 40<?) is used with verbs that imply looking 
 to anyone in love, hope, expectation, or longing. 
 
 3 [2317 c] Zech. xii. 10 "they shall look unto me (marg. him) whom they 
 pierced and they shall mourn for him." LXX rat ewi^\4\povrat irpbs fie av8' div 
 KarupxycravTO Ka -l Koxpovrai eV avrbv (al. exempl. ecp' eavrovs), Aq. avv up e^eKevrriaav 
 rat KO\povrai avrbv, Sym. 'e'firrpocrOev eire^eKevrrjaav Kal Kb\[/ovrai avrdv, Theod. Kal 
 e-KLfiXi'xpovTai. rrpbs fie els ov e^eK^vTTjtxav /cat Koipovrai avrbv. The Targum renders 
 "They shall look unto me" (Walton) " Rogabunt a facie mea," implying "they 
 shall stand looking in expectation and in supplication before my face." The 
 variant e<p' eavrots should be noted. It converts the " mourning" for the "pierced" 
 into " mourning" for the piercers themselves, and quite transmutes the passage. 
 
 4 [2317 d] There was an early twofold application of Zech. xii. 10. Those 
 who "looked" might be (1) Gentiles, (2) Jews; Gentiles, or "nations," might 
 be taken to include (3) the whole world, when referring to the Last Judgment. 
 Zech. xii. 12 "And the land shall mourn, every family apart," clearly refers to 
 the "land" of Judaea, and the "families" are immediately mentioned as those 
 of David, Nathan, Levi, and Simeon, but the LXX rat Kb\j/erai 77 777 Kara 
 <pv\as (pv\ds, might be rendered "the earth. ..tribe by tribe," and this might 
 be taken to mean " the tribes, or nations, of the earth." Moreover, in Zech. xii. 10, 
 N has btyovrai for Ko\povrai, and this indicates that oxj/ovrai avrbv, "shall see him," 
 might be substituted for (Aq. Sym. Theod.) Koxj/ovrat avrbv, "shall mourn for 
 him," by Greek corruption. 
 
 [2317 c] Rev. i. 7 has 6\f/erai avrbv rrds b<pda\fibs Kal oirives avrbv i^eKivrrjo-av, 
 Kal Kb\j/ovrai eV avrbv iraffai al (pv\al tt)s yrjs, which applies the prophecy to the 
 whole world under the term " tribes of the earth." But it drops the preposition 
 after the verb of seeing, thus giving, " Every eye shall see him," instead of " Every 
 eye shall look to him." However, it retains "for him" in "they shall mourn 
 for hi in." 
 
 [2317 /"] Mt. xxiv. 30 has rat rbre [<pavrj<rerai rb o-qfielov rod vlov rod dvOpwirov 
 ev ovpavui Kal rbre KoxpovraL irdaai at <pv\ai rrjs yijs /cat] oipovrai r. v. r. a. epxbuevnv 
 
 245 
 
[2318] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 [2318] All the Synoptists mention a "beholding {dewpelv)" of 
 some kind immediately after the death of Jesus. But Mark and 
 Matthew connect it simply with the women "standing afar off 1 " and 
 do not mention any "mourning." Luke, besides mentioning the 
 women, describes "all the multitudes that had come together to 
 behold this," as " beholding the things that had come to pass, and 
 
 eirl t. ve<pe\Qv. Here the three Synoptists agree in the words "And then shall 
 they see the Son of man coming...," but the bracketed words, which are in 
 Matthew alone, represent a version of the tradition of Revelation "they shall 
 mourn for him" from which "for him " has been dropped, so as to represent 
 the '■'■tribes of the earth'" as " mourning" for their own sakes — an entirely new 
 departure. 
 
 [2317 ,.f] Barnabas applies the prophecy to those who crucified the Lord, vii. 9 
 " Since they shall see Him (oxpovrai avrov) then in the [last] day (Zech. xii. 10 
 "in that day") wearing the scarlet robe. ..and they shall say, 'Is not this He 
 whom we crucified, having set Him at naught and pierced and spit upon Him?'" 
 And he, too, drops the preposition that is essential to the meaning ("look to") 
 and omits all mention of " mourning." 
 
 [2317 h] Justin expressly applies Zech. xii. 10 to the Jews, after mentioning 
 a repentance that comes too late to prevent the tortures of hell, 1 Apol. 52 "And 
 what the peoples (Kaol) of the Jews will say and do... was prophesied thus by 
 Zechariah the prophet... They shall mourn {Kbxpovrai) tribe to (irp6s) tribe, and 
 then they shall look to(?) Him whom they pierced (rdre oypovTai els 8v e^eKevr-qaav)" — 
 a curious disarrangement, where perhaps Justin misunderstands "look to" (see 
 below). The preposition " to" is retained, though ''look" is dropped, when Justin, 
 mentioning Hosea (!) and Daniel, says to Trypho [Tryph. 14) " Your people will 
 see and understand to whom they have pierced (6\perai 6 Xaos vfiwv koX yvupiel els 
 hv i^Kivr-qaav)" and again (32) "one [Advent] in which He was pierced by you, 
 but a second when ye shall recognise to whom ye pierced (e-rrtyvwo-ecrde els 6v e'£- 
 eKevT-qaaTe) and your tribes shall mourn (KbxpovTai) tribe to {vrpbs) tribe...," (64) 
 "whom they that pierced Him are destined to see and mourn (8c bpav p.e\\ov<ri 
 ko.1 KbwTeadai oi tKKevT-qaavTes aurbv)," (126) "who shall come again also and then 
 your twelve tribes shall mourn (Koif/oi>Tai)." In all these passages Justin drops 
 the prophetic "for him," and makes the Jews " mourn" for fear of punishment. 
 In two of them he alters "look" into "know" or "recognise" in such a way 
 as to suggest that he takes 8\f/ovrai els Sv i%eK. to mean, "they shall see and 
 recognise Him against -whom they have raised their hands to pierce Him." 
 
 [2317 i] The Gospel of Peter says that after the crucifixion (§7) "the Jews 
 and the elders and the priests... began to mourn (KOTrreadai) and to say, Alas for 
 our sins," and also that (§ S) "the scribes and Pharisees and elders... heard that 
 the whole people (\ct6s) murmured and [mourned] beating their breasts (icd-HTerou. 
 ra ffTjjdij)." This resembles I.k. xxiii. 48 TvirTovres to. aTTjd-q (where SS and 
 Other authorities add a clause like that of the Gospel of l'eteri. 
 
 1 [2318<;] Mk xv. 40, Mt. xxvii. 55 ■qaau 5i Kal (Ml. ixei) ywaiKes diro 
 fia.Kp60ei> dewpou<Tai. Ll<. xxiii. 49 mentions the women later xat yvvaLKes...6pu><Tai 
 raOra. 
 
 246 
 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2320] 
 
 beating their breasts 1 " — apparently indicating the dissent of the 
 multitude of pilgrims from the act of the rulers of the Jews. John 
 applies the prophecy of Zechariah (concerning the " looking " of the 
 house of Judah "to" Him whom " they pierced "), not to the Jews 
 but to the four soldiers used by the Jews as their instruments with 
 the intention — so to speak — of " breaking the bones " of the Paschal 
 Lamb. This intention is frustrated. Instead of "breaking the 
 bones," one of the soldiers pierces the side of the Saviour, thereby 
 drawing forth "blood and water." Then the four soldiers — re- 
 presenting the four quarters of the world — are supposed to stand 
 "looking to him whom they pierced," and the reader is left to 
 interpret this in a twofold sense, present and future. They look 
 to Him now in amazement ; they will look to Him for forgiveness 
 and salvation 2 . 
 
 (X) Eic TeAoc 
 
 [2319] Eis re'Aos occurs in John once, in the only passage where 
 he mentions reXo?, xiii. i (R.V.) "Jesus, knowing that his hour was 
 come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having 
 loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end 
 (marg. to tlie uttermost) (eis re'W)." It will be shewn that the 
 ambiguity of this phrase has influenced other passages in N.T. and 
 that John probably desires to suggest to his readers both the 
 meanings given by R.V. 
 
 [2320] In LXX, eis re'Aos means " to the end" in the sense of "to 
 the [bitter] end" i.e. utter destruction, or " to the [good] end," 
 i.e. perfect deliverance or salvation. Hence it sometimes represents 
 the Hebrew verb reduplicated for emphasis (Gen. xlvi. 4) " I will also 
 surely bring thee up again" LXX " I will bring thee up to the 
 uttermost, or, in the end (cis tc'Aos)." On the other hand, in Job, 
 LXX has "let him not cut me off A? the [bitter] end (cis reAos)," where 
 the Hebrew and Aquila have " let loose the hand [for destruction] 
 
 3 » 
 
 1 Lk. xxiii. 48 koX iravres oi <TVVTrapay€i>6p.(voi. 6'xXot eiri ttjv Oeupiav TavT7)v, 
 dewprjaavres to. yevopeva, rinrrovTes ra ar-qdrj i>ir£(TTpe<pov. 
 
 2 [2318 fi] Any prophecy about Israel might be transferred by Christian 
 evangelists (following St Paul) to the Gentile Churches as being "Israel after 
 the Spirit." But this particular prophecy about the "tribes of the land" might 
 lend itself in a special way to such a transference by being supposed to refer 
 to the "tribes of the earth." Concerning the soldiers and their superiority to the 
 Jews as regards expectation of forgiveness, see the early tradition in Lk. xxiii. 34. 
 
 3 Job vi. 9 Aq. Sym. fVt^aXwc ttjv x €i P a - 
 
 247 
 
[2321] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 Elsewhere eis rcXos means "to consummation," or "for ever" 
 in such phrases as " the poor will not be forgotten for ever" "Arise 
 and cast us not away for ever" "Wherefore hast thou, O God, cast 
 us away for ever 1 ? " Somewhat different is its use in Ps. xvi. n "In 
 thy right hand are pleasures [for] evermore" and (xlix. 9) "that he 
 should still live a/way 2 ." 
 
 [2321] In Greek literature of all periods es Te'Aos is almost always 
 used of that which lasts " to the end" or "turns out to be the fact 
 when one comes to the endV Exceptionally, in Polybius (where it 
 is very frequent indeed), it means "perfectly" ; but the Thesaurus 
 quotes no instance of this meaning from any other ancient author. 
 Lucian perhaps uses it once to mean "perfectly* " but he certainly 
 uses it once to mean "persistently 5 ," and the former passage may 
 mean " even though you have not yet come to the end of your 
 experience of me." In any case the meaning "to the end" is 
 unquestionably predominant. 
 
 [2322] In N.T. the usage of eis riko^ is as follows. In 1 Thess. 
 ii. 16 ecpOacrer 8k eV avTovs rj opyy] eis re'Aos "the wrath [of God] hath 
 come upon them to [the bitter] end," the meaning follows the LXX. 
 
 1 [2320 a] Ps. ix. 18, xliv. 23, lxxiv. 1. Comp. Ps. ix. 6 etc. In the Psalms, 
 these questions, or negations, may sometimes be said to imply the ultimate 
 triumph of good because evil will " not " last "for ever." But in Uab. i. 4 (R.V.) 
 "judgment doth never (marg. not to victory?) go forth," this hopeful view is not 
 taken. In Job xiv. 20 "thou prevailest for ever against him," xx. 7 "he shall 
 perish for every it describes the destruction of man, but not in xxiii. 7 "So shall 
 I be delivered for ever." The word rendered rAos means illustriousness, eminence, 
 enduringness, and is applied to God, in 1 S. xv. 29 (R.V.) "the Strength (marg. 
 Victory, or Glory) of Israel " (LXX in error). Wisdom xvi. 5. xix. 1 uses ^XP 1 
 tAocs thus, "Not to the end Aid thy anger abide," "on the impious there pressed 
 unpitying anger to the end." 
 
 [2320/'] EZs to rAos, Ps. iv. (title) R.V. "For the chief musician" (Aq. ru> 
 vikottoiQ, Theod. et's rd vinos, Sym. iwivliaos) represents a different form of the 
 same Hebrew root that is rendered et's rAos above. It is consistently given by 
 l.XX in the titles of the Psalms where R.V. has "For the chief Musician." 
 
 - [2320 1 I Ps. xvi. 1 1 Aq. vinos, xlix. 9 Aq. els vikos, Sym. els aiwva. 
 
 3 [2321a] Steph. (rAos 1996—7) qu. Solon ap. Stob. Fl. 9, 25, :8 : Aid 
 5' ovti \t'\r)0e oiafxwfpis ocrrts dXirpov 6v/u.6v ?x el J t'o.vtws 5' es rAos i^trpav-q. Fur. 
 Iph. A. 161 OvrjTilv 5' SXpios ('s tAos oi'ofis. Steph. quotes no authors but Polybius 
 ami Theodor. Prodr. for the meaning "perfectly." 
 
 4 [2321 /'| Lucian Sown. 9 |i. 1:1 "I am Education, my child, a familiar 
 acquaintance of yours for some lime, even though you have never yet had a 
 perfect experience Oi me (tl nal fiySt-trw els rAos /jlov wcirflpaaai)." 
 
 5 Lucian A 3 (iii. 260) "you keep on jeering at my VOW (es rAos... 
 £irqpeA.fav)" referring to (il>. 25) a previous mockery. 
 
 248 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2322] 
 
 In Lk. xviii. 5 fx,rj ets te'Aos ep^o/xeVr/ ww 77-1(1417 /xe, R.V. has "lest she 
 wear me out by her continual coming," and this is probably correct, 
 as the present subjunctive denotes a continuous "wearing out." 
 Mark and Matthew assign to our Lord the saying, " He that 
 endureth to theendhz shall be saved," and this is (no doubt correctly) 
 punctuated as meaning " He that endureth to the end — he shall be 
 saved 1 ." But even in Greek, apart from Hebrew originals, a's tc'Aos 
 is liable to create confusion by being connected with what precedes 
 instead of with what follows 2 . Much more, in Hebraic Greek, might 
 a doubt arise, whether " to the end " ought not to be connected with 
 "saved" ("he that endureth — to the end shall he be saved") as 
 meaning "saved to the utmost," "saved in body, soul, and spirit." 
 The parallel Luke omits "to the end," but has two clauses, " (1) A hair 
 of your head shall surely not perish, (2) in your endurance ye shall 
 win your souls 3 ." This ("a hair of your head") resembles the 
 saying to the Thessalonians " May the God of peace himself sanctify 
 you wholly, and may your spirit and soul and body be presented entire 
 without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ 4 "; whereas 
 the Epistle to the Corinthians rather resembles Matthew and Mark, 
 " Waiting patiently for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ who 
 also shall confirm you to the end (eco? Te'Aou?) unreproveable in the day 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ 5 ." 
 
 1 Mk xiii. 13, Mt. x. 22, xxiv. 13. 
 
 2 [2322 a] See Steph. re'Xos 1996 D " Polyb. 8, 2, 2 : To [xei> yap pr/devl 
 TTLtTreveiv els re'Xos airpanTov ■ ubi Schweigh. non recte disjungere eis reXos ab seq. 
 airpaKTOv ostendit." 
 
 3 [2322/;] Lk. xxi. 18—19. Comp. Jas v. 11 "We call blessed them that 
 endure. Ye have heard of the endurance of Job and have seen the end of the 
 Lord," where "end" seems to mean "final salvation," and "endure" is taken 
 absolutely as in 2 Tim. ii. 12 "if we endure." It is also absolute in 1 Pet. ii. 20, 
 Rom. xii. 12, and should almost certainly be taken so in Heb. xii. 7 "It is for 
 [your] training that ye endure," i.e. God chastens you, not to give you pain, but to 
 train you. 
 
 4 1 Thess. v. 23. 
 
 ;l [2322 c~\ 1 Cor. i. 7 — 8. Comp. Heb. vii. 25 <jw'get.v els to Tra^reXes Svvarai 
 "to save to the utmost," which, however, Chrys. explains as meaning "to all 
 time," del, and i/eei ev rrj /meWovari fafj. Comp. 2 Clem. 19 'iva els re'Xos ffoidwixev 
 "be saved unto the end" i.e. "retain salvation to the end," differing little from 
 "be saved in the end," Barn. iv. 6 "utterly (or, for ever) lost," els r. dTnbXeo-av, 
 x. 5 " utterly (or, irrevocably) impious and already adjudged to death," xix. 11 
 " Utterly [ox, for ever) shalt thou hate the evil [one]." In Hernias Vis. III. x. 4 — 5 
 i\apa 8e els tAos follows, as a climax, on iXapwrepa, and means "joyful to the 
 uttermost." 
 
 249 
 
[2323] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 [2323] Returning to xiii. i eh tc'Xos yyaTr^crev avrovs, we have to 
 bear in mind that John must certainly have known (i) that eU tc'Aos 
 was used in the first century to mean "to the uttermost" and "to the 
 end" (2) that it was associated with traditions about final salvation 
 after trial or temptation. Further, if we believe that he was 
 acquainted with the first three Gospels, we must suppose him also to 
 have known (3) that two of the three evangelists reported Christ's 
 saying about the -'saving" of those who should "endure to the 
 end" and that the third had a parallel tradition (in effect) about being 
 "perfectly saved" if men "endured." It may be also assumed 
 (4) that John does not mean to say merely — a platitude beneath the 
 level of this Gospel— that the Son of God continued steadfastly 
 loving His disciples to the end. (5) It has been shewn (1744 (iv) foil.) 
 that in the Pauline Epistles and elsewhere the aorist rjyaTrr/o-ei' is 
 applied to love expressed in action, and especially to the love 
 of God for man expressed in the act of redemption. We may 
 therefore infer that here, as in many other cases, John uses a phrase 
 of ancient Christian tradition in more than one meaning — not ex- 
 cluding the interpretation of Aquila (2320 c) suggesting victory as 
 well as consummation — and that he means something to this effect : 
 " Having loved them before, he now loved them to the last, in a last 
 and crowning act of victorious love 1 ." 
 
 (vi) 'Ek 
 
 (a) 'Ek meaning "some of," see 2213—5 
 
 (ft) 'Ek meaning "native of," as distinguished from And "coming 
 from," or "resident in," see 2289—93 
 
 1 [2323 rt] Chrys. appears to give two interpretations, taking ei's reXos 07., 1st, 
 as <r<t>68pa 1x7., 2nd, as aya.iru>i> SirjveKus : — (1) EI5<fs 7rcDs fiiWuv iyKaTaXifMirdveiu 
 avrovs <T<po5poTtpa.v tt> aydtrr)i> emdeUvvTai; Td yap, 'Ayawqaas, eis rAos i)ya.Try)<Tiv 
 avTous, toOto 577X0? • Oi''3ei/ iveXtirep u>v top <T<p68pa dyairuivra duos t> iroirjtrai. Tl 
 5i77rore 5e ovk e£ dpxv* rovro eiroiijae ; Td /xflfova Harepov epyiferai..., (2) Ti 6V 
 ecTiv, Eh re\os r\ydivr\aiv avrow ; 'AvtI tov, ifxevtv dyatrwu SirjveKWS, KoJ TiK^piov 
 7-77S -rroWrjs dydir-qs tovto \iyei. 
 
 |2323 /'| There is a similar expression with vwepayawdv and Tre'pas in Barnabas 
 v. 8 -rrepas 7^ toi oiddnnwv rbv'\<Tpar)\ K. TTjXiKavTa ripara k. arip.ua ttoiCiv (Krtpvcffev, 
 k. inrepriy&irriofv aindv, where nepas means "as a climax - ' (or "finally"), vrrtp 
 means "to the utmost," and the aorist means that love was expressed in definite 
 action. 
 
 25O 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2325] 
 
 (7) 'Ek MeTpoy 
 
 [2324] This phrase occurs in iii. 34 "For he whom God sent 
 speaketh the words of God: for not (lit.) from measure doth he give 
 the spirit. The Father loveth...." It is non-occurrent in LXX and the 
 Thesaurus. 'Ev /Merpw means "in small measure'''' in Judith vii. 21, 
 Ezek. iv. n, 16, but "in large measure" in Ps. lxxx. 5 (where Aq. 
 has Tpio-o-dr, and Sym. fierpw without iv 1 ). The Thesaurus gives 
 fxerpw for "in due measure," or "by measure," usually in a good 
 sense, and iv /j.eTp<p for "in metre." The text is uncertain 2 . If "he" 
 could be taken as the Son, the meaning might be "[the Son] doth 
 not g'wefrom measure," i.e. from a limited store, it being implied that 
 the store is unlimited from what follows, namely, "He hath given all 
 things into his hand." The objection remains that Ik fxerpov is not 
 found in Greek literature 3 . See 2714. 
 
 (8) 'Ek with ccbzoo and THpeco 
 
 [2325] It has been shewn elsewhere (940) that in LXX, and in John, 
 ek, with o-w£w and tt^coj, does not always imply "take me out of evils 
 in which I am." It may be used in the prayer "Keep me altogether 
 
 1 [2324 a] So, too, Apollinarius here (Cramer ad loc.) iifxeh p.ev ovv, (prjal, 
 jUerpu; tt}v ivepyeiav tov IlvevpaTos i\aftop.ev, avros r)e ov\ ovtws. 
 
 - [2324(6] B omits "the spirit" (but B- adds it in margin): Syr. Burk. "for 
 not by measure did the Father give [the Spirit] to his Son, but he loveth...." SS 
 is partly illegible, but reads " For not by measure gave God the Father, but to his 
 Son [he was loving] and...." Cramer prints a comment of Ammonius, okov e"x« 
 to Ilvev/xa 6 Tios ov<na)5u>s, ov p.y]v ck piepovs ws KTia/xa: and Wetstein mentions etc 
 fiepovs as a substitute for e*K perpov in three cursives. Many MSS. and versions 
 insert 6 debs after 5i8uo-iv. 
 
 3 [2324 (] Perhaps ovk e/c fiirpov is used with allusion to the LXX oik eK/xeTp-r)- 
 drjaerai (Hos. i. io, Jer. xxxiii. 22 (Theod.)) and to the LXX use of fiirpov for 
 a "measure" of corn, oil etc. Origen on Ps. xvi. 5 — 6 — after saying that "the 
 knowledge of God is Christ's allotted portion (K\ijpovopia) " and that the Lord is 
 this " lot (fiepis)" — comments on " lines (cr^wia)" as follows, Et to axoi-vlov P^pov 
 earl, irws yiypairTcu if t. k. 'I. evayy. (iii. 34) ; and he suggests that the term 
 fierpov is used ov irpbs avTrp> tt\v yvG>ai.v dWa 7rapa tov virobexb^evov Tip p.rj elvai 
 civtov peifrvos deKTiKbv, "for," he adds, "the rain, though itself immeasurable, 
 is measured in the vessels that receive it : eKX-qpoooTrjdy] di p.01, <p-qoiv, uxnrep 4k 
 peTpov 77?, r) Ktd dpKovp.0,1. Apparently he takes ex piTpov as meaning, for the 
 Psalmist, "proportionate [to my 7vants]" and ovk iK p.erpov for Christ as "im- 
 measurable. " 
 
 [2324 </] 'Ek peTpov might conceivably be a way of expressing eV.uerpos i.e. 
 "outside measure" so as to mean that the fulness of the gift of the Spirit to the 
 incarnate Son was not " beyond the measure of His stature" (comp. Eph. iv. 13). 
 But this adj., though freq. in non-Hebraic Greek, does not occur in LXX; and 
 e/c fiirpov, in such a sense, is still more improbable. See 2714. 
 
 251 
 
[2326] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 out of evil" and is probably thus used in xii. 27 "save me from (e«) 
 this hour" and xvii. 15 "keep them from (Ik) the evil [one] (tov 
 Trovrjpov)." 
 
 (e) 'Ek, atto, and TTApA, with eSepxoviAi 
 
 [2326] These three prepositions are used as follows to describe 
 the coming forth of the Son from the Father: — 
 
 (1) (Ik) viii. 42 "For I came forth from (Ik) the Father and am 
 come (t)k(o)," where the first clause expresses origin rather than 
 coming, and the origin of the Son is contrasted with the origin 
 of the Jews, who are said to be (viii. 44) "from their father the 
 devil (ck tov Trarpbs tov Sia/3oA.ou) " : xvi. 28 "I came forth from 
 (Ik) the Father and have come (iX-qXvOa) into (eh) the world," where 
 the preceding verse says -n-apa t. -n-a Tpos e^rjXOov, i.e. "from the side, 
 bosom, or home, of the Father," but this states merely origin, "out of" 
 contrasted with "into," without the suggestion of domesticity or 
 affection. 
 
 [2327] (2) (oltto) The words of the evangelist, xiii. 3 "Knowing 
 that .. from (aVo) God he came forth and unto (-n-pos) God he goeth 
 back," are to be compared with those of the disciples, xvi. 30 
 "Herein we believe that from (aVd) God thou earnest forth," where 
 the disciples alter the words of their Master in repeating them, for 
 Christ had said (xvi. 27) "I came forth from the side of (irapd) 
 the Father," and (xvi. 28) "I came forth (lit.) out of (U) the Father." 
 The disciples repeat neither of these prepositions. Possibly the 
 same feeling that induces them to alter "Father" to "God" induces 
 also the change from -n-apa and Ik to otto. It is not for them to lay 
 stress on the domesticity of the relation between the Father and the 
 Son. The same feeling may have influenced the evangelist. 
 
 [2328] (3) (Trapa) xvi. 27 "For the Father of himself taketh you 
 as friends (<pi\ei i>pas) because ye have taken me as friend (e>e 
 Tr«f>i\r}><aTe) and have believed that I came forth from the side of 
 (vrapa) the Father." Here the personal preposition is used because 
 personal feeling predominates — the notion of a household bound 
 together by affection. The same explanation applies to xvii. 8 
 "They [i.e. the disciples] recognised (iyvoHrav) in truth (d\i/0<Ss) that 
 I came forth from thy side (irapd a-ov) and believed th.it thou didst 
 send me." This is the last statement of the Son about His coming 
 forth, and it seems appropriate that it should use the personal 
 preposition. On ^>i\«r, see 1728/ and 2584 c. 
 
 2 c 2 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2329 (i)] 
 
 (£") 'Ek with nAHpooo and reMi'zoo 
 
 12329] In xii. 3 "but the house was filled full (iir\rfpw6rj) from 
 (ex) the odour of the ointment," B reads i^Xr/adr) (for e7rA^pw'(9r/) and 
 this is the word used in 2 Chr. vii. 1 "the glory of the Lord filled 
 (eTrXrjae) the house," as also by nA in Is. vi. 4 "the house tvas filled 
 (LXX Iv^\7](tBi]) with smoke." But perhaps John uses -n-X-qpoot 
 to suggest spiritual filling, such as makes the Church really the 
 Church, the full-filling, or Pleroma, of divine graces and powers. 
 And some symbolism of this kind may also explain eV, which is very 
 rarely indeed used with verbs of filling in LXX and N.T. ' It might 
 be originally merely a Hebraistic form, such as may be found in the 
 Apocalypse, in which <ek expressed the Hebrew preposition used with 
 "fill." But John might give it a spiritual application by taking the 
 house as the House of God, i.e. the Church, which is "fulfilled," 
 i.e. brought into the fulness of the glory of Christ, as a result of {Ik) 
 this sacrifice of sweet savour. Origen takes some such view of the 
 "house," which he calls "omnem hujus mundi domum ac totius 
 ecclesiae domum 2 ." 
 
 [2329 (i)l In vi. 13 iyifxiarav 8wSe/<a Kcxpu'ovs KXarrpaTwv c'k t<Zv 
 irivTi. aproiv twv KpSivuw a irrepia-a-evaav tols /3e(3pwKoatv, is the 
 
 connexion "filled [full] of fragments" or "baskets of fragments"? 
 Our English versions adopt the former. A.V. has "filled twelve 
 baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves," R.V. "with 
 broken pieces from the five barley loaves." Westcott does not dissent. 
 His comment on A.V. is "fragments i.e. the pieces broken for 
 distribution (Ezek. xiii. 19)." But John has not mentioned any 
 "breaking" for distribution. Chrysostom ad loc. calls the fragments 
 Xd\\io.va, a word denoting "fallen fragments." Origen speaks of "the 
 barley loaves from which («<£' wv) there superabounded the twelve 
 baskets 3 ." The Latin and Syriac versions indicate that Kocptvoc 
 
 1 [2329 a] See Winer xxx. 8 (b) p. 251 quoting Rev. viii. 5 yefiifciv iic, xix. 21 
 XopTdfeiv €K, xvii. 2, 6 fiedveiv, or iJ.e0WKecrda.i, e'/c. Comparing Mt. xxiii. 25 
 Zawdev ytfiovcriv il- apiray^ with Lk. xi. 39 to ktrwdev v/xwv ytfiei apwayris, he 
 thinks the former means that the contents of the vessels are derived from 
 robbery. 
 
 " 2 [2329/;] Horn, on Cant. i. 12. He takes the fragrance however to be that 
 of the " odor doctrinae qui procedit de Christo et sancti Spiritus fragrantia." 
 
 3 Origen Comm. Matth. about "the seven loaves." 
 
 253 
 
[2330] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 KXaa-fxarm' should be connected — as probably in Luke 1 (though 
 Luke may mean "pieces broken for distribution") — and that the 
 meaning may be, as in the Syriac, "filled twelve baskets-of -fragments 
 from the five barley loaves 2 ," taking ye/u.i£w and Ik together. 
 
 (vii) "Efxirpoo-Oev 
 
 [2330] "E/xTrpoaOev <tov occurs in Matthew and Luke ("prepare... 
 before thee") quoting Malachi about the messenger that was to 
 "prepare the way," and applying the prophecy to John the Baptist 
 as being the messenger. In Malachi, both the Hebrew and the LXX 
 have "before my face" 7rp6 Trpoa-wirov /jlov, instead of "before thee." Mark 
 omits the clause with "prepare," but has "send my messenger before 
 thy face (71730 irpotnIiTrov <rov)," and attributes the prophecy to "Isaiah." 
 These facts shew that there were early Greek variations as to 
 Z/Airpocrdei' applied to the Baptist as being the forerunner of Christ. 
 Like the English "before" (in "placed before" "stands before" 
 "ranked before") so ZpTrpoaBev, in certain contexts, might mean 
 "superior to," "above [in esteem]." This word, belonging to the 
 Matthew-Luke tradition, is put by John thrice into the mouth of the 
 Baptist himself testifying twice, (i. 15, 30) "He is become before me" 
 i.e. "ranked before me" and, in the third instance, (iii. 28) "I have 
 been sent before him" i.e. as His herald or harbinger 3 . 
 
 1 [2329 (i) <?] Lk. ix. 17 ifpdrj rd irepicraevcrav avrots KXaa/ndruv xdcpivoi ddideKa. 
 This prob. means "baskets of" not "superabundance of." Comp. Lk. xiii. 8, 
 where D and the Latin mss. have "a basket of dung," and see Steph. for k6<plvo<s 
 meaning "a measure," and for the curious phrase o'ivov Kdcpivos. 
 
 - [2329 (i) b] The Syr. (Burk.) has " they gathered and filled twelve baskets of 
 fragments from the five pieces of barley-bread — those which remained over from 
 them that ate" (SS "they gathered them, the fragments that remained over of 
 them and filled twelve baskets, the superabundance of those five loaves of bailey 
 and of those two fishes. Now the men that had eaten of that bread had been 
 live thousand"). The Latin versions also have " fragmentorum " which prob. 
 depends on " cophinos." 
 
 :i [2330 a] See 830 — 5, where this Johannine use of ^/jLirpoadev should have 
 been noted. In Ileb., Ciesen. 817/' mentions only two instances of Malachi's 
 word as denoting superiority, Gen. xlviii. 20 "set Ephraim before Manasseh 
 (lQy)Ktv ..Ay.-KpoaBev),''' Job xxxiv. 19 (LXX confused). "Vjunpoadev does not mean 
 "superior" elsewhere in N.T., for Jn x. 4 "[the shepherd] goeth before them " is 
 not an instance. No instance quoted by Steph. means "superior" except Plato 
 o;i I) TavTa bi iravra ixilvwv ip.irpoaOtv TiraKTai (pvaei, "these have a natural 
 superiority to tho-e," but comp. Plato 744 A <rw<ppoavvqs lfjnrpo(r6(v vyUiav ...TTOlWV 
 rifxlav, and S05 I) tfiTrpoaOev.. 0€i/jlci> av. 
 
 254 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2331] 
 
 (viii) 'Ev 
 
 (a) 'En used metaphorically, e.g. "abide in," see 1881 
 
 (/3) 'En used temporally 
 
 [2331] ii. 19 — 20 "Destroy this temple and \with~\in (iv) three 
 days I will raise it up... thou within (iv) 1 three days wilt raise it up 2 !" 
 The corresponding utterance in Mark and Matthew (omitted by 
 Luke) has "after an interval of (Sia) three days," and the context 
 leaves the impression that no such words proceeded from Jesus but 
 only from false witnesses. In the predictions of the Resurrection, 
 whereas Mark has "after (/*era 3 ) three days" (1297, 1301—2) Matthew 
 and Luke have "the third day f and as these early variations cannot 
 well be regarded as accidental, we are led to infer that something 
 may be intended by John's variations here ("in" and "within"). 
 B's reading represents Jesus as saying "in three days" and the Jews 
 as quoting Him not quite correctly, "within three days." If the 
 evangelist wrote this, his meaning may be that the Jews, while 
 slightly exaggerating what Jesus had actually said 4 , nevertheless (by 
 a sort of irony of Providence) more exactly predicted that which 
 actually came to pass: Christ did raise up the Temple of His body 
 "within three days 5 ." See 2715. 
 
 1 [2331 a] Comp. Xen. Mem. iii. 13. 5 "within five or six days," Plato 240 B 
 " within three days," Steph. (Vol. iii. 962) "Quod Hippocrates dixit 'Ev ewTa 
 ■hfj.^pyaii' awodvricFKovcnv, interpr. Celsus, Intra septimum diem," also Xen. 
 Cyropaed. v. 3. 28 "To come (lit.) less than within (/udov 77 iv) six or seven days." 
 
 2 [2331 i>] The first iv is om. by B but ins. by X, the second iv is om. by X, 
 a has " in triduo...tribus diebus," b " in triduo...in triduo," e "in trib (sic) diebus 
 ...in triduo." 
 
 3 Mk xiv. 58, Mt. xxvi. 6r. 
 
 4 There are many other instances in which Jesus is not quoted exactly ; but the 
 whole subject of quotations and repetitions in Jn is attended with great difficulty : 
 they are so frequently inaccurate (2544 — 53). 
 
 5 [2331 <•] It would be wrong to translate Mk xiv. 58, Mt. xxvi. 61 5td rpiihv 
 i)/j.epu)v, " within three days," or anything but "after an interval of three days" 
 (comp. Mk ii. 1 5t' i]/j.tpQ>v), just as Mk viii. 31 fxerd t. 77. must be rendered 
 "after three days." And these two expressions must be reconciled with 7-77 77x7-77 
 TlP-tpq. partly (see Field on Mt. xvi. 21) by Greek looseness of expression, and 
 partly by Biblical influence. As regards Acts i. 3 di' rj/xepuiv Tecrcep&KovTa, Cramer 
 publishes, as from Chrys., "he said not for forty days but (?) at intervals during forty 
 days, for He was [during that time, now] approaching nigh and [now] removing 
 again," ov yap elire reaaapaKovra rjp.ipas aWa Sl' 77/xepcDi' reaaapaKOvra- icplaraTo 
 yap xai d(picrTaTO irdXiv. If that is the writer's meaning, he gives to Sid with T)p.epQ>v 
 an unprecedented rendering, which completely changes the sense. No authority 
 
 255 
 
[2332] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 (7) 'En quasi-instrumental 
 
 [2332] John does not use the Hebraic iv for "with" in such 
 phrases as "slay with the sword 1 ": but Hebraic influence may in 
 part account for his use of Iv tov'to where many would use 81a. 
 tovtov "hereby": xiii. 35 "By this shall all men know that ye are 
 my disciples, if ye have love one to another." In part it may arise 
 from his proneness to see things as though they were going on in 
 spiritual regions (e.g. light, darkness, love), "In this region shall men 
 
 for it is alleged by Blass (p. 313) except Mk xiv. =;8, Mt. xxvi. 61, which, as 
 stated above, must be rendered "after an interval of." D omits 5td in Acts but 
 places it above the line between recrcr. and T]ix.., d has "post dies quadraginta." 
 This makes excellent sense, "After an interval of forty days, giving them a vision 
 of himself (dTrravdixevos avroh) and speaking of the things concerning the kingdom 
 of God, and (?) uniting himself with [them] ((rwa\i£6/j.€vos), he exhorted them not 
 to separate from Jerusalem." This would vividly represent what the Lord said 
 and did in His last manifestation. The words attributed to Chrys. are not quite 
 incompatible with the meaning in D, " After forty days [from the Resurrection] 
 appearing [for the last time]." Chrys. may mean, "Luke said ' after,'' not 'during,'' 
 for [during all those days] He came and went [not appearing continuously]." 
 
 [2331 a 7 ] Jn xx. 26 "after eight days," indicates that Christ had not appeared 
 to the disciples since the appearance last (xx. 19) recorded, and favours the view 
 that the manifestations after the Resurrection were not continuous. It also shews 
 how divergent traditions about the intervals might arise; for the Hebraic phrase 
 81 rifiepQiv "after [some] days," being as strange in classical Gk as in English, 
 might be supposed to have accidentally omitted the number. Hence H, "eight," 
 or m, "forty," might naturally be inserted, being supposed to have dropped out 
 before H in H/v\epu)N. Even if Chrys. interpreted 81& as meaning "at intervals 
 during," it is impossible to accept his interpretation without a great deal of 
 evidence for such a use of did with a plural ("days," " years" etc.). See 2715. 
 
 [2331 <'] In Lk. ix. 37 rrj e£?)s -rjiiipq., D has 5id ttjs rjfxipas, d "per diem," Syr. 
 "on that day again (SS om. again)." The Gk of D, if it is another way of saying 
 rfj e^rjs ij., must mean "after the interval of the day," but seems to have been 
 taken by the Latin translator as meaning "in the course of the day." 
 
 1 [2332 a] Rev. vi. 8 cnroKTelvat. iv po/xcpaia. Comp. Lk. xxii. 49 iv fjuxxa-ipV- 
 A Tebtunis Papyrus 16 (B.C. 114) has iv fj.axa.ipvi- — and others (ib. 41, 45, 46. 47) 
 have the same phrase (in pi.)— to express "[armed] with a sword." Comp. ib. 48 
 Avkos ffvv dtXXots iv 6ir\ois, foil, by ko.1 airacaixivwv ras txaxaipa 1 :. As iv 6tt\ois 
 practically means bw\o(j>6pos . "bearing arms," SO iv /xaxalpy by analogy mighl come 
 to mean /xaxa.ipo<p6pos, "bearing a sword." None of these papyrus passages have a 
 vi 1 b like a-rroKTelvu or 7rard(T(rw, as in Rev., Lk., and LXX (2 K. xix. 37, Jer. xxvi. 
 23 etc., where iv represents Heb. "in"). So, too, 1 Cor. iv. 21 f v p&fiSip i\t)eiv — 
 until in tai ire alleged from non-Hebraic I lk o{fpxotxai iv — must be regarded 
 
 as akin to 1 S. xvii. 43 Zpxv---* v paftdy /cat \LO01s, ib. 45 fy>x?7 ••■£" pop.<pala, 
 2 S. xxiii. 21 KaTifir]... (Field) iv pd[i8<p,p.\\M. 1 Chr. xi. 23 KaTi^rj...iv pd/35<fj. The 
 Targum follows the Heb. in using "in," and Deissmann (p. 120) gives no reason 
 for rejecting the obvious explanation that the Pauline phrase had a Semitic origin. 
 
 256 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2334] 
 
 discern that...," namely, in Christian fellowship. So xvii. 10 "I have 
 been glorified in them" does not, perhaps, mean merely "in their 
 hearts" (still less merely "by them") but "in the Church" as repre- 
 sented by the small band of disciples: and xvi. 30 "In this we 
 believe that thou earnest forth from God" may be intended to 
 suggest the thought that, after wandering in the dark, the disciples, 
 finding that Jesus miraculously knows their thoughts, seem to 
 themselves to have emerged into light: "In [the light of] this [thy 
 saying], we believe — " 
 
 (8) 'En used locally, in toj rAZOcpyAAKicp (viii. 20) 
 
 [2333] viii. 20 "These words he spake in (iv) the Treasury 
 teaching in the Temple." As no authority has been alleged for the 
 supposition that the Treasury (ya£oc/>vAa/aov) was open to the public 1 , 
 it has been suggested that iv must here mean "near." But no 
 authority for this hypothesis is alleged from N.T. Either therefore 
 we must suppose that (1) a special part of the Women's Court, 
 opposite the Treasury, was familiarly known as "the Treasury," 
 or else that (2) John has used the expression loosely for some other 
 reason. In support of (1), no instance has been alleged. 
 
 [2334] It is true that, according to the LXX of Nehemiah, the 
 people were to bring their gifts "to the Treasury 2 ," and this might 
 suggest that the public had access to the Treasury. But according 
 to Mark, Jesus stood "opposite the Treasury'' when He taught the 
 disciples to judge the widow's gift not as man sees it, but as God sees 
 
 1 [2333a] It would have been correct to say (1) " in the women's court," on 
 which the Treasury abutted, or (2) "opposite the Treasure-chests" (called 
 "Trumpets") into which offerings were put by people in the women's court, 
 or (3) "opposite the Treasury" (Mk xii. 41) i.e. in that part of the women's court 
 where one could see people "casting their gifts into the Treasury" (Lk. xxi. 1). 
 Josephus says {Wars v. 5. 2) that a portico ran "in front of (irp6) the treasure- 
 boxes (tlov yai'ocpvXaKLuv)," and {Ant. xix. 6. 1) that Herod Agrippa suspended a 
 golden chain "up above the Treasury (i>7re/) to ya^ocpuXaKtov) " i.e. presumably on 
 the wall of the Treasury abutting on the Court, where it would be visible to those 
 in the Court. But none of these facts suggest that people had access to the 
 Treasury, and the access is antecedently most improbable. Hor. Heb. i. 226 says, 
 "When John saith, 'Jesus spake these words in the treasury,' it is all one as if he 
 had said, ' He spake these words in the court of the women'..." — i.e. in the place 
 where the "Trumpets" abutted on the women's court. 
 
 2 [2334a] Nehem. x. 37 "to the chambers of the house of our God," ei's 
 ya£o<pv\d Kioi> o'lkov tov deov. This might give the impression that the people came 
 into the Treasury. 
 
 A. VI. 257 17 
 
[2334] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 it ; why then did not John adhere to Mark's tradition (supposing him 
 to have known it) and say, " These things spake Jesus teaching 
 opposite the Treasury"? May not the reason be that, from the 
 symbolical point of view, the old phrasing was not quite appropriate? 
 John perhaps accepted from the Synoptists the tradition that the 
 Treasury was the scene of Christ's doctrine about judgment con- 
 cerning gifts, as judged by man and as judged by God. But he may 
 have also adopted a further tradition that His doctrine on that 
 occasion included judgment in general (viii. 15 "ye judge after the 
 flesh"), since the whole life of man may be regarded as a "gift" or 
 "offering" to God 1 . From his point of view, then, the Treasury has 
 
 1 [2334/'] Mt. xxiii. 23 and Lk. xi. 42 protest against the tithing of mint, 
 when accompanied by the neglect of "judgment." Mt. xii. 7 says, "If ye had 
 known what that means, ' I will have mercy and not sacrifice,' ye would not have 
 condemned the guiltless." Compare the tradition of Micah (vi. 7 — 8) that " to do 
 justly " is better than offerings of " thousands of rams," and " rivers of oil." The 
 Treasury, the receptacle of God's offerings, might well seem an appropriate place 
 for doctrine about "doing justly " or "judging righteous judgment." 
 
 Note also the following uses of iv : — 
 
 [2334 <] 'Ej» X ei P L m iii - 35 irdvra diduKev iv rfi x el P l olvtov is Hebraic as 
 compared with xiii. 3 irdvra <-8uKei> o.vt<£ eis rds x f *P a s- The second is the more 
 emphatic — "gave him all things [giving them absolutely] into his hands." But 
 indiscriminative writers or translators might use the two indifferently as in Josh. 
 x. 30, 32 (bis) " delivered into the hand of Israel," Heb. "gave, or placed, in the 
 hand," LXX th x e ^P as --- €LS T & s X e 'P as ; DU ^ A iv x €l P'---- € ^ T( * $ x € 'P a *- Comp. 
 Dan. i. 2 Theod. fdwKev iv x €L P l o.vtov, LXX Trapi!)wKev...els x^-P as o-vtov. 
 
 [2334 if] The interpolation in v. 4 KaTiftaivev iv rrj KoXv/xjirjOpgi is probably 
 from a Semitic source. Comp. Judg. vii. 9 Kard^rjOi iv (A as) rrj Trapefj.ftoX7J and 
 1 S. xiv. 21 "into (marg. in) the camp," Josh. viii. 13 etc. Blass (p. 130) quotes 
 Herm. Sim. i. 6 diriXdys iv rrj wSXei crov, and refers to Clem. Horn. i. 7, xiv. 6, 
 and (p. 313) quotes Epict. i. ri. 32 dvipxv ev "Puip.rj. But in Clem. Horn, i. 7 iv 
 Trvpl dafticrTy pupdeiaas rbv aiuiva KoXacrOrjffecrOai, the meaning maybe "punished 
 in lire unquenchable." In Clem. Horn. xiv. 6 iv dXXo§dirr\ 6pp.rjcraaa is im- 
 mediately described as iv dXXoodTry yivo^iviq. The context lays stress on a voyage 
 by sea, and suggests that the meaning may be, not "having set out in (for to)," 
 but " having found anchorage in (opfxiu) a foreign coast." In Epictet., Schweig. 
 says that dvipxy covers an erasure, which, he says, may be dwipxy. Comp. 
 ib. ii. 20. 33 direXddv iv /BaXaveiy. This would reduce the two instances in Epict. 
 to agreement with Herm. Sim. i. 6, and comp. Steph. 12S9 n quoting Mustoxydis 
 An< id. direXOdvTos iv rrj irarpldi, and "alia nun minus barbara schol. (pOLT-qr^s 6 
 ffvvex^ Trapd t£ StOatr/taXy dTrepxofJ.evos." The facts indicate that in vernacular 
 Gk, independent of Semitic influence, the use of iv was freq. with dtripxe<rda.i but 
 not with other verbs "I motion. Epictet. elsewhere uses dvipxofxai with eh, and 
 also absolutely (but not with iv), of "going up [to Rome]." '.\.Tripxo/j.ai iv seems 
 to have meant " I go and stay in [a place]." Hut the I 'ayi'nn Pap. 1 16, 138 give 
 iirekffeiv tit tt6\lv (not iv, though the writers are illiterate). 
 
 258 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2336] 
 
 a typical meaning. It belongs to the Father, and the Son comes to 
 visit it in order to inspect the offerings made to His Father. In this 
 light — the Son being regarded as Lord of the Treasury — it is more 
 appropriate to think of Him as standing "in" it than " opposite to" 
 it, or " looking up" to it 1 . 
 
 (ix) 'Evcoiriov 
 
 [2335] 'Evw7rtoi/ occurs only once, xx. 30 (lit.) "Many and other 
 signs therefore on the one hand (ttoWo. fx.lv ovv koI aAAa 2 o-^/xeta) did 
 Jesus in the sight of (Ino-mov) the disciples," and once in the Epistle, 
 1 Jn iii. 22 "we do the things that are well pleasing in his sight 
 (e. avrov)." Mark and Matthew never use it. Luke uses it twenty- 
 two times, the last instance being (xxiv. 43) " he ate in their sight" 
 i.e. " in the sight of" the disciples. This refers to the period after 
 Christ's resurrection : and it is noteworthy that the only Johannine 
 instance of the word refers apparently to the same period, and to 
 events of the same kind i.e. to signs wrought by Jesus " in the sight 
 of" the disciples alone, and not in the sight of the world at large. If 
 the "signs" had not been restricted to the " sight" of u the disciples" 
 the phrase (it seems probable) would not have been inserted. 
 
 (x) 'EttC 
 
 ( I ) 5 Eni with Accusative 
 
 [2336] 'Ettl with accusative, which is frequently found in the 
 Synoptists to express "coming up to" or "against" a person, thing, 
 or place, is never used thus of literal motion by John except in xix. 
 ^1, e7u Se tov 'Irjcrovv eA^oVtcs. John uses it however of the Spirit 
 (i- 33' 5 1 ) "coming down on" a person, and in vi. 16 "came down 
 
 1 Lk. xxi. 1 avapXeypas. 
 
 2 [2335 a] This use of "and" after "many," though (Steph.) regular in classical 
 prose, is not found elsewhere in N.T. except in Luke iii. 18 7ro\\a fih ovv kolI erepa, 
 and Acts xxv. 7. In xxi. 25 '£<m.v 5£ icai &\\a iroXXa omits "and." Both in the 
 use of evixnriov, and in the insertion of /cat, this passage resembles the style of 
 Luke. Also fikv odv, which occurs in Jn only here and xix. 24, is extremely 
 frequent in the Acts. 'Evuiriov, in Lk., in connexion with " eating," occurs in 
 Lk. xiii. 26, "we did eat and drink in thy presence...,'" where Mt. vii. 22 has " we 
 prophesied in thy name...." Justin Mart. Apol. 16. Tryph. 76 has "we did eat 
 and drink in thy name.'''' So has Origen repeatedly (Huet ii. 389 — 90, 393, 
 Cels. ii. 49). Acts x. 41 has (Peter's speech) o-vi>e<pdyo/j.ei> k. o-vueTrio/xev ai)ry, 
 
 Ign. Smym. 3 avvtcpayev [i.e. the Lord] avrois Kal avvimev u>s aapKiKos The 
 
 narrative of Jn xxi. 13 describes the disciples as eating in Christ's presence and 
 from His hand, but makes no mention of His eating. 
 
 259 17 — 2 
 
[2337] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 on (R.V. unto) the sea." On the reading in xxi. 4 Za-rq hr(, where no 
 verb of motion is expressed, see 2307 a. 
 
 (2) 'Em' with Dative 
 
 [2337] 'Ett-i, "close on," "at," "by," in iv. 6 hrl rjj irrjyrj, and in 
 v. 2 €7rt rrj TrpofiaTiK-fj, calls for no comment. In the latter, bri — since 
 it might be thus used whether the meaning were "by a. gate" or "by 
 2. pool" — throws no light on the disputed ellipsis (2216). 
 
 [2338] In iv. 27 "And upon this (eVi tovtw) came his disciples 
 and were amazed that he was speaking with a woman," it has been 
 shewn (1673 #) that " amazed " probably conveys a notion of being 
 "shocked" or "scandalized." " Upon this" literally "on the top of 
 this," is frequent in classical Greek, where em occurs not only in 
 such phrases as "evil on evil," "one on another," but also in the 
 ordinary meaning of sequence, "on this," "hereon," "hereupon." 
 But in N.T. this use of km toutw — apart from some verb preparing 
 the way for kitl — is unique 1 . Origen has en-i tovto : SS has "while 
 they [were] speaking " ; the Latin versions, " meanwhile," " forth- 
 with " etc.; Dx*, ev. Chrysostom says, "'Upon this came His 
 disciples ' : they came most seasonably when the teaching of the 
 Lord had been completed 2 " — perhaps meaning "Jesus had just time 
 to utter the words, I am He" whereas the writer of SS ("while they 
 were speaking [as above described] ") perhaps means " The woman 
 had not time to add a word of question." Both interpretations 
 appear to recognise the exceptional meaning of " upon this " by an 
 attempt to paraphrase it. The context supposes that the disciples 
 did not hear Christ's words; else they would have been "amazed" 
 at what He said, not at the mere fact that He "spake with a 
 woman " : but they came up just in time to prevent the woman from 
 saying anything more. 
 
 [2339] In xii. 16 Tarra rjv iir auTai yeypa/x/xe'ra, D reads irepi 
 (comp. v. 46 7repi yap i/xov ckciW? eypcujfev) which would be the usual 
 preposition if the meaning were simply "concerning": but em "on 
 the basis of" (not eis, "with a view to"), means that the Scripture was, 
 
 1 The references given by Alford (act toe.) are not to the point, as they have 
 verbs ("rejoice," "console" etc.) in the context and mean "rejoice at," "console 
 over" etc. Eph. iv. 26 /xi] iiriUvtTw iirl reproduces a phrase from Deut. xxiv. 15. 
 
 2 [2338 a] ^</;65/3a els Kaipbv awijvTricTav ttjs 8i8a<TKa\las dwapTi<70el<r7]s. On 
 Origen (ad toe.) iiri tovto, note confusion of and u>. Kminus is strangely confused, 
 Xpicrrbs ^70) yev6fi-qv ov Sevrepos dXXos Udvei- OvSt" pav -qpero Il^rpos are Opaovs.... 
 
 260 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2342] 
 
 by foreknowledge, "based on," and "adapted to," the act of Christ 
 that fulfilled it. The context is quite different in Lk. xxiii. 38 
 iiriypacfirj £tt avrip : but probably eVi, there too, means " suited to the 
 case of," and hence " concerning " — not " over his head " (506 (i) b). 
 
 (3) 'Etti with Genitive 
 
 (a) 'Eni thc BaAacchc (vi. 19, xxi. 1) 
 
 [2340] John seldom uses eVi with genitive, for it does not (1882) 
 lend itself to metaphor. The only instance of eiri with the genitive 
 in Christ's words is in xvii. 4 " I have glorified thee on the earth." 
 But the following passages claim attention: — vi. 19 — 21 "They 
 behold Jesus walking on (? near) the sea (irzpnraTovvTa «rt rrjs 
 6a\dcr(T7]<;)...a.nd straightway the boat (lit.) became on (? near) the land 
 (evOeux; iyivero to ttAoiov €7ti 7-775 yr}<s) to which they were returning 
 (ets 77V v7rr]yoi')," xxi. i " After these things Jesus manifested himself 
 again to the disciples on (? near) the sea (eVt T7?s 6aXdo-o-q<;) of 
 Tiberias." 
 
 [2341] In the latter, there is no intention to represent Jesus as 
 walking on the sea, for it is expressly said that " Jesus stood on the 
 beach 1 " Why, then, does not John use the customary 2 phrase "by 
 (■rrapd) the sea " ? Turning to the Synoptic account of the Walking 
 on the Sea 3 , we find that Matthew curiously differs from Mark and 
 John. Matthew has the phrase first with the accusative, " He came 
 toward them walking on (? over) the sea (errl rrjv 6.)"; then with the 
 genitive, "seeing him on the sea (i-n-l tt/s 0.) walking." This change 
 of case may be explained as follows, from a desire to clear up an 
 early obscurity attaching to the phrase "on the sea," and to the word 
 "walk." 
 
 [2342] " On the sea" is ambiguous — capable of meaning "near 
 the sea," as when we say that a city " lies on the sea " — and more 
 ambiguous in Greek than in English. We could not say, of a 
 person, "he stood on the sea," for "on the edge of the sea." But 
 Greek and Hebrew can say this. Moreover TrepnraTtLv means as 
 a rule "walk about" and not "walk" in the sense of progression. 
 
 1 [2341 a] xxi. 4 'i<jrr\ eis (marg. e7r/) tov aiyia\6v. For the reasons for 
 preferring iwl, see 2307 a. 
 
 - [2341 b~\ " Customary," even where there is no verb of motion, both in LXX 
 and in Mk-Mt. Comp. Mk iv. 1 diddcrKew ir. ttjv 6., v. 21 tJv w. ttjv 6., Mt. xiii. 1 
 
 (KddriTO IT. TT)V. 6. 
 
 3 Mk vi. 48 — 9, Mt. xiv. 25 — 6, not in Lk. 
 
 26l 
 
[2342] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 In LXX it is used of "walking to and fro," on a roof, or palace wall 1 , 
 and in classical Greek it was so frequently used about the " walking up 
 and down " of the philosophic teacher that it gave the name to the 
 Peripatetic philosophy. Plutarch says that people use the term 
 " walk about " concerning those who " move up and down in the 
 porches," not about those who "walk (/3aSi£ovTas) into the country or 
 to see a friend 2 ." Hence 7repi7ra.T€u' could not well mean "walk 
 forward " except in some special context, as where Herodian says 
 " He used to travel with them, mostly walking (Tr€pnra.T<2v), rarely 
 in carriage or on horseback 3 ." If therefore Matthew desired to use 
 the verb in the sense of "advance," some change in the context 
 might be usefully introduced to suggest this 4 . Now from the time of 
 
 1 [2342<2] 2 S. xi. 2 ir. iirl rod SiJi/xaros, Dan. iv. 26 iwi tuiv reix&v (Theod. iirl 
 ru) vatj)). Job ix. 8, Ps. civ. 3, describing Jehovah as " walking about (wepnra.T<2>v) " 
 on the waters, or on the wings of the wind, are prob. to be expl. in the light of 
 Job xli. 23 (24) (LXX) " he reckoneth the abyss as a portico (els irepiwa.Tov),'''' i.e. 
 as a place for walking up and down in. Prov. vi. 28 "walk about on coals" 
 conveys no notion of progressing. The accus. occurs in an erroneous rendering of 
 Is. viii. 7 "go over all his banks," irepnraTrjcrei sttI irav reixos v/ulQv. 
 
 2 [2342 b~\ Plut. Mor. p. 796 D tovs ei> reus crroais avaKa/xirroi'Tas irepnraTei.v 
 (paaiv...ovKi'Ti 5k tovs els aypbv 7} irpbs <pt\ov padifovTas. 
 
 3 [2342 r] Steph. quotes Herodian, iv. 7. 11 rd. TrXelard re avroTs crvvwSeve 
 irtpiirarQiv , awavius ap/xaros rj Iwirov (TrijSaivwv. 
 
 4 [2342^/] It maybe urged that Mark himself distinctly mentions advancing 
 in the words " Cometh (tpxercu) towards them." Phis is true, but the context 
 indicates varieties of tradition. For (1) Mark adds "he wished to (lit.) come past 
 them (rjdeXev wape\duv avTovs)." (2) Matthew omits this, but has f)\dev instead 
 of fpxercu. (3) John also omits this ("wished to pass by") but has rjdeKov in 
 quite a different context (" they wished io receive him "). (4) Tlapekdelv, instead 
 of "pass by," might mean "come to [them]" in classical Greek, and might be 
 taken by some as having that meaning here. (5) The three words h66Aon, 
 H6eAeiM, and hA0€N might be easily confused. (6) The tradition that Jesus 
 "wished to pass by the disciples" — and presumably gave up His wish — is 
 fraught with great difficulty. (7) Matthew alone introduces a story about Peter 
 here, asking Jesus to bid him "come" to Him " over the waters (iirl to. #5ara)," 
 and then Peter " zvalked over the waters (wtpuwaT-qaev eirl to, vdara) " and "came 
 to Jesus." Taking all these facts into consideration we appear to be justified in 
 inferring that Matthew's reason for deviating from Mark's use of the genitive 
 (which is also the usage of the LXX) in the first instance in which he speaks 
 about the "walking," was, that he desired In emphasize the meaning "walking 
 onivard," as distinct from " walking about." 
 
 [2342f] IIe/N7raT<?a> in N.T. means (1) "walk about," (2) "walk in love, faith, 
 light etc." Applied to the lame, or paralysed, it may mean "recover the power 
 of walking." When applied to Jesus, it probably means in most cases, as in 
 classical Greek, "walk about while teaching" Where Mark describes Jesus as 
 (xi. 27) "walking about in the Temple," Matthew has (xxi. 23) "came into the 
 
 262 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2342] 
 
 Homer and Hesiod, eiri with the accusative of Odkao-crav, ttovtov etc. 
 was extremely common in the sense of sailing, advancing etc. over 
 the sea or ocean 1 . Consequently, by the slight change of the genitive 
 
 Temple," and Luke (xx. i) '■'teaching the people in the Temple and preaching 
 the Gospel" ; and this is probably the real meaning of Mark's tradition. For 
 several authors use the word thus (Steph. ) Philostr. p. 21 "lecturing to one's 
 audience (itepataTOvvTOS is rods d.Kpowp.ivovs)," id. 302 "lecturing to people that are 
 in a state of depression (it. is avdpwitovs ddvp-ois Zx oVTa s)" Diog. Laert. vii. 109 
 "Ask and answer and lecture (to ipwT$v ko.1 ditoKpiveadai kclI it e pi.it areZv)." As 
 Jewish teachers "sat" while teaching, itepntaTeu would not probably be applied 
 to Jesus in this sense, except either as a Greek paraphrase, or as referring to 
 His "going from place to place" while preaching the Gospel. 
 
 [2342/] Mt. iv. 18 itepnrarCov (Mk i. 76 itapdyuv) 5i itapa ttjv da\a<T<raD 
 ttjs T. occurs before the call of Peter. The corresponding narrative in Lk. v. 1 
 has iyivero iv tl2 tov ox^ov iitLKeladai avTt£ ko.1 aKOvetv t'ov \byov tov deov Kal avros 
 r/v io-Tibs itapa ttjv \lnv-qv TevvqcrapiT. If this detail in Lk. is parallel to the 
 detail in Mk-Mt., Lk. would seem, as above, to have taken it. as "teach." In 
 Lk.'s sequel, Jesus goes into a boat and (v. 3) "sitting down, from (4k) the vessel 
 he taught the multitudes." This resembles an incident, omitted by Luke, but 
 recorded by Mark and Matthew before the Parable of the Sower, where the three 
 Synoptists relate the gathering of a crowd. Mark and Matthew add : — 
 Mk iv. 1 Mt. xiii. 2 
 
 "...so that he himself went into a "...so that he himself went into a 
 
 boat and sat in (iv) the sea, and all the boat and sat, and all the multitude 
 
 multitude were toward the sea on (or, had taken up its stand on the beach 
 
 on the edge of, iitl) the land (iitl (iitl tov aiyia\bv ijTrjKei)." 
 
 ttjs 777?)." 
 
 [2342 »•] The facts indicate that there were many traditions about Jesus 
 teaching the disciples " in the sea" or "by the sea." It is not at all likely 
 that itepieitaT-qaev iitl ttjs 6a\daaris els tovs /j.a0r)T&s originally meant (according 
 to the idiom of Philostratus) " He discoursed, on the edge of the sea, to the 
 disciples " — for the idiom was probably confined to educated writers. But, 
 reversely, it is possible that the original and poetical tradition about Jesus 
 walking on the sea to the disciples may have been explained by some as meaning 
 that He "stood on the edge of the sea and discoursed to them," or else " He, in 
 the sea, i.e. in a boat on the sea, discoursed to the disciples." 
 
 [2342 h] In Jn xii. 35 " Walk about (itepntareiTe) (R.V.) while (ws) ye have 
 the light," the Syr. (Burk. txt) has " walk in the light" ; and a little later (xii. 36) 
 instead of " believe in (els) the light," Chrysostom has "walk [having regard] to 
 (eis) the light." If u>s meant "while," we should have to interpret the former 
 passage "Be active," "be doing," assuming that the "walking about" is in the 
 paths of righteousness ; but more probably (2201) us means "as" and the sense is 
 " Walk according as ye have the light." 
 
 1 [2342/"] Steph. quotes abundant instances from Homer and Hesiod of iitl 
 with accus. in this sense ("over the sea"), but none (nor do L. S. and Jelf) from 
 later authors. Matthew, however, uses it twice in the story of Peter walking on 
 the waters, as well as once in the Synoptic Tradition. And comp. Eurip. Hec. 
 446 iit' olS/xa, also Hel. 400, Iph. T. 395, 409. It seems a poetic idiom. 
 
 263 
 
[2343] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 to the accusative, Matthew suggests that the meaning of the old 
 tradition was not "walking about on the edge of the sea," but 
 " walking over the sea [toward the disciples]." In the light of this, 
 his readers would naturally interpret the next clause as "having 
 beheld him, on the sea, walking [towards them]." 
 
 [2343] Mark's narrative suffers from ambiguity. He has the 
 same two phrases as Matthew, but with the ambiguous genitive 
 in both clauses. John has only one clause, and that contains the 
 ambiguous genitive, " They behold Jesus walking on the sea («ri tt}<; 
 
 e.y." 
 
 [2344] The variations may be illustrated by the description 
 (LXX) of Israel " encamped by the [Red] Sea." The Hebrew 
 preposition means literally "upon." In the first instance, LXX 
 renders this literally by «ri with the genitive, but a few verses after- 
 wards by 7rapa with the accusative 2 , which is the regular rendering 
 all through the Bible, 7rapa Odkaaaav being very frequent whereas 
 brl OaXaao-qs is extremely rare. When the latter occurs in the 
 Psalms (R.V.) "terrible things by (Heb. on) the Red Sea," the 
 Hebrew writer and the Greek translator (who uses brl with the 
 genitive) may be alluding to the passage in Exodus where the 
 meaning is "on the edge of the sea 3 ." 
 
 [2345] It appears, then, that the phrase used twice by Mark, "on 
 the sea," is, both in Hebrew and in Greek, ambiguous. Matthew 
 alters it in one case so as to make the meaning clear, ''walking over 
 the sea." John retains " walking on the sea." In view of Matthew's 
 alteration, and of Luke's omission of the whole story, it is reasonable 
 to conclude that there were early divergences of opinion as to the 
 meaning of "on the sea" and to regard it as probable that lohn 
 
 1 [2343 a] Mk vi. 48—9, Mt. xiv. 25—6, Jn vi. 19. Some of the Latin MSS. 
 distinguish between the two clauses. In Mt., a has "ambulans supra mari.. .supra 
 mare ambulantem " (/> om. 2nd clause), e has "ambulans super mare... in mari 
 ambulantem," /'has "ambulans super mare. ..supra mare ambulantem," SS lias 
 "mi the water. ..on the waves of the sea." In Mk, SS has "walking on the 
 water. ..on the water [and] walking." In Mk, a has "ambulans fesus super 
 man m [sic)... ambulantem super mare." In Mk, D has ir. ewl 7-775 Oa\d(rarjs twice. 
 In Mt., I) has two genitives; L has genitive first, accusative second. 
 
 1 |2344,/| Ex. xiv. 2 iirl rijs 0., xiv. 9 irapa ttjv 0. 'E7rt ttjv 6. occurs in 
 Ex. xiv. 16, 21 etc. of Moses " stretching out his hand over the sea." 
 
 :i [2344A] In I's. cvi. 22, the Syr. and Vulg. have " in the Red Sea": Walton 
 renders the Targ. "in," but the Heb. "super," but the preposition, in both, is the 
 same as in Kx. xiv. 2 (Heb.). 
 
 264 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2346] 
 
 intended " walking on the sea " to mean something different from 
 Matthew's "walking over the sea" — something more in accordance 
 with the usage of Polybius — who describes the Roman soldiers 
 as "standing on (i.e. on the edge of) the sea 1 ," and not venturing 
 into it in order to attack the Carthaginians — and also in accordance 
 with the LXX version of the Deliverance on the Red Sea and the 
 allusion to it in the Psalms. And this hypothesis is made all the 
 more probable because we thereby interpret the Johannine "on the 
 sea" precisely as we are to interpret the Johannine "on the land" in 
 the same story, and also as we interpret the Johannine "on the sea" 
 in the narrative of the manifestation after the Resurrection. In each 
 of these three cases " on " means "close to," "on the edge of." 
 
 [2346] It has been shewn elsewhere that John's use of the rare 
 (1735 be) word H0EAON in the context indicates that he was writing 
 with allusion to Mark's H0EAEN. Mark had said that Jesus 
 "willed" to pass by the disciples. John says that the disciples 
 "willed" to receive Jesus : and then there was a miracle. The boat 
 was "immediately on the edge of the shore"! But the difference 
 between the Synoptic and the Johannine miracle is this, that in the 
 former the Lord comes to the disciples, in the latter He draws the 
 disciples to Himself 2 . See also 2716 — 7. 
 
 1 Polyb. Bell. Pun. i. 44 iirl 5£ rrjs daXdaaris ^ary)uav \ol 'Pw/xcuoi] KaTaTreirXrjy- 
 [xtvoi ttjv tQv TroXepLiiov rokixav. 
 
 2 [2346 a] John, like Origen, may have regarded the story as typical of the 
 Storm of Temptation. The narrative has some points of similarity to that of 
 Adam and Eve, when they, after yielding to temptation, heard the voice of "the 
 Lord God walking (wepiwaTovi>Tos)" and they were afraid. Before they had 
 tasted of evil, says Philo (on Gen. iii. 8), they were at rest themselves and 
 believed God to be at rest : now, being themselves in commotion, they impute 
 motion to Him. This is not the place to discuss the relation between the two 
 Johannine descriptions of Jesus "on the edge of the sea {kid ttjs da\acro-r}s)" of 
 Tiberias — one before, one after, the Resurrection. But, as regards the former, 
 the facts indicate that John found this ambiguous phrase in the Original Greek 
 Tradition. Instead of omitting it, or altering it, he desired to set forth what 
 appeared to him the true and spiritual traditions containing it. In other words, 
 whereas Luke omits, John intervenes and explains. 
 
 [2346 />] The Acts of fohn says § 2 (ed. James) " When He had chosen Peter 
 and Andrew, who were brethren, He cometh to me and to my brother James, 
 saying, ' I have need of you : come unto Me.' And my brother <hearing> that, 
 said 'John, what would this child have that called to us upon the shore?' {koX 
 6 a. fxov tovto dwev, T. to waidiov touto <.to> inl tov alyiaXov KaXicrav i][j.as 
 tL fiouXerai ;).'' 
 
 [2346 <] The narrative goes on to say that, when they had "brought the ship to 
 
 265 
 
[2347] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 (/3) 'Etti xof cTAypof (xix. 19) 
 
 [2347] Jn xix. 19 i-n-l tov aravpov — which is parallel to Lk. xxiii. 
 38 ctt' avrw, R.V. "over him," but better, perhaps, "concerning him" 
 (506 (i)/')— requires in itself no grammatical comment, but perhaps 
 points to mistranslation of Semitic tradition by one or more of 
 the evangelists. 
 
 (xi) Kcn-d 
 
 [2348] Kara, in the Synoptists, is occasionally used of locality, 
 both with genitive and with accusative. In John it is never thus 
 used. In Mark, it occurs no less than seven times in the phrase xar' 
 l8Cav, "privately." John never represents Jesus as doing anything 
 "privately" (comp. xviii. 20). This is one explanation of the rarity 
 of Kara in John as compared with Mark. It is interesting to note 
 that one out of two instances with the genitive, and one out of eight 
 instances with the accusative, occur in interpolations (viii. 6, v. 4). 
 The phrase eU xaO' eU is also part of an interpolation (viii. 9). 
 
 (xii) Merd 
 
 (a) Mcta 'loyAAiOY 0«- 2 5) 
 
 [2349] Mera with the accusative requires no comment, meaning 
 almost always "after," of time, as in the Synoptists 1 . 
 
 Mtra with the genitive of the person in N.T. regularly means "in 
 company with," and frequently " associated with (as a friend)," " on 
 the side of." Except in Revelation, it is not used in N.T. with verbs 
 
 land," the brothers presently saw Jesus "helping along with us to settle the 
 ship {to ttUIov edpaffw/j.ei*):' For this remarkable expression comp. (Steph.) 
 Callixenus Athen. 15, p. 204 n eSpaadfjvai to irXolov ao-<pa\us iirl tup <pa\ayywv 
 (i.e., Steph. viii. 603, on the (1) "stocks" or (2) "rollers"), and Constantin. 
 Basil. Mac. c. 34, p. 90 eirl tlvos d<r<pa\ovs (XiriSos edpaffdrji'ai (metaph.). In 
 N.T. also we have "hope" connected with steadfastness in two metaphors, (1) 
 Col. i. 23 Tedefj.t\iu/j.ti>oi. Kal edpaloL ical M /j-eraKLVOvfievoi d-rrb ttjs <?\7t/5os..., 
 (2) Heb. vi. 18—19 Att/5o$, i)v u;s ti-yicvpav ^x°^ v - This " settling the ship" is 
 perhaps originally derived from some poetic metaphor. 
 
 1 |2349«1 Mera with accusative occurs (12) in the phrase p. raDra (or, tovto) 
 (2394), also 111 iv. 43 /nerd 5<* rds 860 r/M^pas, xx. 26 ped' rifxipas 6ktu>. It is foil, by 
 other nouns in [v. 4] fiera ttjv rapaxv" (interpol.), xiii. 27 fxeTa to \pufxlov. 
 
 In the historical books of LXX, fxeTa raOra is very common (much more so 
 than ixera tovto). It occurs (5) in 1 Mac, but not in 2 Mac, 3 Mac, 4 Mac. It 
 occurs (3) in I Esdr. but never in lvr. , which has juerd tovto twice. Merd 
 T0.VT0. is non-occurrenl in Mis and Mt., but it occurs Mk-App. xvi. 1:, and in 
 Lk. (both speech and narr.). It is very fieq. in Rev. (i. 19, iv. 1. 2, vii. 9 etc.). 
 
 266 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2350] 
 
 of contention e.g. "fight with (i.e. against) 1 ," a use apparently 
 confined to Hebraic Greek. In John, when it is used of people 
 " talking," or " murmuring," or " questioning with one another (/xct 
 dAAr/A-w) 2 ," the speakers are all on one side — either the Jews against 
 Jesus, or the disciples wishing to question Jesus (not some for, others 
 against, Him). And awfyrelv, ^rrjais etc. elsewhere are found with 
 7rpos or a-vv or dative, but not with /xtTa 3 . These facts bear on the 
 interpretation of iii. 25 (lit.) "There arose therefore a questioning 
 from (? 2350) (e*c) the disciples of John along with (^era) a Jew about 
 purifying, and they came to John and said to him, Rabbi,...." 
 
 [2350] The whole of the context— which turns on the possibility 
 of rivalry between the Baptist and Christ, who had come into the 
 Baptist's neighbourhood — suggests that the Jews and some of the 
 Baptist's disciples wished to incite the Baptist to jealousy. If we 
 take CrJTTjcris to mean (as it does in the Acts and Pastoral Epistles) 
 a quarrel 4 , and a quarrel about some matter that seems to the writer 
 unimportant, we can give /xera its usual Johannine signification by 
 supposing (1) a parenthesis after "quarrel 5 ," (2) an ellipsis of Ttcts, 
 " some," after e* (2213—5), (3) fxerd meaning " allied with " : " There 
 arose therefore a quarrel — [some] of the disciples of John [siding] 
 with a Jew [or, Jews] about purifying ; and they came to John 
 and said, Rabbi,..." i.e. they tried to rouse him to jealousy of 
 
 Jesus 6 . Nonnus has €pis...'I(uaFvao jxaO-qTai^ 'E/3pa.Lov (JLera cpwros. 
 
 1 Rev. ii. 16, xi. 7, xii. 7, xiii. 4 etc. But comp. 1 Cor. vi. 6 — 7 adeXcpbs 
 /Hera &5e\<pov KpipeTai...Kpifj.aTa £x eTe /*£#' ^o-vt&v. Steph. gives no instance. 
 
 2 Jn xi. 56 ZXeyov, vi. 43 yoyyvfcre, xvi. 19 ^TjreXre, all foil, by /*. d.XXr/Xctii'. 
 
 3 Mk viii. 11 dat., ix. 14, 16 irpos, Lk. xxii. 23 irpbs, Acts xv. 2 717x3s 
 (v. r. <t6v), Acts xxv. 19 71756s : Acts vi. 9 dat., ix. 29 irpbs. 
 
 4 [2350(7] Ztjttjctis is not in LXX. In N. T. it occurs elsewhere 6 times. 
 It implies strife in Acts xv. 2, 7, foolish discussion and pedantical wrangling in 
 1 Tim. vi. 4, 2 Tim. ii. 23, Tit. iii. 9, and prob. in Acts xxv. 20. ZrjTrjfxa is 
 also used in an unfavourable sense in Acts xv. 2, xviii. 15, xxiii. 29 etc. 
 
 5 [2350(5] Comp. Rev. xii. 7 "And there was war in heaven — Michael and 
 his angels making war with the dragon — and the dragon made war and his 
 angels...." 
 
 6 [2350c] The Latin versions have "Jews" instead of "Jew" and render 
 iK as follows : — a and/" " inter," b " ex," e " de," d " a." They render nera thus : — 
 a "et" (but a has "inter Judaeos et discipulos Johannis"), b and e "cum," 
 
 / "et," d "ad." Syr. Burk. has (txt) "among the disciples of John with the 
 Jews," but his marg. gives " of one of the disciples of John with a Jew {or, ' the 
 Jews') S," and the Arabic Diatessaron has "between one of John's disciples and 
 
 267 
 
[2351] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 (0) 0\ Me-r' aytoy" ontsc (ix. 40) 
 
 [2351] In ix. 40 (lit.) " There heard [some] of the Pharisees these 
 things — those that were with him (rJKovo-av e*c twv <I>. tclvtol ol /act 
 avrov oi/tcs)," SS has " the Pharisees which were near him." This 
 rendering, if allowable, would remove a great difficulty ; for the con- 
 text represents Christ as severely condemning them, so that " on his 
 side" or "his companions" — the rendering demanded by usage 1 — ■ 
 seems out of place here. But (1) perd is hardly ever used of mere 
 proximity, (2) the article would surely have been omitted, since the 
 sense would require " some, being casually with him." Chrysostom 
 paraphrases it as "following him superficially (e7ri7roA.a«os) " : but 
 how can the supposition of such an ellipsis be justified? It would 
 be more allowable to suppose that, as in ix. 25 tu<£Ao? wv means 
 "being once blind," so here 01 6Wes means "those who once were." 
 But there the context continues " now I see (apn /JAeVo))," so that 
 the antithesis and the context together make the meaning clear : 
 " Being [known to everyone as] blind," or " being [up to this 
 moment] blind," now I see. Here there is no such context, and no 
 satisfactory explanation presents itself". 
 
 (7) MeTA compared with nAp<\ 
 
 [2352] John only once says fteVetr /actu 3 , the reason being perhaps 
 
 one of the Jews." These last two renderings necessitate that the two must be 
 described as going together to John and saying "Rabbi" etc. 
 
 [2350 d] Chrysostom supposes that the "Jew" was one of Christ's followers, 
 one whom the disciples of John tried ineffectually to persuade. But this view, 
 besides not explaining fj.trd, fails to explain why the evangelist here alone uses 
 the word "Jew" instead of " a disciple of Christ," the term he elsewhere applies 
 (xix. 38) to Joseph of Arimathaea. 
 
 1 [2351 a] Even where Peter is represented as (xviii. 18) " alongwith " the High 
 Priest's servants (as Judas is "alongwith' 1 '' the soldiers that arrest Jesus) fierd 
 probably suggests blame, "making himself their companion" And, with the 
 article, the notion of companionship is strengthened. 
 
 - [2351 />] Mori, "once," occurs in this narrative, a little earlier (ix. 13) "him 
 that was once blind (t6v nore rv<p\6v)." And the context implies that, whereas 
 "the once blind" had been caused to see, so, "those who had once seen"— i.e. 
 those who, being Pharisees, had once been disciples of the Lord— had been made 
 blind. Ii would therefore make good sense to read o'i irore per avrov ovres, and 
 irore might have been dropped owing to its similarity with OT6C of which it 
 seemed a repetition. Hut there is no variation in the MSS. except that A places 
 6vra before per' avrov. 
 
 :! [2352,?J |n xi. 54 "and there he abode with (utrd) the disciples" is shewn 
 by the following words ("Now the passover of the Jews was nigh") to denote 
 a brief period. 
 
 268 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2354] 
 
 that jxera mostly implies companionship, friendly conversation, aid 
 etc., for a special occasion, unless the contrary is implied by adding 
 "for ever" etc. 1 When the Paraclete (i.e. Friend and Helper) is first 
 mentioned, it is with p-erd, but qualified by " for ever," then with Trapd, 
 "at home with," then with ev, as follows, xiv. 16 — 17 "another 
 Paraclete will he give to you that he may be in companionship with 
 you (p.eff i/xwv) for ever, even the Spirit of truth, which the world is 
 not able to receive, because [the world] doth not behold it or under- 
 stand it. Ye understand it because it abides, as in a home, with you 
 (ivap vjxZv /xevet) and in you it [really] is (kcu ev v/xiv eo-nv, v.r. co-rat, 
 W.H. txt eWv)." 
 
 [2353] Here are three stages of revelation. The first is, that the 
 new Friend — instead of being the companion of the disciples for 
 a few months (like the Lord in the flesh) (//.era) — would be their 
 companion, guide, and prompter, "for ever (eh tov alwva)." The 
 second is, that since the companion was the Spirit of Truth and 
 the disciples had a spiritual affinity with Truth, they were al- 
 ready in sympathy with the Spirit, and it was already (in the eyes of 
 the Lord who saw things as they were) at home ivith them (irapd). 
 The third statement is, that the Spirit was indeed essentia//)/ " in 
 them," i.e. in their inmost being (ev) 2 . The MSS., except BD, read 
 (xiv. 17) e'o-Tat "shall be in you." But "ye understand it because it 
 shall be in you " makes very poor sense. Our Lord has previously 
 used the present tense to the disciples ("Ye are") telling them that 
 they are (xv. 3) "pure" by reason of "the Word" that He has, as it 
 were, spoken into the hearts of all but Judas. This " word " is 
 regarded as being the beginning of the Spirit, which, therefore, He 
 now says, "in you [essentially] is." 
 
 (xiii) Ilapd 
 
 (1) TTApA with Accusative 
 
 [2354] This construction is never used by John. Whereas Mark 
 and Matthew have "by the sea (irapa rrjv OdXao-aav) " with verbs of 
 
 1 [2352 5] In xii. 7 "The poor ye have always with you (/J-ed' v/j.Qv)" is 
 omitted (1688 b) by SS and D. If it were genuine it would be Jn's only mention 
 of vrwxoi in Christ's words. 
 
 2 [2353a] In some contexts, ev v/mv might mean "among you all" and not 
 " in you individually." But the whole passage indicates that the three prepositions 
 describe three stages of spiritual help for each one of the disciples individually, 
 the Spirit being (r) "by his side," (2) "at home with him," (3) "in his heart." 
 Moreover, the Johannine ev almost always means "in," not " among." 
 
 269 
 
[2355] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 rest or motion, and Luke twice has " standing by the lake (co-no's, or 
 eo-Ta>a, 7rapa rrjv Xifxvrjv) 1 " John, though he at least once describes 
 Jesus as standing by the sea, never uses irapd thus. It has been 
 shewn (2340 — 6) that once at least (and probably twice) he uses em 
 with the genitive to mean " on the edge of the sea." 
 
 (2) TT<\pA with Dative 
 
 (a) TTApA with Dative and mgta with Genitive, see 2352 — 3 
 (/3) Synoptic and Johannine use 
 
 [2355] In the Synoptists, 7rapa tw Oew, or tw irarpi, "with God," 
 or "with the Father," mostly suggests "in the sight of God," "in the 
 estimation of the Father," not "in His, [so to speak, literal] presence." 
 But in John the sense is local and metaphorical, as in viii. 38 " that 
 which I have seen with (irapd) the Father," that is " in the home of 
 my Father," or "by the side of my Father." It means the spiritual 
 region that we call "heaven." Compare xvii. 5 "glorify me...^_y thy 
 side (irapd creavTw). . .with the glory that I had by thy side (irapd 0-01)." 
 In xix. 25 " Now there stood (laTrJKetaav 8e) by the cross (irapd t<3 
 aravpw) of Jesus his mother...," there occurs the only instance in 
 N.T. where irapd is used with an impersonal dative. It is quoted by 
 Chrysostom with irapeaT7]Kevai and the dative. Is it possible that 
 " the cross " had already acquired a shade of suggestion of a " sign " 
 or military " standard," so that when Christ's disciples had abandoned 
 Him in the conflict, the women are described as still " standing by 
 the cross," as soldiers "stand by the colours"? 
 
 (3) n<*pA with Genitive 
 
 [2356] On irapd and ex, with i£epxop.ai, see 2326- — 8. Ilapa. 
 Kvpiov occurs in Mark and Matthew as a quotation in connexion 
 with the Corner Stone ("This [thing] is from the Lord") and in 
 Luke, in connexion with the Incarnation, just before the Magnificat 2 . 
 In John, Trapd with genitive almost always means "from [the bosom, 
 or home, or hand, or immediate presence, of]" God 3 . 
 
 1 I.k. v. 1 — 2. 
 
 - [2366a] Mk xii. i i, Ml. xxi. 42 (I's. cxviii. 13). I.k. i. 45 Zarai reXeiuais... 
 Trapa Kvpiov, and also i. 37 ovk adwarrjo'ei irapa rod deov ttSlv pr)p.a (alluding to 
 Gen. xviii. 14 " too hard for the Lord" irapa tu> dap pij/xa) refer to the Incarnation. 
 
 3 In this sense it occurs about 18 times, in other senses about 7 times. 
 
 2/0 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2359] 
 
 (4) FT^pA with Genitive and with Dative interchanged 
 [2357] In the following, the dative construction is followed by 
 the genitive construction (but D, and most Latin and Syriac versions, 
 have assimilated the latter to the former) viii. 38 a eyw ewpaKa irapd 
 
 T<3 irarpl AaAw • /cat t'peis ovv a rJKOV<ran irapa. tov Trarpos rroteiTe. 
 
 Commenting on this, Origen adduces vi. 45 — 6 ttS? 6 a.Kovo-a.% napa 
 
 TOV TTOLTpOS KCU Ua6(OV £pX €TCtt ^pOS ip.€. Ol'X OTL TOV 7Ta.T€pa ewpctKeV TtS 
 
 el an 6 (x)V irapa. [rou] Oeov, ovtos ewpaKev tov iraTepa. But in the latter 
 Origen reads 6 u>v irapd tw iraTpi instead of o w irapa. [rot;] deov 1 , and 
 
 Chrysostom reads 6 in tov Oeov at least once 2 . 
 
 [2358] Retaining the text in vi. 45 — 6, we may explain 6 tov irapa 
 \toi>~\ deov, like 6 wv eh tov koXttov tov irarpos above (2308 — 9), as 
 a combination of rest and motion, suggesting the divine nature of 
 the Son on earth, not " sent from the side, or home, of God " like 
 John the Baptist (i. 6 aireo-Ta\p,evo<; irapa) but " BEING from the 
 side of God," i.e. eternally existing and proceeding from God. 
 There is a distinction between the believer — who (through the Law 
 of Moses and of Nature) " hath heard " voices issuing from the 
 Father's House and " hath understood " their humanising and loving 
 tendency — and the Son, in the Father's House, who " hath seen the 
 Father." 
 
 [2359] In viii. 38, the interpretation of the whole largely depends 
 on the interpretation of iroieire as indicative or imperative, on which 
 see 2193 foil. On this, too, rests in part the application of tov iraTpos 
 to God, or to Satan (who is shortly afterwards described as the 
 " father " of those whom Jesus is addressing). But in any case there 
 is the same contrast as in vi. 45 — 6 between the distinctness with 
 which the Son " sees " the things in the House of the Father and the 
 
 1 [2357 rt] Huet ii. 293 A 'irepos avyxpwp.evos /cat rip, lias 6 aKovaas irapa rod 
 irarpbs Kai fxadwv ipxerat irpos fj.e, oi>x Sri tov iraripa e'wpa/ce tis, et fir] 6 wv irapa tcjj 
 irarpl ovros ecopa/ce rbv iraripa, ipel on eiffi rives tQv ivcrwiJ.aTovij.evwv \pvx&v wplv els 
 yiveaiv eXOelv, /j.e/j.a8y}Tevp.ivai irapa ru> war pi, /cat anovaacrai avrov, at rives /cat 
 epxovrai irpbs tov <xwr%>a 
 
 '- [2357/'] Chrys. Etra e7ra7ef Oi)% on tov Ylaripa rts ed/panev el /at? 6 wv t/c 
 rod Qeov ' ov Kara tov rrjs alrias \6yov ivravda tovto \iywv d\Xd /card tov rpbirov 
 rrjs ovaias. 'E7ret el tovto ZXeye, irdvres irapa tov deov iap.iv irov odv to e^aiperov 
 tov Tiov /cat Kexwpi.o~iJ.ivov; That is to say, 7rapd would apply to "all men," 
 e/c to the Eternal Son alone. One may infer from this that 6 wv irapa, in Chrys., 
 a few lines above, when the text is first introduced, is (as often in such cases) 
 a corrupt conformation to the received text. Cramer reads e/c repeatedly, but 
 has a strangely different text, with irdvTes yap e/c tov deov eo-/J.ev. 
 
 271 
 
[2360] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 indistinctness with which men receive promptings from the invisible, 
 whether for good or for evil. About the promptings for good Jesus 
 said, " everyone that hath heard and understood." He does not here 
 say, " the things that ye have heard and understood." Perhaps the 
 evangelist wishes to suggest that the muttered instigations to evil 
 need no such effort to " understand " them as is required by the 
 promptings to good. 
 
 (xiv) n« P c 
 
 [2360] Ilept with accusative does not occur in John. On the 
 v.r. in xi. 19 ras irtpl yidpOar, see 1990. With the genitive, irepC 
 occurs in John almost as often as in all the Synoptists together, 
 because of the frequency of the Johannine phrases " testify con- 
 cerning," "speak concerning" etc. This makes it almost certain 
 that Trepi, the reading of A etc. in i. 30 l-n-ep ov iyih dirov, is 
 incorrect ; for there would have been no temptation to alter it. It 
 also demonstrates that virep ov, in that passage, cannot mean pre- 
 cisely " concerning whom," for, had that been the meaning, John 
 would have written irepL See 2369 — 71. The frequency of -n-epi, 
 and the existence of ypa.<puv TVi.pl in v. 46, shew that xii. 16 r/v &tt 
 avrw y€ypa^u.£Va does not mean quite the same as rrepl avrov. See 
 2339. 
 
 (xv) IIpo 
 
 (a) TTpo eMOY (x. 8) 
 
 [2361] In x. 8 "As many as came before me (rrpo ip.ov) are all 
 thieves and robbers," the difficulty of " before me " has caused its 
 omission in several versions and quotations, because the phrase 
 might be used against the Prophets and Saints of Israel. Tlpo, in 
 some contexts, might mean " in preference to" — as in "Thou shalt 
 have none other gods before me 1 ," if rendered into classical Greek. 
 But Trpo, with (\6eu>, could hardly mean anything except " in front of" 
 or "previously to." 
 
 [2362] In the second of these two senses, however, the phrase 
 will harmonize with the context, if "before me," referring to what has 
 
 1 1 2361 </ ] Ex. xx. .5, LXX ttMjv ifiov, Deut. v. 7, comp. Dent. xxi. 16. In 
 Deut. v. 7, I.W lias wpd wpocrixnrov fiov, hut AF ttXtji- ifxov. The I, XX, so far 
 mi he judged from the instances given by Trommius under seven Hebrew 
 headings, never uses irp6 t<> mean "preferred to." 
 
 272 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2363] 
 
 just been said ("I am the Good Shepherd") can mean '■'■before the 
 coming of the Good Shepherd in the dawn to open the door of the 
 fold and to bring out the flock for pasture." In contrast with Him, 
 the evil shepherds, or hirelings, may be supposed to come prema- 
 turely, while it is dark, trying to force their way into the fold in 
 order to steal and kill. Possibly irpb i/xov may be also intended to 
 suggest a notion of "preferring himself to me," but the fundamental 
 meaning is that of time. Only, we are not to suppose that " before 
 me" means "before I became incarnate" or that it is limited (as 
 Chrysostom seems to suggest) to leaders like Judas and Theudas 1 . 
 It appears to be uttered by Christ in the character of the Good 
 Shepherd — whether called the Shepherd of Israel, or the Shepherd of 
 the world — and to mean " As many as have come to the flock, from 
 the beginning, not waiting for the Good Shepherd's time, nor 
 associating themselves with Him, but pressing forwards to rule 
 mankind by the short methods of constraint." 
 
 (/3) TTpd transposed 
 
 For xii. I npb e£ r)p.tpu>v tov 7raa-^a, see 2288. 
 
 (xvi) ITpos 
 
 (i) TTpdc with Accusative, with verb of rest 
 
 [2363] The only Johannine passage that needs comment is i. i 
 " In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with (fi-pos) God 
 (tov 6e6v)," where the question is, What is precisely meant by 7rpos? 
 An evangelist might have used o~vv " together with," or /xerd " in 
 companionship with," or -n-apd (with dat.) "by the side of," "in the 
 household of" — as, in Proverbs, Wisdom personified, describing her 
 close connexion with God, says, " Then [i.e. during the Creation] 
 I was by His side {nap aimS)*." But John uses a preposition that is 
 (so far as present evidence goes) not used in this connexion by any 
 
 1 [2362 n] Origen says (Huet ii. 41 d) irpo yap rrjs reXetuxrews rod \6yov ircLvra 
 ipeKTa to. ev avOpibwoLS are evderj kclI iWiwrj. In his context he mentions the 
 "■■white horse'''' in the Apocalypse (xix. n) with Ps. xxxiii. 17 "A horseis deceitful 
 for safety" and Ps. xx. 7 "Some trust in chariots and some in horses." The 
 passages suggest a contrast between the true Deliverer, or Captain of Salvation, 
 and the false Deliverer, between the Warrior and the Brigand. 
 
 2 Prov. viii. 30. 
 
 A. VI. 273 l8 
 
[2364] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 Greek classical author, nor in LXX. 1 And this is all the more 
 remarkable because Trapd with dative is used by John to describe 
 " abiding with" spiritually, as well as literally, and this is also used 
 in classical Greek, and in the Synoptists, to mean " in the house of," 
 " at home with." 
 
 [2364] In N.T. 7rpo's nva is frequently employed, to mean, not 
 exactly "at home with," but "in familiar intercourse with," "close 
 contact with," sometimes hostile, but in any case close, communica- 
 tion 2 . In the Second Epistle to the Corinthians the Apostle says 
 that he desires " to be at home in converse with the Lord (ei-S^eiv 
 77-pos tov K.) " and in any case to be " well pleasing " to Him ; and he 
 uses this preposition to describe his "staying in converse with" Peter, 
 and to express his hope that the youthful Timothy may " be free 
 from intimidation in his intercourse with" the Corinthians 3 . 
 
 [2365] According to the analogy of Mark's usage, 6 Ao'-yos yv 
 7rpos tov 9c6v would mean " the word was in converse with God " : 
 and John, in writing the words, might possibly have in mind the two 
 passages (2364 a) in Mark's Gospel where Christ speaks of Himself 
 as "having converse 7i>ith" men, and where, in each case, either 
 Matthew or Luke has omitted or altered the preposition. As the 
 Logos on earth rjv 7rpos di^pwVovs, so from the beginning He was 
 
 1 [2363 a] Steph. and Thayer give no instance of dvai irpbs nva from classical 
 Greek. Wahl's classical instances bear on ypa<pecr0ai, or airoypa<pea6cu, irpbs etc., 
 and contain no example with elvai or with a verb of simple rest. Swete 
 (Mk xiv. 49) says "see W. M., p. 504, and cf. ix. 19, note"; but ix. 19 note 
 says simply " irpbs v^ds — ixed' v/uluov (Mt.), cf. vi. 3"; and vi. 3, commenting on 
 irpbs ijfxas, simply says, "They were settled at Nazareth (w5e irpbs wuV)" — 
 presumably a misprint for ^/xas. W. M. p. 504 gives no classical instance exc. 
 Demosth. Apat. 579 a (Teubner 892) toTs fi£>> e...dvai ras dl/cas irpbs tovs dec- 
 fxodiras, i.e. "bring their suits to " — which is not to the point. 
 
 [2363/;] In -2 Chr. xxviii. 15 "they brought them to Jericho. ..unto their 
 brethren," Kai^imjaav clvtovs eis 'I... irpbs tovs d5e\(povs avruif, motion is implied. 
 No instance has been hitherto alleged of eluai. irpbs tlvol in LXX. 
 
 2 [2364(7] Mk vi. 3, Mt. xiii. 56 (Lk. diff.) " they are all in familiar intercourse 
 •With tis {irda-ai irpbs T/Acas elfflv),'' Mk ix. 19, Lk. ix. 41 (Mt. xvii. 17 p.i0' v/xQv) 
 '• I low long shall I hold converse with you (irpos v/xas) \" Mk xiv. 41; (Mt. xwi. 55 
 .mi., Lk. sxii. 53 ntd' v/xuv) "I was daily in converse with you (irpbs v/j.as) in the 
 Temple teaching and ye did not seize me." Cornp. Mt. xxvi. 18 (Mk-Lk. diff.) 
 irpbs at irotw to llacrxa " I keep the Passover in thy house." The context suggests 
 a sign, and a secret arrangement, and confidential communication. 
 
 * [2364 b] 2 Cor. v. 8, Gal. i. 18, 1 Cor. xvi. 10 &<p6(3ws yivi)T<xi irpbs vfj.ds. 
 Comp. Gal. ii. 5 "that the truth of the Gospel might abide in converse with you 
 (biap-tiv-Q vpbs iifx.ds)." 
 
 274 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2366] 
 
 7r/3o5 tov Oeov, and the twofold application of the phrase " in converse 
 with " prepares the way for the thought of a Mediator. Moreover, 
 this preposition, being regularly used with many verbs of speaking 1 , 
 might seem appropriate to the definition of the Word. 
 
 [2366] But would an educated Greek at once understand rjv 7ro6s 
 toi' 0e6v in this sense ? In Mark, the context shews the meaning of 
 euai 7rpos, but it is not shewn thus at the beginning of the Fourth 
 Gospel : and 7rpo's with the accusative, in classical Greek, means 
 "having regard to," as in wpos ravra " having regard to these things," 
 one of the commonest phrases in the language. Hence Trpos rbv 
 Oeov might be taken by Greek readers to mean " having regard to 
 God." And this would agree with abundant instances of tfiv irp6% 
 rira, in classical Greek, meaning " to live in absolute devotion to 
 anyone" as where Demosthenes describes patriots as " living with 
 constant regard to (7rpos) their country 2 ." This sense, too, suits the 
 whole of the Fourth Gospel, which describes the Son as doing 
 nothing except that which He sees the Father doing, so that the 
 Logos is regarded as always, so to speak, ["looking] toward,'" or 
 " having regard to" God. Probably John combines this spiritual 
 meaning ("devoted to") with the more local meaning ("in converse 
 with ") and, in his own mind, the former is predominant 3 . 
 
 1 [2365 a] Not however so freq. in Jn as in Lk. Myeiv and elrretv rrpbs in Jn 
 occur only thrice of Christ's words, but more freq. as to the words of others. 
 
 - [2366 a\ Aristot. Khet. i. 9. 4 eXevQepov yap rb pi] rrpbs aXXov ffjv, Plut. A/or. 
 471 K iirei rrpbs erepovs rj irpos avrovs eidiapeda 'Ctjv, Demosth. 411. 33 rols 5e 
 rrpbs vpas £w(7iv (comp. ib. 361. 4 Trpos rovrov rravr eaKorrovv), Lucian iii. 312 
 irpbs pbvov ae j"cG. It is frequent in Aristotle. 
 
 3 [2366 />] llpbs Tiva with verbs of speaking — which is prob. non-existent in 
 Mk-Mt. except in 7rp6s dWrjXovs or iavroijs — is fairly frequent in Jn, but not 
 nearly so frequent as in Lk. Jn seldom has it of words addressed by Jesus to 
 others (iv. 48 "Except ye see signs...," vi. 5 "Whence are we to buy loaves?" 
 viii. 31 "If ye abide in my word...," addressed to those who are soon afterwards 
 called the children of the devil), but more frequently of words addressed to Jesus 
 (ii. 3, iii. 4, iv. 15, 49 etc.). In Lk. it is so freq. as to occur six times in the 
 first chapter. In LXX, Trpds Tiva in r Kings xii. 5, 7, 10, xxii. 18 etc. corresponds 
 to rivi in 2 Chr. x. 5, 7, 10, xviii. 17 etc. 
 
 [2366 c] In Mk xii. 12, Trpos avrovs elrrev means "with reference to (or, against) 
 them." In Mk x. 26, W.H. read Xiyovres Trpos avrbv without altern. following 
 BCX, and this would mean "to Jesus." But the text varies greatly. SS omits 
 "saying" and has "in themselves," and AD and the Latin vss. have 7rpos eavrovs. 
 There does not appear any reason why trpos avrbv, had it been in Mk, should 
 have been altered to irpbs eavrovs. But if the e in eairroi''s were dropped in 
 some MSS. after the C in rrpbs, or if eavrovs were spelt avrovs, it would be 
 
 275 l8—2 
 
[2367] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 (2) TTpdc repeated after verb of motion 
 
 [2367] In xx. 2 " She runneth therefore and cometh unto (Trpo's) 
 Simon Peter and unto (7rpd?) the other disciple whom Jesus loved 
 and saith to them..." why is irpo<; repeated? The repetition would 
 certainly indicate a desire to distinguish in a marked manner between 
 the two, if xpo's had been repeated in a brief phrase like 7rp6s 2. 
 kcu 7r/3os 'IwaV^v. Perhaps here it means simply that the two were not 
 living in the same house, and Mary is to be supposed as being 
 accompanied by Peter to the house of the other disciple. No other 
 instance quite like this is given by Winer-Moulton (p. 522, Part iii. 
 sect. 1. 7. a). Elsewhere prepositions are repeated to give dis- 
 tinctness and weight to separated clauses as in Jn xvi. 8 (and, 
 without /cat, in Eph. vi. 12). 
 
 (3) Pfpuc with Dative 
 
 [2368] This occurs four times in John (Mk (1), Mt. (o), Lk. (i) 1 ) 
 always meaning "at," "close to," xviii. 16 "Peter was standing at 
 the door," xx. 11 "Mary was standing at the tomb outside," xx. 12 
 "two angels sitting one at the head and one at the feet." Ilpds, 
 "near," with dative of person, occurs in Sophocles {Ant. 1189, Oed. 
 Col. 1268) (comp. Aesch. Suppl. 242) and might conceivably have 
 been used (7rpo<; tw $e<±>) in i. 1 if John had meant merely "near 2 ." 
 
 (xvii) 'Yirt'p (see also 2718—22) 
 
 [2369] 'Y-n-ep with accusative occurs as v.r. for (xii. 43) rjrrtp, see 
 2092. 'Yntp with genitive occurs 1 3 times in John, more than twice the 
 number of instances in all the Synoptists. In almost all the Johannine 
 instances it refers to the death of one for the many' 1 . But in the 
 
 comparatively intelligible that avrote (read as aiVoi's) should be changed to avrbv : 
 and avrbv might be thought by the scribe of B to agree better with Mt.-Lk. and 
 with the context, which describes Jesus as answering what is said by the disciples. 
 VY.II. reject B's reading of eavr. for avr. in Mk viii. 37 and xi. 8, and place 
 it in tin- margin in xi. 7. On the whole, in Mk x. 26, eavrovs seems more 
 probable than avrbv. 
 
 1 Mk v. 1 1 r/v 8t (f/ctt irpbs r$ 6pti, Lk. xix. 37 iyylfrvros 5£ avrov 77S77 wpbs 
 rrj narafidati r. opovs rQiv 'EXcuuSi'. 
 
 '- [2368(7] \\\i)aiop, "near," deserves mention as a preposition peculiar to Jn in 
 iv. 5 w\-qalov rov xw/j'oi', R.V. " near to the parcel of ground." \\\t)oiov, "near," 
 occurs nowhere else in N.T., nor does Steph. quote it freq. except with genitive of 
 person (but see Aescli. Prom. 364). Jn may have been influenced by LXX where 
 it occurs (Tromm.) 10 times, .nice (Josh. viii. },},) in connexion with Geiizim, 
 called in John (iv. 20 — 21) "this mountain." 
 
 :t Jn xvii. 19 virep avrQv ayiafa itxavrbv refers also to mediation. 
 
 276 
 
PREPOSITIONS [2371] 
 
 following it is rendered by R.V. (as well as A.V.) "of": i. 30 "This 
 is he of whom (virep ov) I said, After me cometh a man which is 
 become (A.V. "is preferred") before me...." 
 
 [2370] Against this rendering is the fact that (2360) Trepi is the 
 regular Johannine preposition in the phrase "speak, of" meaning 
 "speak about." 'Yirep, it is true, is used by some authors in a sense 
 closely resembling that of irepi, as we might use "on" ("on this 
 subject the writer urges etc." often with a notion of advocacy): but 
 in such cases the context — referring generally to a thing, not to 
 a person — ought to be such as to make the meaning clear 1 . Here 
 the context suggests "in behalf of." For the Baptist is speaking as 
 a messenger or ambassador of the Messiah, and he might have used 
 the words of St Paul "We are ambassadors in behalf of Christ 2 ." 
 
 [2371] Ammonius 3 , among other explanations, suggests that dvtjp is 
 here applied to Christ by John the Baptist in the sense of wp.(f>io<;, 
 "bridegroom," and it is an undoubted fact that in the Fourth Gospel 
 the singular of dvqp is always capable of this sense 4 : and the Baptist 
 is introduced later on in this Gospel as calling Christ the "bride- 
 groom" and himself the "bridegroom's friend 5 ." This suggests 
 a new way in which we may interpret vnip in accordance with its 
 legitimate meaning: "This is he in behalf of whom [coming as the 
 bridegroom 's friend in behalf of the bridegroom] I said, After me 
 cometh a man...." It would be too much to substitute "husband" 
 for "man": but a play upon the word, suggesting the former, may 
 very well be intended. In the first statement of the Baptist's evi- 
 dence the word "man" did not occur (i. 15) "This was he (lit.) that 
 (1927) I said (ouros r/v ov €177-01'), He that cometh after me...." The 
 insertion of the word dvrjp is therefore all the more remarkable here: 
 and so is the insertion of v-n-ep. We may suppose that in the first 
 moment of discovery the Baptist simply announces a superior. 
 After an interval he is able to define the superiority: "He is the 
 
 1 [2370 a] E.g. in Xen. Cyrop. vii. 15. 17 Abradates has been, in effect, 
 pleading in behalf of the flanks of the army that they will be exposed while he 
 himself will be so safe that he is almost ashamed to take the position assigned to 
 him. Cyrus replies, "Well, if your part [of the army] is right, be not alarmed 
 for them («' to. irapd crol KaXws lx et Odppet virep iKelvwv)." See 2719 a. 
 
 - 2 Cor. v. 20. 3 Cramer ad loc. 
 
 4 [2371(7] In iv. 16, 17, 18 the context shews that it must mean "husband." 
 In i. 13 ovSe ek de\r)/j.a.Tos dvdpos, the use of dvrjp instead of dvdpwwos may indicate 
 " husband," the meaning being " not by mortal begetting." See 2722 c. 
 
 5 Jn iii. 29. 
 
 277 
 
[2372] PREPOSITIONS 
 
 dvijp, the lord, the husband of Israel. I came and spoke in his be- 
 half, preparing the way for him as the bridegroom 1 " See 2718 — 22. 
 
 (xviii) 'Y-iro and viroKaTa> 
 
 (i) 'Ytto with Accusative 
 
 [2372] 'Ytto with accusative occurs only in i. 48 "Before Philip 
 called thee being under the fig-tree I saw thee {irpb tov o-e <J>tA.i7r7ror 
 </)wi'»/crat oi'Ta vtto ryv avKrjv eirjoV o-e)." This should be compared 
 with the following, which contains the only instance of v-rroKaria 
 in John, i. 50 "Because I said to thee that I saw thee underneath 
 the fig-tree (on cTSoV o-e iVokcitco rrj^ <rvKr}$) thou believest!" Here 
 a phrase with v-n-6 and accusative is quoted with vTroKarw and genitive. 
 Perhaps the more emphatic form viroKaro), "under cover of," em- 
 phasizes the notion of secrecy: "Because I said to thee that I saw 
 thee under cover of a fig-tree [as if that were, in thine eyes, so very 
 marvellous]." The same substitution is found in Luke's, as compared 
 with Mark's, description of the suppressed light. Mark has "under the 
 bed," but Luke "under cover of a bed," or "thrust doivn under 
 a bed 2 ." 
 
 1 [2371 U\ For vieip with personal object and verb of speaking, comp. Xen. 
 Cyrop. iii. 3. 14 eVei oSv <rii <riu}irq.s eyw Xe^w ko.1 vwep gov Kal inrtp r)p.£iv, Polyb. 
 xxi. 14. 9 TavTa...atraprjvaTo vwkp iravros tov trvveSplov, xxviii. 16. 4 vwep rjs 
 [7rpe<r|3ei'as] eVoterro rbv xPVf laTia 'P- 01 ' Ka ' tovs \6yovs. 
 
 - [2372 a] Mk iv. 21 virb tt\v KKiv-qv, Lk. viii. 16 vnoKarw k\lvt)s. In LXX, 
 
 ( 1 ) "under the tree, oak, pomegranate etc." is regularly vw6 with accusative, but (2) 
 "under every green tree," referring to idolatry, is regularly inro K&Tui (in Is. lvii. 5, 
 where LXX has vird, Aq. and the rest have vtok&tu) with genitive. By so 
 allusive a writer as Jn this distinction might be utilised here if the intention was 
 to indicate in the second phrase (vttok&tu)) that Nathanael was passing through 
 some spiritual crisis and perhaps wrestling with the solicitations of evil thoughts 
 just before Philip called him. 
 
 [2372 />] There is ambiguity in the first words, npb tov...<tvktjv. The caller 
 might be Nathanael or Philip, and either Philip or Nathanael might be under the 
 fig-tree. We have to infer the meaning from the context. And, even when 
 tlSbv ae is added, there is still ambiguity. "Qvtcl may agree with (1) the preceding 
 or (2) the following ere: and the meaning may be (1) "[Long, or just] before 
 Philip called thee at the moment when thou wast under the tig-tree — I saw thee," 
 
 (2) "[Just] before Philip called thee — I saw thee in that moment when thou wast 
 under the fig-tree." 
 
 [2372(] Chrysostom lias a long and not very clear commentary, in the course 
 of which he seems to assert that Christ had seen Nathanael not only "just />,/c>/r 
 (Trply r\ <\>wvr)oai)" the calling hut also "before this (irpb tovtov)" : only the time 
 had not come to say this. And yet Chrysostom previously says "But Jesus 
 
 278 
 
DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUNS [2374] 
 
 (2) 'Ytto with Genitive 
 
 [2373] 'Ytto with the genitive is avoided by John (1885) as he 
 prefers to speak of an agent performing an action rather than of an 
 act performed by (vVd) an agent. It occurs only in xiv. 216 ex wv T <*s 
 
 c'rroAds jjlov k. Trjpwv avrds CKetvo's iariv 6 dyairdJv fie- 6 oe aya7rwv /xe 
 
 dya-n-rjOyjo-eTai v-n-b t. TraTpd? /xov, where perhaps the writer desires to 
 repeat precisely the words 6 dyairdiv pe so that they may constitute 
 the two middle terms of the sentence (2544 a). Perhaps the frequency 
 of the nominatives 6 aya.7rcoi' and 6 //.r) dya-n-wv in the Epistle (i Jn ii. 
 io, iii. io, 14, iv. 7 etc.) may partly explain the shape of the sentence 
 here. Had the verb been npaw we should have expected e'dV tis i/xi 
 Tiiia Ti[X7]a€L avTov 6 Trarrjp similarly to xil. 26. 
 
 PRONOUNS 
 
 I. Demonstative 
 
 (i) Air6s (see also 2723—7) 
 
 [2374] Avto's (nom. sing.), in Luke 1 , sometimes means "he" (un- 
 emphatic); but John uses it always to mean "himself," sometimes in 
 a context mentioning other persons ("himself (avros) and his mother," 
 "himself and his household 2 ") but more often without such context 
 to mean "of his own knowledge, or motion," "unaided," "un- 
 prompted," e.g. ii. 24—5 "But Jesus [of] himself (d. Se'I.) would not 
 trust himself to them because he understood [of] himself (Sid to 
 avrbv yaw/cHv) all men... for he knew [of] himself (auVds yap eytvw- 
 
 answered as God. For indeed He said I have known thee from the beginning... 
 and 'But now (i.e. just now) did I see thee in the fig-tree (Kai yap el-rev, ore 
 Avudev <re otSa...Kal, NO? eUbv ae ev ry (rviqj. ..).'" Probably teal yap elirev means 
 "For indeed He said {in effect}" i-e. He meant. And Chrysostom perhaps 
 implies that the words of Jesus contained both of the meanings above mentioned, 
 though the time had not yet come when the former ("long before") could be 
 clearly expressed. It will be noted that he paraphrases "under the fig-tree" 
 as "in [the covert of] the fig-tree." 
 
 1 [2374 a] Comp. Lk. xix. 2 Kai Idoi/ avrjp ovd/nan Za/c. Kal avrbs tjv dpxiTe\uvTjs 
 with Judg. xvii. 7 Kal eyevqdt) veavlas...>cal avros Aeveirys, a literal rendering of 
 the Heb. "and he [was] a Levite," and see Lk. iv. 14 — 15, viii. 1 etc. In Lk., 
 this use is probably Hebraic. 
 
 - [2374/5] Jn ii. 12, iv. 2, 12, 53, xviii. 1 (R.V.) " he entered himself (d.) and 
 his disciples," (A.V.) "he entered and his disciples." 
 
 279 
 
[2375] PRONOUNS 
 
 o-Ktv) what was in man 1 ," vi. 6 "For he himself (a. yap) knew [i.e. he 
 knew of himself, although he asked a question]..." 
 
 [2375] So in vi. 15 "Jesus withdrew again into the mountain 
 himself alone" avros /xo'vos is in contrast with the multitude that 
 wished to seize Him, and perhaps it does not merely mean " by 
 himself alone." Several authorities omit airrds. Perhaps it has a 
 mystical emphasis (2724—6). The same phrase, avVo? pros, is applied 
 to the grain of seed that will not die, xii. 24, A.V. "It abideth alone," 
 but R.V. "it abideth by itself alone." It would be well to use the 
 emphatic pronoun elsewhere, e.g. vii. 10 "Then he himself also went 
 up [following his brethren]." In v. 20 "The Father loveth the Son 
 and sheweth him all things that he himself doeth," R.V. has "himself" 
 but does not have it in xii. 49 "The Father that sent me hath himself 
 given me commandment (6 Tre/z^as p.* irar^p avros p.01 ivToX^v 
 Se'SwKei')." In the latter, awVds is not quite the same as e/<€u'os, " He 
 and no other " ; it is rather, " He in His own person," or " He in 
 His own character of Father V 
 
 [2376] Avtovs (accus. pi. masc.) occurs very frequently in the 
 Synoptic narrative, to denote disciples, multitudes, Pharisees etc., in 
 relation to Jesus, describing how Jesus "taught them" "healed 
 them," " called them," "sent them" " questioned them " etc. In John 
 it occurs thus only four times 3 (excluding one instance in an inter- 
 polated passage 4 ). On the other hand it occurs nine times in Christ's 
 Last Prayer referring to the disciples, when He is praying to the 
 Father concerning "them 5 ." 
 
 1 [2374<| A.V. omits "self" in each of the three cases, R.V. in every case 
 but the third. The threefold repetition of avrds is remarkable. In reality it 
 does not mean "Jesus, by himself "—for Jesus repeatedly declared that He does 
 nothing "from, or by, himself"— but Jesus being one with the Father or with 
 the Spirit. Comp. the threefold repetition of ravra in 2396—7. 
 
 2 [2375 a] In xii. 49 R.V. has "The Father which sent me, he hath given me...." 
 In vii. 4 ovdeU yap tl iv Kpvirr^ voui ko.1 forel r auT6^ (v irapp-qaia dvai, the txt, if 
 correct, means "himself in opposition to his work." W.H. marg. has avrd, with 
 BD d; but (1) c might be dropped before e, (2) although Syr. Cur. omits avrds, 
 SS inserts it, (3) fijTui with accus. and inf. is not found in N.T. See 2727. 
 
 ■' Disciples in i. 38, vi. 17, xiii. 1, soldiers in xviii. 7. 
 
 4 viii. 2. 
 
 r ' [2376 a] xvii. 6 — 23. The noin. pi. avrol is used (peril, in a more personal 
 and emotional sense than tKUfoi) in Christ's Prayer for the disciples, xvii. 19 
 "that they may be also themselves hallowed," xvii. 21 "that they may be also 
 themselves in us." In xvii. 8 na\ avroi iXafiov, there is perh. a notion of spon- 
 
 280 
 
DEMONSTRATIVE [2378] 
 
 [2377] In xviii. n to iroTrjpiov...ov /at/ 7ti<d au'rd, there is probably 
 a combination of two constructions (i) "that very cup (avV6 t. it.)," 
 i.e. the cup just as the Father presents it, and (2) the repetition of 
 avro (more usually eKtivo) to emphasize the object 1 . In xx. 2 — 15, 
 after Mary has said " They have taken the Lord out of the tomb," 
 the two disciples run thither, and one of them happens to be indicated 
 by a pronoun (xx. 6 "Simon Peter following him"): but the narrative 
 proceeds to describe how Peter (xx. 7) "entered into the tomb, and 
 beholdeth...the napkin, which had [before] been upon his head," 
 where "his," of course, means "the Lord's" — very naturally and 
 dramatically since " the Lord " is in the mind of the evangelist and 
 is assumed by him to be in the minds of sympathetic readers : and 
 similarly Mary addressing, for the first time (as she supposes), the 
 "gardener," says "Sir, if thou hast conveyed him away," although 
 the "gardener" has merely said, "Whom seekest thou 2 ?" 
 
 [2378] The meaning of avrov is disputed in the following, viii. 44 
 " He (eKeu'os) was a murderer from the beginning and stood (eo-rrjKev) 
 not in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he is 
 speaking that which is false (to i//ei)8os) he speaketh out of his own 
 (<ek twv 181W) (2728) ; because he is a false speaker (i/zeuo-nrs) and the 
 father of it (airrov)." Here "of it" probably means "of that which is 
 false." Falsehood is regarded as being slanderous, i.e. diabolic, or 
 Satanic. Whenever Satan utters that which is false he speaks "out 
 of the abundance of his heart," "out of his inmost nature"; but it is 
 also suggested (by "your father" in the context) that, when the 
 Slanderer causes men to slander, he speaks out of them as "his 
 family " — 181W being either masculine or neuter. For Origen's and 
 Chrysostom's views see 2728. R.V. has "speaketh of his own" — 
 which, if "of" is meant for "from" (as in "give of" "take of"), is 
 probably not English (2728 b), or only the English of scholars. 
 
 taneousness, "and they of themselves received the words I gave them." (In 
 xvii. 11 avroi (v. r. ovtol), if genuine, is antithetical to the following eyu.) 
 
 1 [2377a] Winer-Moulton p. 184, after quoting Jn xviii. 11, says "The 
 pronoun is used for emphasis : so also in Mt. vi. 4, 1 Pet. v. 10 (Acts ii. 23), 
 Rev. xxi. 6." But W. H. reject at)ros in Mt. vi. 4, Rev. xxi. 6, not even giving 
 it in the margin. In 1 Pet. v. 10 aurbs Karapriaei probably implies the willingness 
 of the Father to strengthen those who resist temptation (not "He [as distinct 
 from others]"). In such a solemn utterance as xviii. 11, it is hardly possible that 
 avro should be "pleonastic." 
 
 2 On avrov, as distinct from iavrov or t'Stos, used possessively, see 1720 a — i. 
 
 28l 
 
[2379] PRONOUNS 
 
 [2379] Some have suggested that avrov above (viii. 44) refers to 
 ns "anyone," implied as the subject of AaA.17, "Whenever anyone 
 speaks... he is a liar, and so is his father," i.e. so is the devil. But 
 (1) the alleged instances of the omitted ns are quite different from 
 the context here 1 . (2) Such an end to a sentence as xal 6 7raT»}p 
 avrov, leaving the reader to supply "is the same," or "likewise a liar," 
 is quite unparalleled in this Gospel. (3) Where the subject is 
 omitted, it would not be permissible (except in very special cases, 
 such as Mt. xix. 3 e^ecrriv [nvt], " a man may ") to use a pronoun 
 referring back to the non-existent subject. 
 
 [2380] In xi. 45 — 6 " Many therefore of the Jews, [by 'many' I 
 mean] those that had come (01 i\66vTe<;) to Mary... believed in him: but 
 some of them (tiv« Se e£ avruv) went away to the Pharisees and told 
 them...," the pronoun "t/iem" may mean either "the Jews" or that 
 section of the Jews which "had come to Mary." For a discussion of 
 this see 1941 foil. It is not likely that those who " told the Pharisees " 
 told them from good will to Jesus, desiring to glorify the latter : for, 
 had that been the meaning, the writer would probably have used 
 " and," or " therefore," instead of " but " (" but some of them went 2 "). 
 
 1 [2379 a\ Of the instances alleged by Winer-Moulton p. 736 n. 3, Job xxviii. 3 
 has "man" supplied in R.V. but "He" {i.e. God) in A.V.; both R.V. and A.V. 
 agree in supplying "God" in the context (xxvii. 22), and its poetic character 
 makes it of little use as a parallel to Jn. In 2 S. xvi. 23, 6v rpbwov ewepuT^o-rj is 
 a literal rendering of Hebrew, "as though [one] were to take counsel," and has 
 little bearing on independent Greek. In Mt. xix. 3, ran may be easily supplied 
 after ^€<ttiv, "[one] is permitted," and the parall. Mk x. 2 has dt>5pL. In 
 1 Thess. iv. 9, the substantival infinitive in ov xp e ^ av ^X eTe yp&<pe<- v vfi!iv is very 
 doubtful, having regard to (1) dxopxv in B, tx.ofJ.ev in other good authorities, 
 ypatpecdai. in some authorities, and to (2) the likelihood of conformity to 1 Thess. 
 v. 1 ov xpeta" Zx eTe "V"" ypdtpeffdai.. In any case it supplies no parallel to \a\fj in 
 Jn viii. 44. 
 
 [2379 b\ Winer himself does not recognise the omission of the indefinite ns 
 in any instance except where the subject can be supplied by the reader from his 
 own knowledge or reading, or where it means "God," "Scripture," "the sacred 
 writer" etc.: and, though it is frequent in LXX (as literal transl. of Hebrew, 
 e.g. Ezr. iv. 15 "that [one] may search" iiruo-KtypriTai, but 1 Esdr. ii. 18 eino-Kecptfrj) 
 it requires more support than is alleged by Winer-Moulton before it can be 
 recognised in any book of N.T., and especially in John, who had. other ways 
 of expressing himself (idf tis \a\77, 6 \a\wv etc.), so that antecedently he would 
 not be likely to use such an ellipsis even if the other evangelists used it. 
 
 • [2380^/ 1 It may be said thai the impotent man cured by Jesus gave 
 information similarly (v. 15) to the Jews. Bui we are not told that he "believed 
 in Jesus"; and it is quite possible that the evangelist regarded him as ungrateful 
 and unbelieving— a contrast to the blind man, of whom it is expressly said 
 that (ix. 36—8) he "worshipped," after expressing "belief." 
 
 282 
 
DEMONSTRATIVE [2382] 
 
 It is difficult to explain how some of those who " believed in " Jesus 
 could (apparently) act against Him. Possibly, it is one of the 
 instances of John's manner of stating a fact, first, loosely and (strictly 
 speaking) even inaccurately, and then correcting the statement 
 (1925). If so, the meaning may be "those that had come to 
 Mary [as a whole or, almost without exception]... believed... but 
 some [few] of them [did not believe, but] went away to the 
 Pharisees..." For 8s = auros or cKelvos, see below 1 . 
 
 (ii) 'EKtivos (see also 2729—32) 
 
 [2381] This pronoun is used frequently by all the evangelists as 
 an adjective, especially in temporal phrases such^as "in those days," 
 "from that hour" etc., and all the Synoptists have it in the phrase 
 "woe unto that man (t<3 dv0pwir<a e/ceiVo)) 2 ." But the singular, as a 
 personal pronoun, is almost confined to John 3 . He uses it some- 
 times, without much apparent emphasis, in narrating a dialogue (" he 
 answered," "he saith ") to mean "he, on his side, replied, said, 
 denied etc. 4 " 
 
 [2382] Outside dialogue, when John uses e/ccivos in his own 
 words, or in the words of others reported in the first person, it 
 generally has considerable emphasis as in i. 8 " He was not the 
 Light " (i.e. do not suppose that he, the Baptist, was the Light), 
 i. 18 "The only begotten... //t? [and no other] hath declared," i. 33 
 " He that sent me... he [and no other] said to me," ii. 21 " [The Jews 
 took the words literally] but he was speaking about... 5 ." It is often 
 used by the Son concerning the Father, v. 19 "Whatsoever things he 
 doeth " and similarly in v. 38, vi. 29, viii. 42. The Samaritan 
 woman also uses it about the Messiah, iv. 25 "when he (emph.) (e.) 
 
 1 [2380 b~\ In v. 1 1 6s Se aweKplOr) avrois, AB alone retain 8s dt, which is omitted 
 or changed to 6 de by other authorities. *0s 5t is prob. more emphatic than 6 5^ 
 and less emphatic than avrbs 8^ (which, in Jn, would mean " he [of] himself said"). 
 "Os, in this sense, occurs in N.T. elsewhere only in Mk xv. 23 5s 8e ovk ZXafiev 
 (where SB and 33 almost alone preserve 6s). It is one of several curious 
 characteristics common to Mk and Jn. Steph. gives abundant instances of /ecu 6's 
 in Plato and Xen., but none of 6s 5e. But comp. Job xxii. 18 6s 8e ev£w\r\ffev, 
 where 6's represents the Heb. pron. "he" and is emphatic, Aq. and Theod. have 
 accu cu't6s (A ore ye), Tob. v. 13 6s 8e etirev, 'Eyw 'Afixptas (X ko.1 etirev ai>T<p). "Os 
 /j.iv...5s 8t does not occur in Jn. 2 Mk xiv. 21, Mt. xxvi. 24, Lk. xxii. 22. 
 
 3 Lk. xviii. 14 has Trap' inuvov, Mk-App. xvi. 10 has iKelvi). 
 
 4 Jn ix. 11, 25, 36 (?), xviii. 17, 21. 
 
 5 Comp. the pi. in x. 6 "But they (e. de) did not know," xi. 13 "But they 
 thought...." 
 
 283 
 
[2383] PRONOUNS 
 
 cometh, he (unemph.) will tell us all things." In the Epistle, it is 
 the pronoun used to denote Christ, as being the Person always before 
 the writer's mind as his example. 'E/cctvos is used thus six times 
 there, and in no other sense 1 . 
 
 [2383] In John, ckcivos 2 , when preceded by *ai, is generally 
 combined with it in the form kcWvos. The following is exceptional, 
 xix. 35 "And he that hath seen hath borne witness, and his witness 
 is true (dA. airov Icttlv 7] jj-apTvpia) and he (/ecu €Ke<Vos 3 ) knoweth that 
 he (unemph.) saith true (oTStv on akrjdy \eyet), in order that ye also 
 may believe." Here exeivos might theoretically be a mere emphatic 
 substitute for the preceding au-ro's. Then the meaning would be 
 simply, "he that hath seen is quite certain that he himself is speaking 
 the truth." But this does not make very impressive sense, whereas 
 the occasion demands something not only impressive but uniquely 
 impressive. Moreover it seems to demand a combination of more 
 witnesses than one, as in the Gospel, where (viii. 17) "the testimony 
 of two men" is mentioned, or in the Epistle, where (1 Jn v. 8) 
 "three" witnesses are mentioned in connexion with "the water," 
 "the blood," and "the spirit." 
 
 [2384] The passage may perhaps in some respects be illustrated 
 by v. 32 "Another is he that witnesseth concerning me and I 
 know that the witness.. is true," where, though Chrysostom supposes 
 Jesus to mean the Baptist, He probably means (2730) the Father, 
 who "witnesseth" to the Son by the works that He (v. 36) "hath 
 given" to the Son to accomplish. St Paul appeals sometimes to the 
 testimony, as it were, or presence, of God or Christ 4 ; and, on one 
 occasion, not long after the words "the God and Father of the Lord 
 Jesus Christ... knoweth that I lie not," he passes to "visions and 
 revelations of the Lord 5 ." So here, we appear to have a solemn 
 appeal on the part of the evangelist touching the truth of a statement 
 that he obviously regards as symbolical of a profound mystery not 
 apparent to the soldiers at the crucifixion but revealed to him. To 
 whom should he appeal except to the Lord Himself from whose side 
 
 1 1 Jn ii. 6 (see Westc), iii. 3, 5, 7, 16, iv. 17. The fern, occurs in v. 16, the 
 neut. never. Comp. 2 Pet. i. 16 iTrbwTai...Tr)S (Kelvov fieyaXeiSTTjTos. 
 
 - [2383 a] Perhaps the only exception in Jn, besides the one above discussed, is 
 v. 39 " Ye search the Scriptures, and they are they (icai itcdval uaiv) that testify 
 concerning me." 
 
 3 Alford tends k&kuvos with X. 
 
 4 Rom. ix. t, Gal. i. 20, 2 Cor. xi. to — 11. > 1 Cor. xi. },\ foil. 
 
 284 
 
DEMONSTRATIVE [2385] 
 
 (as he declares) there flowed forth "blood and water"? But, if so, 
 we have seen from the Epistle (2382) that the evangelist might 
 naturally speak of the Lord as e/mvos, when recording His testimony 
 to the truth of a tradition revealed to "him that had seen it," whether 
 in a vision or otherwise, "And he that hath seen hath borne witness, 
 and his witness is true, and He knoweth that he saith true, that ye 
 also may believe 1 ." For a parallel from Barnabas, see 2731. 
 
 [2385] Chrysostom has the following comment on vii. 1 1 ttov 
 iarlv eVeti'os; "By reason of their great hatred and rancour they 
 would not even call Him by His name 2 ." The same pronoun that 
 might mean, in the mouths of admirers, "that [great] man," might 
 mean, in the mouths of enemies, "that [notorious] num." In vii. 45 
 "There came therefore the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees 
 and they (eVeivoi) said to them, Why did ye not bring him?" — we 
 must bear in mind that John has previously described (vii. 32) "the 
 chief priests and the Pharisees" as sending officers to arrest Jesus. 
 Meantime, he has told us about the talk of "the multitude," of whom 
 "some" say this, "others" that, some for, some against, Jesus: now, 
 in contrast with the "division" in the multitude, he describes the 
 fixed and virulent determination of the Pharisees by emphasising the 
 pronoun in "they said 3 ." See also 2732. 
 
 1 [2384 d\ If the evangelist is distinct from "him that hath seen," then this 
 sentence implies three witnesses. It should be noted that this evangelist alone 
 records that the Saviour, after the Resurrection, shewed the disciples His wounded 
 side (xx. 20, 27). Nonnus (cd/jLef) prob. read oida/xev. 
 
 [2384/>] On xix. 35 Blass (p. 172) says, "There is doubt about the whole 
 verse, which is wanting in e, and Cod. Fuldensis of the Vulgate, about this 
 particular clause [i.e. the itcetvos clause], about the text of this clause, as Nonnus 
 read eKcivov otdafiev, etc." But e, besides omitting the verse, alters the order of 
 the preceding words "sanguis et aqua" to "aqua et sanguis"; and it is possible 
 that the omission may be from homoeotel., in passing from -is in sanguis to the -is 
 in "credatis" ("ut et vos credatw "). So difficult a verse might naturally be 
 amended into eKuvov oi8a/j.ei> ; but the emendation is manifestly based on xxi. 24 
 o(8a/j.ev on. d\r]6ris avrov i] fxaprvpia earlv. But there is great force in Blass's 
 warning against basing " theories as to the origin of the fourth Gospel on this 
 verse," and in his objection to "the meaning ordinarily attached to it." 
 
 2 So, too, Cramer, rivos eveKev...; vtto iroWov /jlictovs /cat ttJs dyrex^eias 
 ovvcxbfi-evot.. 
 
 :f [2385 a] The antithesis is much more obvious in Acts iii. 13 tv v^eis [j.£v 
 Trap€8uiKaT€...KaTa irpdcwTrov IleiXaTov Kpivavros inelvov aTroXueiir, ii Ye on your side 
 delivered up. ..when he on his side had decided to acquit." In the context of Jn 
 there is no ixiv and there is a considerable interval between eicdvos and the earlier 
 member of the antithesis. Still, antithesis is the explanation. 
 
 285 
 
[2386] PRONOUNS 
 
 (iii) OStos 
 
 [2386] Outos nom. sing. masc. is about as frequent in John as in 
 Mark and Luke taken together. This arises partly from the frequency 
 of testimonies to Christ from the Baptist and others ("this is he 
 that...") 1 , but partly also from the evangelist's habit of using outos 
 after a previous description to sum up, or repeat, i. i — 2 "In the 
 beginning was the Word.. J/iis [same] was in the beginning with 
 God." So, too, at the close of his Gospel, after the many hints and 
 suggestions as to "the disciple that Jesus loved" etc., xxi. 24 " This 
 \same\ is the disciple that testifieth concerning these things...." 
 Outos is also used, in apposition, to sum up a collective participle, 
 
 vi. 46 6 wv trapa [tou] Oeov, outos..., vii. 1 8 6 Se ^tjtwi'. . .ovtos, XV. 5 6 
 /a€Vwi'...ovtos (where the meaning would be quite different if outos 
 were after a participle without a pause, e.g. 6 yueVwv outos, "this man 
 that remains"). In all these cases, the meaning is that if a man 
 does a certain antecedent act, then "this [same] man (outos)" also 
 does a consequent act 2 . 
 
 1 [2386 a] i. 15 (reading 8v dirov), i. 30, 34, iv. 42, vi. 14, vii. 40. In i. 34 
 (W. H.) ovtos iariv 6 vibs t. 6eov, the reading (k\€kt6s for vibs, supported by SS 
 and X (815), appears to have been in the txt of a papyrus of the 3rd century, Oxyr. 
 Pap. vol. ii. p. 7, where the editors have shewn that a lacuna is prob. to be filled 
 thus. 
 
 2 [2386^] In the Epistle, ovtos nom. sing. masc. occurs only thrice, ii. 22 
 6. etrrtv 6 avTixpt-CTos, v. 6 6. ioriv 6 e\d<l>v Si' vScltos k. ai/xaros, v. 20 6. eanv 
 6 a\r}divbs debs. On the difference between ovtos 6 d. and 6 d. ovtos, see 2553 c. 
 The following is exceptional, ix. 16 ovk 2<ttiv ovtos irapb. 6cov — 6 avdpwTros (altered 
 by many authorities, but probably meaning "This [man] is not from God— this 
 fellow ! " contemptuously, and at the same time perhaps intended by the evangelist 
 to suggest an inner meaning— a radical sense of antagonism between "God" 
 and "man," resulting in a rejection of the doctrine of the Incarnation). In 
 xii. 18 fiKovaav tovto avTbv TrewoLr]K^i>ai — t6 o~qp.dov, the meaning seems to be 
 " They heard that he had done this — [this great] sign." 
 
 [2386r] On xxi. 21 ovtos di tI ; Blass (p. 177) compares Acts xii. 18 tI &pa b 
 IWTpos iytvtTo, Lk. i. 66 rl apa Tb Trcubiov Zo-tcu; Joseph. Vit. § 296 01 eiKoai xpv<rot 
 ri yeybvaaiv ; Xen. Hell. ii. 3. 1 7 rt Zoolto t) 7ro\trei'a, and gives the rendering 
 " what will become of him?" This is possible. But in all these instances there 
 is no ellipsis. And the context in xxi. 21 points (2209) to some action, some- 
 thing more than mere passive "becoming." Comp. Luc. Dial. Mori. vii. 2 
 • '• 357) ° ytpw 8k tL npbs Tadra; "and the old man — what [<//</] he in conse- 
 quence?" 1 Mat. Gorg. 502 A tL 5t b irarrip avTov Mrti)!; ib. A'ep. 332 E tLs 82 
 TrXiovTas lovva.TwTo.T6s cgtiv e3 noidv] wpbs t6v tt)s 6a\aTTi)s kIv5vi>oi> ; Kv^epv^TTjs. 
 'Vi 8t b oi k aios ; All these imply contrast, "so-and-so did thus: what shall this 
 niiin do?" — so tl at they are parallel to xxi. 21. Nonnus supplies Te\to<rtt. 
 
 286 
 
DEMONSTRATIVE [2386 (i)] 
 
 [2386 (i)l Owto?, if connected with a noun and not used pre- 
 dicatively, requires an intervening article as in classical Greek 1 . In 
 ii. ii TavTtjv e7roL7](T€v dpx-ljv Twi' o-^/aciW, R.V. has " this beginning 
 of bis signs," following N and Chrys., who read rrjv dpxtjv- — an 
 interpolation so natural that its non-prevalence in the mss. is 
 surprising. Basilides, after speaking of the ineffable spiritual life, 
 likens it to the water at Cana and says, "This is the great and 
 genuine 'beginning of the signs,' [that beginning] which Jesus 
 wrought in Cana of Galilee 3 ." Origen comments on the fact that the 
 Synoptists did not give the title "beginning of the signs" to the first 
 "wonders" or "mighty works" wrought at Capernaum. He takes 
 "beginning" as appositional or predicative and as meaning "chief of 
 signs (Trporjyov/Aevov a-r]ixetu)v)," and he justifies this by saying that the 
 creation of the draughts of sober joy is greater than acts of healing 4 . 
 A similar predicative use of dpxv occurs in O.T. once, and perhaps 
 only once, Prov. viii. 22 xvptos eKTure p.e apxw oBwy avrov, about the 
 creation of Wisdom 5 . The Hebrew word there rendered kti(w is 
 cana — Targum bara "create" — and means Krao/xai as well as kti£w: 
 and Aquila and the rest substitute iKT-qaaro. Krrjcns, or KTrjpia, is 
 accepted by Origen as representing the meaning of Cana 6 . In the 
 first verse of Genesis, where LXX has ttoUw for the Hebrew bara 
 "create," Aquila has kti£w. Philo (i. 361), inveighing against drunk- 
 enness, quotes the passage from Proverbs thus, 6 0e6s e/cnfo-aTo p.e 
 7rpwTL<rT7]v twv iavTov epytuv 7 . These facts shew that 7roi€to, KTt£w, and 
 KTa.op.aL might be interchanged. Origen's direct comment on "Cana" 
 
 1 [2386 (i) a] Ezr. x. 9 ovtos /xr/v 6 Zvoltos is a literal rendering of Heb. and 
 means "this [is] month the ninth," parall. to 1 Esdr. ix. 5 ovtos 6 y.r\v kvaros — 
 perhaps intended to mean, " this month [is] ninth in the year." Comp. 1 Chr. xi. 4 
 avTT] 'Ie/3oi's " this [is] Jebus." 
 
 2 [2386 (i) b] Alf. omits Chrys., but mentions " Eusj [-mss.]." As he does not 
 mention Clem. Alex., he presumably refers to Eus. hi. 24. 11, quoting Clem. Alex. 
 Tavr-qv apxw (Toiijcre tCiv irapaSd^wv 6 'Ir/irovs. But Heinichen and Schwegler 
 mention ttjv only as an inferior reading [rain-qv ti\v apyj\v). 
 
 3 [2386 (i) r] Hipp. v. 8 (pp. 107 — 9) avTrj, (prjah, earlv ij fj.eyd\rj ical aXrjdLvri 
 dpxv tu>v (jy)iJ.eiwv, 7)v iiroir)0~tv 6 'Irjcrovs ev K. ttjs T. 
 
 4 Lomm. vol. i. 295 — 6. Nonnus has TIpuTotpapes r68e dav fxa. . .irtXeao-ev . 
 
 5 [2386 (i) d] Comp. Sir. xxiv. 9 (A) irpb tov aiQivos awapxyv fKriai /xe. 
 
 6 Lomm. ii. 117 fieSaiCov eavTW kttjctiv tw a,7r6 ravTTjs rrjs yijs iricrTevovTwv eh 
 tov iraTtpa. di clvtou, lb. 128 wapa. t6 KTTjfia avTOv...Js.ava ihvo^aadr}. 
 
 7 Philo proceeds (i. 362) to describe the infinite flow of the graces of God as 
 a fountain (iTnppeovo~qs ttjs tov 8eov x a P lTUlv Trriyrjs). 
 
 287 
 
[2387] PRONOUNS 
 
 is lost; but he refers to what he had written as indicating that it 
 denoted the "creation" or "acquiring" of the Church by Christ; 
 and the Hebrew cana is used in O.T. of God (Gesen. 888 — 9) 
 (1) "creating" heaven or Israel, and (2) "acquiring" or "redeeming" 
 His people. The latter is symbolized in O.T. by wedlock. Using 
 the same metaphor, Origen warns men to "abstain from the harlot 
 Matter (v\rj) and to be made one with the Logos that was in the 
 beginning with God, and with His Wisdom, whom He created as the 
 beginning of His ways 1 ." The facts indicate that ii. n ravr-qv 
 iTTOLTjaev ap-^ffv means tovto iiroir)o~ei> tos (or ware, elvai) dpxqv, that 
 
 it is intended to sum up a typical description of the marriage feast 
 of the Logos or Wisdom of God, that it was based on the above- 
 quoted passage in Proverbs, and that Origen has rightly interpreted 
 its inner meaning. 
 
 (a) AlA TOfTO 
 
 [2387] Aia tovto, "for this cause," "consequently," is almost 
 always placed by John at the beginning of the sentence. An 
 exception is xv. 19 "If ye were of the world the world would love 
 its own. But because ye are not of the world but I chose you out 
 of the world— for this cause (Sui tovto) the world hateth you." The 
 initial "for this cause" is so frequent elsewhere that we may infer 
 that here, too, John writes with the feeling that he is introducing 
 a new sentence, as though the last terminated with the statement 
 "I chose you out of the world," as a consequence of which, "the 
 world hateth" them 2 . Another exception, according to R.V., is 
 i. 31 "And I knew him not; but that (dW iva) he should be made 
 manifest to Israel for this cause came I baptizing with water." Here, 
 however, there is probably (2064) an ellipsis, as in other cases, before 
 
 1 [2386 (i) e] Lomm. ii. 233. Origen perh. has in his mind the context in 
 Proverbs which contrasts Wisdom, who cries to men "Drink of the wine that 
 I have mingled " with Folly, or " the Foolish Woman," who cries " Stolen waters 
 are sweet" (Prov. ix. 5 — 17). Epiphan. p. 443 A has tovto irpCiTov arifxtiov 
 (iro'nqcuv, and Chrys. quoting with r-qv apxv v , says etre 51 tovto are 'irepov irpGiTOv 
 o~r)nilov iyivero tQv fxtra to pawno/Aa ~yevop.evwv oil o~(f>b5pa 5uax v P^ i<J ^ al ivayKaiov 
 thai /xot SoKti. Their words indicate that any Greek writer would naturally have 
 used irpwrov if he had meant merely "first," but that John meant something more. 
 
 2 [2387 a] The three instances in which N.T. (Bruder) quotes from O.T. 
 clauses with bio. tovto, all have it at the beginning, Acts ii. 26, Rom. xv. 9, 
 Ilcb. i. 9. 
 
 288 
 
DEMONSTRATIVE [2390] 
 
 u-a, and the rendering should be "But [it came to pass] in order that 
 he should be made manifest to Israel. For this cause came I etc." 
 
 [2388] In vii. 21 — 2, "...I did one work [on the sabbath] and 
 ye all marvel. For this cause hath Moses given you circumcision... 
 and on the sabbath ye circumcise a man," R.V. marg. gives "and ye 
 all marvel because of this.'" But the text is to be preferred (in con- 
 sequence of the regular Johannine usage) in spite of its difficulty, the 
 meaning of "for this cause" being, perhaps, "in order to typify the 
 subordination of the sabbath to man." The words point back to 
 the cure just effected on the sabbath, at which the Jews, instead 
 of welcoming it, "marvel," i.e. are amazed with a foolish and faithless 
 amazement (1673 a — e). Rebuking them, Jesus says, "For this 
 cause" i.e., for the cause of kindness, to reveal love and not law 
 as the key to the mysteries of the Father, there has been ordained 
 the rite of circumcision, always on the eighth day after birth, so that 
 ye are forced sometimes to circumcise on the sabbath. 
 
 [2389] Aia tovto, with an interval, frequently precedes on, 
 " because" e.g. viii. 47 "He that is from God heareth the words 
 of God. For this cause (81a tovto) ye hear not, because (on) ye are 
 not from God." Here, "/or this cause" looks back to the general 
 cause ("he that is...") and then forward to the particular cause ("ye 
 are not..."). Some such restatement of a cause ("because 0/ this, 
 which I have just mentioned, ...because, in other words, so and so 
 happened") is very frequent in John. The phrase is almost always 
 in asyndeton ; but it is preceded by "and" and followed by "there- 
 fore" in one of the very few passages where it occurs in narrative, 
 v. 15 — 18 "The man. ..told the Jews that it was Jesus that had made 
 him whole. And (kcu) for this cause did the Jews persecute Jesus; 
 because [in other zvords] (6Vt) he did these things on the sabbath. 
 But he answered them, My Father worketh...and I work. For this 
 cause therefore (ow) the Jews sought rather (2733 a) to kill him, 
 because [in other words, or, from their point of view\ he not only 
 brake the sabbath but also called God his own Father... 1 ." 
 
 [2390] It is sometimes difficult to define exactly the noun 
 
 1 [2389 a] Aia tovto follows dAAd and precedes eis in xii. 27 (see 2512 b — c),. 
 "And what should I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? Nay (a\\d), for this: 
 cause (dta tovto) came I, to [meet] (eis) this hour." Here "for this cause" looks- 
 back to "this hour," and forward to a phrase in which "hour" is repeated for 
 emphasis (" to [meet] this hour"). 
 
 A. VI. 289 19 
 
[2391] PRONOUNS 
 
 represented by tovto, e.g. in xii. 37 — 40 ''But. ..they did not believe, 
 in order that the word of Isaiah might be fulfilled, 'Lord, who [hath] 
 believed...?' For this cause they were not able to believe, because 
 again Isaiah said, 'He hath blinded their eyes....'" Apparently, 
 however, "this" means the Law of fulfilment of Prophecy as being 
 the Will of the righteous God. Isaiah's question ("Who hath 
 believed?") amounted to a predictive statement, "None believed." 
 John, having expressed the fulfilment of this statement in the form 
 "they were not able to believe," goes on to explain this by another 
 prophecy referring to retributive blindness 1 . 
 
 [2391] An apparent, but only apparent, exception (to Sia tovto 
 looking back) occurs in x. 17 "For this cause doth my Father love 
 me because I lay down my life." No doubt, the immediately pre- 
 ceding sentence (about "other sheep") contains nothing to which 
 the phrase could well point. But we must go back further and take 
 the passage as a whole: "Even as the Father knoweth me..../ lay 
 down my life for the sheep — and other sheep I have... and they shall 
 become one flock, one shepherd. For this cause doth my Father 
 love me because I lay down my life that I may take it again." It will 
 then appear that "for this cause" looks back, past the intervening 
 parenthesis, to the words "lay down my life for the sheep" which are 
 repeated, with modification, after "because." Similarly in 1 Jn iii. 1 
 "...and we are [the children of God]. For this cause the world 
 knoweth not us because it knew not him," the reference of "this 
 cause" is to the preceding words, "and we are [the children of God]"; 
 and the meaning is, "Because zve are His children the world knows 
 us not — naturally, because it knows not the Father." 
 
 (/?) 'En toyt(i» 
 
 [2392] 'Er tovtw, (neut.) "in this," "herein," "hereby 2 ," occurs 
 five times in the Gospel and twelve times in the Epistle. The uses 
 are not quite similar. In the Epistle, when followed by cm or lav, it 
 
 1 [2390 a] For 5id tovto (i) looking back to a previous statement and at the 
 same time (2) preceding a sentence with initial 6Vt, see Ps. xvi. 8 — 10 (Acts ii. :6 — 7) 
 Sta tovto Tji'^pafdr] r\ Kapdia /j.ov...Kal r) ff&pi; fiov KaTaffK-quwo-ft eV £\tt18l. oti ovk 
 ecKaraXe/i/'as.... Here dia tovto merely looks backward. On begins a new 
 
 uce and introduces a restatement of the cause for joy ("for indeed thou wilt 
 not leave my soul to Sheol'') stated previously in the words "Because he is 
 at my right hand 1 shall not be moved." 
 
 2 Not in the Synoptists exc. Lk. x. 20 "/// this rejoice not." 
 
 29O 
 
DEMONSTRATIVE [2394] 
 
 seems sometimes to look forward, as in i Jn ii. 3 "And hereby know 
 we that we know him — if we keep his commandments," i.e. by the 
 following test. There is nothing in the preceding context to which 
 "hereby" can well point. In the Gospel it always looks back. But 
 (like Sia tovto) it may also look forward to something supplementary. 
 This, however, is not the case in iv. 36 — 7, "He that reapeth re- 
 ceived wages and gathereth fruit unto life eternal; in order that he 
 that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together. For herein 
 is the saying true that 'One soweth and another reapeth.'" Here 
 the meaning is, that in the joy of the sowers and the reapers of the 
 heavenly harvest there is fulfilled in the real and spiritual sense — 
 namely, in the sense that the sower rejoices to sow for others — the 
 proverb current among men of this transient world in the unreal 
 saying that "fools sow and clever men reap." The on clause 
 has nothing to do with iv tovtu) but defines 6 Aoyos. 
 
 [2393] But iv tovtio is explained by a following on clause in 
 ix. 30, where, the Pharisees having said "We know not," the blind 
 man just healed says "Herein [i.e. in your not knowing] is the marvel 
 [namely] because (on) ye know not whence he is, and [yet] he opened 
 mine eyes." In xiii. 35 "...even as I have loved you that ye also 
 love one another. Herein shall all know that ye are my disciples, 
 if ye have love one to another," the cause is first stated before 
 "herein" and then repeated with slight modification — "if [1 say] ye 
 have love among one another "—as though the "love" were a book 
 in which "all" could read the truth of their discipleship. In xv. 8 
 "Herein [i.e. in your abiding in me] my Father was glorified in order 
 that ye might bear (i'va...c/>ep7T€) much fruit and might become my 
 disciples," the reference is to previous statements (xv. 5 — 7) that, if 
 the disciples "abide" in Christ (as the branches abide in the vine) 
 they will "bear fruit," and that this "abiding" will procure the 
 accomplishment of all their prayers. Here, as a climax, it is said 
 that in this abiding the Father "was glorified," in the fulfilment of 
 His will and effort (2093—6) "in order that (I'm)" the disciples "may 
 bear much fruit." Thus the <W clause does not define "herein" (as 
 though it meant "in the fact that ye bear") but explains the object of 
 the "abiding." 
 
 (7) Mgta toyto, or tayta 
 
 [2394] Mcto. tovto is rarer in John than (acto, tolvto.. The former 
 occurs only as follows, mostly implying a short interval, ii. 12 "After 
 
 291 19- 
 
[2395] PRONOUNS 
 
 this [i.e. after the sign at Cana] he went down...," xi. 7 "afterthis [i.e. 
 after abiding two days] he saith," xi. 1 1 "These things he said, and after 
 this [i.e. after saying these things] he saith to them," xix. 28 "After 
 this [i.e. after giving His mother to the beloved disciple]... he saith 
 T thirst." 5 In all these instances there follows some word or deed 
 of Jesus. This is not the case after p.era ravra in xix. 38 "after these 
 things Joseph asked Pilate"; but in v. 1 "after these things there was 
 a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up," an action of Christ practically 
 follows as elsewhere 1 . In ii. 12 and xix. 28, //.era tovto might refer 
 to the completion of a definite period or act (like the Hebrew in 
 Gen. xxiii. 19 "After this he buried Sarah 2 ") as distinct from fierb. 
 ravra referring to a collection of actions. But in xi. 7 — 11, the story 
 of Lazarus, it is difficult to understand the twice-used phrase unless 
 the intention is to describe the miracle as not being merely wrought 
 at the grave but also prepared for, stage by stage, during the period 
 of anticipation prescribed by the Father to the Son. 
 
 (8) AyTof omitted and tayta repeated 
 
 [2395] For the most part, John avoids pronouns where classical 
 Greek would use them, and prefers nouns, as in the Prologue and 
 elsewhere (" In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with 
 God, and the Word was God," " not to judge the world but to save 
 the world" etc. 3 ). In the following, the mss. vary (ii. 12) " He went 
 down to Capernaum, himself, and his mother and [his ?] brethren and 
 his disciples." The Synoptists similarly vary when they describe 
 Christ's family as seeking to speak to Him; Mark has "his" twice, 
 "his mother (avrov) and his brethren (avrov)," but Matthew and 
 Luke have "his mother and brethren (77 /a. kou ol d. avrov)," thus 
 knitting them into one group 4 . In John, inferior authorities have in- 
 serted "his" — naturally, because "his" comes before disciples. But 
 perhaps John did not wish to apply the epithet " his" to "mother," 
 
 1 [2394^] The other instances are iii. 22, v. 14, vi. t, vii. 1, xxi. 21. It 
 occurs once in speech, xiii. 7 "But thou shalt know after these things." 
 
 * [2394 /'] LXX /j.era ravra. The more usual Hebrew is (lit.) " after these 
 words'''' fxtra ra prjfj.ara ravra, Gen. xv. i, xxii. I etc. Neither jxera tovto nor 
 fxera ravra is found in Mk or Mt. But Mk-App. xvi. 12 has fxera ravra. Lk. 
 has fxera ravra, about past action, twice pec. (x. t, xviii. 4) and once (v. 27) where 
 Mk ii. 13 has irdXtv irapa r'i)v doXaaoav, and Mt. ix. 9 iicetOev. Lk. has /xera 
 ravra twice about the future (xii. 4, xvii. 8). 
 
 3 i. 1, xii. 47, comp. ix. 5, x. 29. 
 
 4 Mk iii. 31, Mt. xii. 4(1, Lk. viii. 10. 
 
 292 
 
DEMONSTRATIVE [2397] 
 
 "brethren" and "disciples" in that impartial way. He may have 
 omitted "his" before "brethren" and inserted it before "disciples" 
 because he has in view — what he tells us later on — that " his brethren 
 did not believe in him 1 ." 
 
 [2396] This general habit of omitting pronouns makes the 
 following passage all the more remarkable, xii. 16 " These things 
 (javra) his disciples understood not at the first : but when Jesus was 
 glorified, then remembered they that these things (ravra) were written 
 {y^ypajxjxiva) concerning (2339) him, and that they had done these 
 things to him." On this Westcott says, "The threefold repetition of 
 the words is to be noticed." He refers to the "threefold repetition" 
 of Tavra. Schottgen 2 gives a multitude of instances in which "this 
 thing," represented by the Hebrew feminine "this" (mostly altered as 
 to gender in LXX), is mystically interpreted as referring to the 
 Messiah. The most important is Ps. cxviii. 22 — 3 "The stone that 
 the builders rejected is become the head of the corner. This [thing] 
 (avT-r)) is the Lord's doing." This is quoted by our Lord, soon after 
 the Entry into Jerusalem, in Mark and Matthew, who follow the 
 LXX in retaining the literal (but from the Greek point of view quite 
 misleading) feminine 3 . Luke, however, stops short at the word 
 "corner." This, then, is just one of the occasions where we might 
 expect John to intervene (see Index, "John, interventions of"). 
 
 [2397] There are good reasons for thinking that our Lord's 
 quotation about the " stone " originally terminated with the words 
 " head-stone of the corner," and that an early Christian co?igregational 
 ascription of glory, or utterance of hope or thanksgiving, to God, was 
 
 1 [2395 a] vii. 5. Of course it might be urged, on the other side, that by 
 writing 17 /i^rr/p avrou /ecu oi a5e\<pol tcai 01 ^.a^r/rat avrov, he groups " the brethren" 
 with "the disciples," apart from "the mother." This must be admitted. If 
 therefore a meaning is intended, the meaning is ambiguous (as often in this 
 Gospel) and only to be decided by the sequel, which states that His brethren 
 remained unbelievers. 
 
 - [2396 a] Schdttg. ii. 45. Gen. ix. 12, 17 " This (tovto) is the sign," 
 Ps. xxvii. 3 "In this (ravTri) do I trust," Jer. ix. 23 — 4 "Let him boast in this 
 (toijtw) " are interpreted of the Messiah. 
 
 3 [2396 £] Mk xii. n, Mt. xxi. 42 (Lk. om.) irapa. Kvpiov tyevero avT-q. Comp. 
 1 S. iv. 7 "There hath not been such a thing" ov yiyovev toiclvtt], i K. xi. 39 
 "And I will for this afflict the seed of David," LXX. om., A 5ia raiirriv. Field 
 (on Mt. xxi. 42) says that some modern commentators have committed the error 
 of taking avr-q as referring to Kt<pa\r), " This (head of the corner) was from the 
 Lord." I fear we must add Origen {ad loc, Huet i. 468 a) ko.1 6av/j.aari] Ke<pa\-q, 
 and probably Chrysostom. See 2621 — 2. 
 
 293 
 
[2398] PRONOUNS 
 
 variously added (i) by Mark and Matthew, (2) by Luke, (3) by 
 Barnabas 1 . If this was the case, John, taking up Mark's tradition 
 about avrr], and converting it into the more intelligible ravra, may 
 have placed the tradition in its right position, not as an utterance of 
 Christ's, but as an evangelistic statement, namely, that the Church, 
 in later days, recognised "these things" which took place in connexion 
 with Christ's Entry into Jerusalem — meaning the whole, and not 
 excluding the contrast between the fixed rejection by the rulers and 
 the recognition by the multitude (xii. 9—10) — as being divinely 
 ordained. 
 
 (iv) TotOVTOS 
 
 [2398] As to iv. 23 kclL yap 6 TraTrjp Toioijrovs £t7T€1 tovs TrpoaKV- 
 vovvtcls avTov, Winer-Moulton (p. 138) parallels it to Mk ix. 37 [eV] 
 T(5v ToiovTwv 7rai8<W "one of such little children 2 ." But John has not 
 prefixed the article as Mark has ; and the article is invariably prefixed 
 in IV. T. wherever toioiJtos is used as a niasc. pronoun, referritig to 
 some previous description. It follows that tolovtovs must be taken 
 predicatively, although the construction presents difficulties. Per- 
 haps (r)Tei is nearly equivalent to "desire" (Dan. vii. 19 Theod. 
 it,i]Tovv, LXX rjOeXov) and the meaning is " desires [to have] his 
 worshippers such," as Horace uses " te semper amabilem sperat" for 
 " hopes [to have] thee ever amiable." But of course tyrei does not 
 
 1 [2397(7] Luke xx. 18 (instead of Mk-Mt.'s continuance of the Psalm 
 quotation) has a prediction that (see Dan. ii. 35 — 44) " Everyone that falleth 
 on that stone shall be broken in pieces." Barnabas, after the words "He hath 
 made me as a hard rock," continues, vi. 4, X^yei 8e ttolXlv 6 irpo^T-rjs- XiQov 8v 
 aTreooKi/xaaav oi oLKodo/j-ovvres, ovtos iyevqdrj els K€<pa\rju ywvias. kcll ttclXlv \iyei' 
 Autt] £<jt'lv 77 ri/j.e'pa. r\ neydXr] /ecu Oav/jLaarr], rjv eirol^crev 6 Ki'pios. 
 
 [2397/'] The words in the LXX "This (aib-77) came (iyevero) from the Lord 
 ami it is marvellous in our eyes" supplied an extremely appropriate congregational 
 utterance for Greeks, coming after the words "The stone that the builders 
 rejected " — as though the Gentile converts said, "The rulers of Israel, the builders 
 of the Temple, rejected the Stone that was to become the head (Ke<pa\i)), but we 
 accept it, i.e. the head, and it is marvellous in our eyes." This would be an error; 
 but, as we have seen, it was one that Origen certainly, and Chrysostom probably, 
 adopted. Both these commentators connect the text with the notion of the corner- 
 stone as uniting the believers in Israel with the Gentiles (Orig. Huet i. 467 K, 
 Chrys. ad toe.). 
 
 -|2398</| Mk i\. 37, \. 14. Mt. \i\ 14, l.k. wiii. i". Acts xxii. ::, 
 Rom. xvi. 18, 1 <'or. v. 11. vii. :S, wi. 16 etc. Chrys. ./</ /<v. d toloutovs (Morel. 
 tovtovs) 7rri\cu i£r)Tu seems to have taken tolovtovs non-predicatively, but the 
 usage of all books in N.T. (including 3 |n S) is hardly to be disputed. 
 
 294 
 
PERSONAL [2400] 
 
 mean " desire " exactly : and the evangelist may intend to suggest 
 not only what the Father "desires" His worshippers to be, but also 
 the fact that He is "seeking" them out of the world, and "seeking" 
 to help them, as the shepherd " seeks " his flock. 
 
 II. Personal 
 
 (i) Insertion for emphasis 
 
 [2399] In classical Greek the personal inflexion of a verb 
 dispenses mostly with personal pronouns, e.g. v/juls, as subject. But 
 John uses v/meis about as often as it is used by all the Synoptists 
 together. The main reason is his love of contrast as in viii. 23 " Ye 
 (i5/xeis) are from beneath ; / (eyw) am from above : ye (v/aci?) are from 
 this world; f (iyw) am not from this world 1 ." Sometimes, however, 
 emphasis may be intended, and may be in danger of being confused 
 with contrast. Thus, in the first instance where v/acis occurs, 
 i. 26 ("I (cyw) baptize in water; midst of you standeth [he] whom 
 ye (w/acis) know not ") a contrast might be supposed to be intended 
 between "ye" and "I." But there "ye" perhaps means "evetiye-, 
 although he is in the midst of you " ; and " I " is contrasted, not with 
 "ye " but with " he whom ye know not." 
 
 [2400] But a great deal is lost by readers of the English versions 
 of the Fourth Gospel from the general neglect of the translators to 
 distinguish the instances where the English personal pronoun does, 
 
 1 [2399 rt] There is very little in the Synoptists like this use of vfj-ets. The 
 nearest approach to it is the contrast between the "my" of prophecy, meaning 
 God's ("my house") and "ye," in Mk xi. 17 (comp. Mt. xxi. 13, Lk. xix. 46) 
 " My house shall be called a house of prayer... but ye (i/ieis) have made it a den 
 of robbers": and the Sermon on the Mount contrasts "/ say unto you" with 
 what was "said to them of old time" (Mt. v. 21 — 2, 5$ — 4). 
 
 - [2399/;] "Even ye." Perhaps the emphasis is condemnatory, not "even 
 ye," but " ye of course," " ye, being such as ye are." Comp. v. 44 " How can 
 ye \being such as ye are] believe, [ye] that receive glory from one another." 
 
 [2399c] In i Jn, there is a clear distinction between "we write" and "/ 
 write." The Epistle opens with "we" thus (i. r — 10) "That which we have 
 heard, that which we have seen. ..And these things we (emph. ^m £ 's) write unto you 
 that our (rifjuav, marg. v/jlQv) joy may be fulfilled.... If we say that we have not 
 sinned we make him a liar and his word is not in us." After thus writing in the 
 name of the Apostles and Elders generally, describing their testimony, their 
 privileges, and their dangers, the writer passes to his individual testimony (ii. 1) 
 " My little children, these things I write unto you," and this is repeated nearly 
 a dozen times, ending with v. 13 " These things have I written." But no pronoun 
 is inserted except for emphasis or antithesis, i. 4 "And these things we write 
 (ypafiofji.ev r^eFs) that our (v. r. your) joy may be fulfilled." 
 
 295 
 
[2401] PRONOUNS 
 
 from those where it does not, represent a Greek pronoun. Thus, 
 ii. 18 (A.V.) "What sign shewest thou unto us?" and vi. 30 "What 
 sign shewest thou then?" appear on the same level. But in the 
 latter the pronoun, " thou," is inserted in the Greek ; and the context 
 shews that the Jews emphasize the pronoun, possibly meaning "thou 
 also [like Moses}" whom they presently mention, or else meaning 
 "thou on thy side [since thou demandest obedience from us] 1 ." So in iv. 
 10 "If thou hadst known. ..thou (ov) wouldst have asked him 
 (avTov)," the second " thou " is emphatic and the meaning is, " Thou 
 wouldst have asked him [not waiting for him to ask thee]." There 
 is also a deliberately intended difference between r}/xds olSa^u and 
 oiSafxev in the following, ix. 29 " We (v/xeU) know that God hath 
 spoken to Moses, but this man— we know not whence he is" where 
 the former means, " We, the guardians of the Law about which you 
 know nothing." 
 
 (ii) "Ey6 
 
 [2401] For eyoJ with dpi, see 2220—8. For eyw, as denoting 
 emphasis generally, see 2399 and 1713. The emphatic use of " I " 
 in the testimony of the Baptist— attested sometimes by B alone among 
 the uncial mss.— has perplexed some, who have not perceived that 
 the Baptist is intended, by the use of this pronoun, to emphasize his 
 own inferiority to Christ, or else the spontaneousness of his testimony, 
 "/am not the Christ," "/am [but] a voice," "/baptize with 
 water," "/am not worthy to loose his latchet " etc. The following 
 are the instances in Greek : i. 20 eyw owe el/u 6 xp-, i- 2$ «yw <j>wvrj, 
 
 1. 26 — 7 eyw /?U7n-i'£aj...oi> ovk elfil [eyw] a£ios 2 , i. 30 ovtos iariv virlp ov 
 iyw ilnov (where Chrys. not only changes vVe'p to the more usual vrepi 
 but also drops eyw), i. 31 (rep. t,^) Kayw ovk ySew, i.e. "and I for my 
 part did not know him, it was God that revealed him to me," i. 31 
 Ota tovto rjXdov eyw ev vScltl /3a7rrt£(oi', i. 34 Kayw iwpaKa, i.e. "and 
 I, with my own eyes, opened by God, have seen," iii. 28 avrol v/xels 
 
 1 [2400 a] In vi. 30 tL ovv ttoius <rv o-n/netov ; the R. V. " What then doest thou 
 for a ml;!]?" may he intended to emphasize "thou," hut there is nothing to make 
 this clear to an English reader. Either italics in the text, or some sign in the 
 margin, might have indicated it. And the absence of any such indication 
 (ihscurcs tin- sense in many passages. 
 
 - |2401 rt] So, too, Ml< i. 8 iyu ipdirTi<ra...ai>T6s o«', Ml. in. 11, I.k. iii. 16 
 4yio fi(i>...avT6s. But the SynoptistS om. iyw in the clause about the shoedatchet 
 <'i hoes, ov ovk eifxi Inavdi. 
 
 296 
 
PERSONAL [2404] 
 
 fXOL /xaprvpelre on ei7roi' [cyoj] Ovk elpu e'yco 6 ^ptaros, i.e. I did not 
 wait for others to dispute my claim to be Messiah, I myself 
 spontaneously denied all claim. Here Alford rejects the first e'yoj, 
 apparently on the ground that B, alone of the uncials, has it. 
 
 (iii) 2v 
 
 [2402] The pronoun "thou" (1726) occurs in John more 
 frequently than in all the Synoptists together. It occurs four times in 
 the short cross-examination of the Baptist by the Jews, four times in 
 the Samaritan Dialogue, and seven times in Christ's Last Prayer — 
 whereas in the whole of Mark's Gospel it does not occur more than 
 ten times. In many cases the Jews use it to Jesus " Thou testifiest 
 about thyself," " Art thou greater than our father Abraham ? " etc. 
 But its frequency extends to the whole of the Gospel and indicates 
 the evangelist's tendency, ist to lay stress on personality and, 2nd, to 
 express personality in dialogue. 
 
 [2403] In xix. 9 " whence art thou (iroflev el en;;) ? " a difficulty is 
 raised by <jv as well as by -n-oOeu. As to irodev, it is barely conceivable 
 that Pilate might have been so impressed by the charge of the 
 Pharisees (xix. 7 " he made himself a son of God ") that he returns 
 to his mysterious prisoner with the question " From what source, 
 celestial or terrestrial, art thou ? " But, even in that case, there is no 
 need of av, which in questions, as in imperatives, sometimes implies 
 contempt (2734). Chrysostom — who apparently had a different 
 reading — says that Pilate, terror-stricken, " begins his examination 
 all over again saying, Art thou the Christ ? (av<a6ev...\€yu)v Ei av 
 el 6 XpicTTosy) But He gives him no answer 1 ." 
 
 [2404] The Index to Epictetus shews that iroOev aoi ; and -n-oOev 
 arv ; might be used, as detached phrases, to mean " How could you 
 have the power to do so-and-so ? " " How are you able to do this 
 or that ? " — with a suggestion of incredulity. This suggests another 
 explanation of the words of Pilate. Fresh from the saying of the 
 Pharisees ("He made himself Son of God") he comes back into the 
 Praetorium repeating to himself " This man son of God ! " and then 
 utters his thought aloud to the prisoner, "How could you possibly be 
 
 1 [2403 d\ It is possible that Chrys. has confused the utterance of Pilate with 
 the utterance of the High Priest in Mt. xxvi. 63, see 2734 d. 
 
 297 
 
[2405] PRONOUNS 
 
 [Son of God] ? " irodev el av 1 ; Some might take this as an inquiry 
 about the province from which Jesus came — an inquiry mentioned 
 by Luke alone 2 . John, believing that this was an error, might insert 
 the exact words that caused the error 3 . But see 2733 — 7. 
 
 III. Relative 
 
 (i) "0 S 
 
 (a) Attraction of the Relative 
 
 [2405] In IV. 5 T ov )(wpi.ov ov ISujkcv 'I., iv. 14 tou vSaros ov eyu> 
 Swcrw, xvii. 5 rfj &6£ij 77 (marg. rjv) ei^oy, xxi. 10 twv 6\pap[wv <5v 
 eVtao-aTc, the relative pronoun corresponds to the defining relative in 
 English (" that," as in " the water that I shall give ") and John's 
 adherence to the Greek idiom of the attraction of the relative into 
 the case of the antecedent helps to indicate that the latter without 
 the former is incomplete 4 . Similarly in xv. 20 p.vr)p.oi>eveTe tov \6yov 
 ov eyw (Lvov v/xlv, the attracted relative indicates that "the saying" is 
 meaningless until it is defined and completed. The meaning is not 
 "the word, which I said," but "the tvord that I said." 
 
 [2406] But, if so, why is the relative not attracted — not at least 
 
 in the best MSS. — in ii. 2 2 i7rio-T€vcrav rfj ypcuprj /ecu nil Aoyw ov etTrev 
 o Ir)o~ov$, and in IV. 5 £iTLO~Tevo~ev-o avOpwrros t<2 Aoyoj ov €t— er at'rw 
 
 6 'Imam's 5 ? The answer may be that in these two passages the 
 " saying " is special, and may be called in some sense complete — not 
 "the zvord that Jesus uttered [as a general doctrine]," but (1) "the 
 [mysterious] word [about destroying the Temple], "which Jesus then 
 uttered," (2) " the zvord [of healing, 'Thy son liveth '], which Jesus 
 
 1 [2404 a] The insertion of el in such a phrase is, however, improbable. 
 On Epictet. i. 19. 9, for wbdtv av, the editor suggests irodev aoi. Similarly in Jn, 
 if ot were written over av, the former might easily be added to the text as «, 
 resulting in ait eL But the subject requires further investigation in connexion 
 with the phrase irbdev ei/xi, frequent in this Gospel (2736). 
 
 - Lk. xxiii. 6 — 7. 
 
 ■ ; Against this view, it may fairly be urged that 7r6#ee av, in the Epictetian 
 idiom, suggests an incredulity approaching contempt, whereas Pilate is "'afraid"; 
 and, in favour of it, that a character like Pilate's is apt to oscillate between 
 arrogant contempt and servile fear. For the paraphrase of Nonnus see 2734. 
 
 4 [2405 </] The instances given by Hauler (l.SX.X) where (in this construction) 
 the antecedent is omitted, are vi. 29 -marevrjTe as 5v awtareiXev, vii. 31 wXeiova 
 arjfifia -Koir\an wv ovtos twoL-qacv, xvii. 9 irepi uv Sounds /xoi. 
 
 8 Here W.I I. give ov in both passages without marg. altern. although some 
 authorities read u5. 
 
 298 
 
RELATIVE [2409] 
 
 had just uttered." It may be urged that the same reasoning applies 
 to xv. 20, which repeats the word "just uttered" in xiii. 16 "A 
 bondservant is not greater than his lord." True, but it is also 
 a word that Jesus uttered as a general doctrine (1784) "A disciple 
 is not above his teacher." 
 
 [2407] The same explanation applies to the reading of B in 
 vii. 39 tovto Se elnev 7rept tov it i'tv licit os, 6 e/xeAAov Xa/x/3dv€LV. . . Here 
 W.H. place o in marg. and ov in text. But the former may make 
 better sense if the object is to make a pause after "Spirit." In that 
 case, the meaning is not " the [new] spirit that was about to be 
 received," but "the [Holy] Spirit, which (i.e. for indeed it) was about 
 to be received." The relative " that " would differentiate the new 
 outpouring of the Spirit from outpourings of the Spirit under the O.T. 
 dispensation, by defining the former as " about to be received by 
 believers." The relative "which" assumes that the readers know 
 " the Spirit " to be " the Holy Spirit," and introduces a new fact 
 about the Spirit, namely, that it was to be received after Christ had 
 been glorified 1 . 
 
 (/3) 'En Tto ONOMATi coy (1) AgAcokac moi (see also 2740 — 4) 
 [2408] The relative has been altered by some authorities, because 
 of its difficulty, in xvii. n — 12 "Holy Father, keep them in thy 
 name that thou hast given me (ev ra ovolhitl crov a> ScSwkcis /*<h) in 
 order that they may be one even as we. When I was with them I 
 kept them in thy name that thou hast given me (eV t<2 6. crov u> Se'cWa? 
 /xoi)." Some in the first clause, and more in the second, have 
 changed J> to ovs (" those whom thou hast given me "), and SS omits 
 both clauses. Chrysostom explains "in thy name" as "through 
 thy help," and reads ov% in the second clause (if not in the first). 
 
 [2409] If the text is correct, it implies a spiritual conception of 
 God's Name and (probably) an indirect attempt to deliver the reader 
 from some popular and philosophic misconceptions, which require a 
 brief notice. All Jews were familiar with the prediction about the 
 Prophet "like unto" Moses (that God's Name was to be "in him"), 
 and with the language of Jehovah saying " I will put my name on " 
 persons and places chosen by Him 2 . The Epistle to the Philippians 
 says that God " gave as a free gift (exaptVaro) " to Jesus " the 
 name that is above every name," in order that "in the name of 
 
 1 On the difference between "that" and "which," see 2273 a. 
 
 2 Ex. xxiii. 21, Numb. vi. 27, 1 K. viii. 16 etc. 
 
 299 
 
[2410] PRONOUNS 
 
 Jesus every knee should bow," whether in heaven or earth or beneath 
 the earth 1 . The Acts of the Apostles 2 relates an attempt of un- 
 believing Jews to use " the name of Jesus " as a sort of hocus-pocus 
 for the purpose of casting out a devil ; and the possibility of such an 
 attempt is recognised in one version of Matthew-Luke's Tradition 3 . 
 The Apocalypse says "To him that overcometh I will give a white 
 pebble, and on the pebble a new name written, which none knoweth 
 save he that receiveth it 4 " : it describes one sitting on a white horse 
 as " having a name written that none knoweth save himself, and clad in 
 a cloak sprinkled with blood, and his name is called the Word of 
 God 5 ," and adds, " His servants shall serve him and shall see his 
 face and his name [shall be] on their foreheads 6 ." These beautiful 
 Apocalyptic traditions may be best and most naturally interpreted in 
 a spiritual sense, but they are open to materialistic perversion. 
 
 [2410] Philo apparently implies that " the name of God " repre- 
 sents something inferior to God. The object to aim at is, to be 
 (Deut. xiv. i) "sons of the Lord God," but, he adds, "If anyone is 
 not yet worthy to be called ' son of God,' let him aim at ordering 
 himself after His firstborn Logos, the Angel, eldest [of angels] as 
 being Archangel with many names : for He is addressed as ' Be- 
 ginning,' and ' Name of God,' and ' Logos,' and ' the Man according 
 to the Image,' and ' Seeing Israel 7 .' T And Justin says " As for name 
 applicable to the Father of all, being unbegotten, there is no such 
 thing. . . The words ' Father ' and ' God ' and ' Creator ' and ' Lord ' 
 and ' Master ' are not names, but appellations (7rpocrpr/creis) derived 
 from beneficent actions and works 8 ." 
 
 [2411] John's doctrine appears to be that the highest " name " of 
 God is that of Him as Father — only as Father revealed through such 
 
 1 Phil. ii. o. - Acts xix. 14. 
 
 J Mt. vii. 22 " In thy name have we cast out devils," where the parall. 
 Lk. xiii. 25 — 6 omits the clause. 
 
 4 [2409 a] Rev. ii. 17. tyrjcfros "pebble," here (as in Acts xxvi. 10 and in Gk 
 generally) probably means a voting tablet either for condemnation or acquittal, so 
 that it may mean "forgiveness of sins." There may be a play on the phrase 
 oiowfxi \J/?)<poi> which means "I give my vote." Comp. 1 Jn iii. 20 "If our heart 
 condemn* 11 • not we have confidence toward God." The context in 1 Jn indicates 
 that this "non-condemnation" proceeds from "loving in deed and in truth": and 
 Rev. ii. 17 perhaps means by "the new name" that new Kind of love which the 
 Son brought into the world and which "none knoweth save lie that receiveth it." 
 
 8 Rev. xix. 12 — 1.5. ,; Rev. xxii. 3 — 4. 
 
 7 Philo i. 426 7. 8 Just. .Mart. 2 Apol. 6. 
 
 300 
 
RELATIVE [2411] 
 
 a Son as Jesus Christ. In his Gospel, the word "name," when 
 uttered by Christ, occurs almost always in the phrase (i) "thy name," 
 or "the name of the (or, my) Father," or else (2) "in my name" as 
 being the avenue through which the requests of the disciples are to 
 pass to the Father 1 . Christ's first mention of " the name of my 
 Father " indicates that it is the stamp of the true Deliverer as dis- 
 tinguished from the false deliverer, who " comes in his own name." 
 Hence, "thy name that thou hast given me" means "thy essential 
 being, of Fatherhood, in the form in which thou hast given it to me, 
 the Son." "Thy name," alone, might mean thy name as revealed to 
 Israel under the Law, through Moses; but this "new name" is "the 
 name of Fatherhood as given to the Son in order that He may 
 transmit it to others, making all one in the Family of God 2 ." 
 
 1 [2411 a] Apart from x. 3 "he calleth his own sheep by name" (and iii. 18 
 "in the name of the only begotten," which is (1497, 2066) not to be taken as an 
 utterance of Christ's) the word "name" is used by our Lord as follows: — v. 43 "I 
 have come in the name of my Father. ..if another come in his own name," x. 25 
 "the works that I do in the name of my Father" xii. 28 "Glorify thy name" 
 xvii. 6, 11, 12, 26 "thy name" — making seven mentions of the Father's name by 
 the Son. 
 
 [2411^] "My name" occurs only in the Last Discourse, addressed to the 
 disciples. Excluding the prediction xv. 21 "all these things will they do unto you 
 because of my name, because they know not...," it is always in the phrase "in my 
 name," concerning the disciples as asking, or the Father as "giving," or 
 "sending" the Spirit, xiv. 13, 14, 26, xv. 16, xvi. 23, 24, 26 — seven mentions. 
 
 2 [2411c] The "name," i.e. essence, of the Father (not of the Son) is '■'■given" 
 to the Son (not " revealed" which would imply unveiling). So in O.T. the Name 
 of God is " put upon " the Temple. The Johannine doctrine bears on superstitious 
 abuses of the name or names of God (see Orig. Cels. 1. 6 and 24, comp. v. 45), 
 and also on the interpretation of the words in the Lord's Prayer, "Father, be 
 thy name made holy." In the Fourth Gospel, Christ only thrice uses the word 
 "holy," namely, here, xvii. 11 — 12 "Holy Father, keep them in thy na?ne that 
 thou hast given me" xiv. 26 "the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit," and xx. 22 "Receive 
 the Holy Spirit, whosesoever sins ye forgive they are forgiven...." Taken together, 
 the three passages suggest that "holiness" is manifested in connexion with the 
 Holy Spirit, through unity and forgiveness of sins, and that God's "name" is 
 "made holy" when the Spirit attains these objects. 
 
 [2411 </] Another aspect of the Johannine doctrine is in the Didactic x. 1 
 "Now after ye are filled (e/unr\7](rdrji>ai) give thanks thus, 'We give thanks unto 
 thee, holy Father, for {virip) thy holy name which (06) thou didst cause to tabernacle 
 (KareaKrivwaas) in our hearts,' " where the writer means the relative clause to be 
 essential, "the Holy Name of thine that" or "that Holy Name of thine which.'" 
 
 [2411 e] Why does Jn add "that thou hast given me" to "thy name"? 
 Probably to lay stress on the free and fill " giving" — " Not as the world giveth, 
 give I unto you." This includes the Pauline distinction between attainment 
 
 30I 
 
[2412] PRONOUNS 
 
 (7) 'EnTOAHN KAINHN...O (i Jn ii. 8) 
 
 ( 2412] In connexion with the above-mentioned "new name" of 
 love, or Father, the following passage also may be mentioned as 
 illustrating the use of the relative, 1 Jn ii. 8 "Again a new command- 
 ment (ivroX-qv) I write unto you, which thing (o) is true in him and in 
 you." Here, the preceding context bids the readers " walk " as 
 Christ " walked," and the following context says that the true light is 
 now shining, and (1 Jn ii. 10) "he that loveth his brother abideth in 
 the light." In view of these contexts, the meaning of " which thing'''' 
 appears to be " which assertion" namely, the assertion that the 
 "commandment," which he has just called (1 Jn ii. 7) " not new," is 
 also, paradoxically, " new." To love one's neighbour is a com- 
 mandment of the Law, " old " ; to love as Christ loved us is a 
 commandment of the Son, "new." The only instance in which our 
 Lord uses the word "new" in the Fourth Gospel is "A new com- 
 mandment give I unto you that ye love one another — even as I loved 
 you that ye also love one another 1 ." It is to this saying that the 
 author of the Epistle is referring. The words may be paraphrased : 
 "I have called the commandment 'old,' I now call it 'new': and 
 truly the ' newness ' is manifest — manifest in Him, giving His blood 
 for us, manifest in you, made one with Him by His blood 2 ." 
 
 attempted "through works," and " the free gift" received through '■'■faith." The 
 Hebrew "give" often means "appoint," and "the Law" is said to have been 
 (i. 17) "given through Moses": but the same sentence adds that "the grace" 
 (including all the grace that reached Israel through the Law) came through Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 1 xiii. 34. 
 
 - [2412 a] On viii. 40 ^rdri p.e dTroKrewai, dvdpoiirov 8s...\e\d\TjKa, where 
 dvdpunrov, at first sight, seems needless, see Origen who refers to it in his 
 comment on Ps. lxii. 3 £a;s tt6t€ iwiridtade ew' dudpwwov, saying, Tovto op.01.6v iari 
 t(j5 XCv 'C-qTtlri fie airoKTeivai. " kvdpuirov 'C-qrovaiv dwoKTeivai- Kai ol €TriTit)ep.evoi 
 dvOpuirip eirtTidevTCLi. In the Hebrew of the Psalm, "man" appears to be 
 emphatic, Sym. has dvopos, and the Targ. has "<7 merciful man," as though the 
 meaning were: "How long will ye spend your time in setting upon a man [made 
 in God's image\\" To this emphasis Origen calls attention saying "This 
 [expression of the Psalmist's] is like ' Now ye seek to kill me' | in the Oospel. In 
 the Gospel] they '■seek to kill a man,' and in the Psalm those that 'set upon [him]' 
 set upon 'a man.'" Perhaps the present text in Origen has dropped dvOpwrrov, 
 ami we OUghl lo read Nw» i'rjTiiTf' fit dwoKTtlvaL, dvdpwirov. AvBpUTTOV 
 
 In < >rigen's Comm. Johann. (on viii. 40) although he does not quote Ps. lxii. 3 
 
 iTrtTiOecrOe, the influence oi ii may be traced on Ins statement about tovs tu> \6yip 
 rod deov iwiftov\ti'oi>Tas that rip dvOpwirivuripip avrov K. ftXfTro/u.ei'ip e'iriTldo'Tai. 
 
 3< '■-' 
 
RELATIVE [2413] 
 
 (ii) "Oo-tis 
 
 [2413] 'Oo-tis, "whoever," "one that," is mostly used of a class. 
 But it is also used in N.T. of an individual, to mean "the one that," 
 especially at the beginning of a clause that introduces explanatory or 
 illustrative statement 1 . In such cases oo-ris, 77719 etc. may be 
 rendered " nmv he, she tic." e.g. Gal. iv. 24 — 6 "One from mount 
 Sinai... now this (17ns) is Agar... ; but Jerusalem that is above is free, 
 now this (tJtis) is our mother." So in Jn viii. 53 "Art thou greater 
 than our father Abraham (R.V.) which (ocn-t?) died?" the purpose is 
 to introduce the death of Abraham as illustrative of the necessity 
 that all men should die. We may paraphrase the relative clause as 
 " One that [great as he was] died" or "yet he died." In viii. 25 
 "Jesus said unto them (lit.), In the beginning whatever also I speak 
 unto you (rrjv apxw ° Tt KaL ^-aXaJ vfuv)," some take on as a con- 
 junction, "because," but it is probably the neuter of cVns. This is 
 discussed elsewhere (2154 — 6). 
 
 Subsequently he says ovk Zcttlv ore 6 Kara tov 'Iriaovv TpoiriKuis voovp.evos avdpwTros 
 ovk iireSrjfjLei ry /3iy. These facts bear on the statement made above (1934 — 5) 
 that avdponrov is emphatic in viii. 40, which means "a man, who" — quite distinct 
 from "a man that'''' meaning " one that." 
 
 [2412 £] In vi. 9 io-Tiv iraiddpiov w5e 6s £x eL i some authorities, including X, have 
 o. Some have %v before tide. Blass says (p. 317) "better iraid. Zx "' Chrys. 
 Nonnus." Some corruption is indicated by the variations of words and order 
 (b e, Syr. (Burk.) Chrys. "there is here a lad," a "est puer hie," f "est puer unus 
 hie," SS "a certain lad hath on him here"). But e'x" > s probably correct. For 
 Chrys. goes on to say fxera yap to eiire'ii' "Ex« wtvre aprons KpiOLvovs — which 
 
 suggests that a scribe has given his previous quotation incorrectly. As to the 
 change of gender, comp. 2 S. xiii. 17 eKaXeae to Traidapiov avrou tov irpoeaT^KOTa 
 
 (unless the particip. is regarded as an appositional noun). Note also that X, 
 which reads here, substitutes Tiva in 1 Mac. xvi. 16 Tivas tQv Traidapiov, and that 
 
 D has oc here with a line drawn through the c. The facts indicate that os was 
 the original reading. On xix. 17 Kpaviov Tonov 6, see 2738. 
 
 1 [2413 a] In the parables, Matthew uses octtls to introduce the point of 
 resemblance (of the householder, king, virgins etc.) between the emblem and 
 the reality {e.g. "that planted a vineyard," "that took their lamps" etc.). So in 
 Lk. vii. 37 "a woman that was in the city a sinner," the relative clause introduces 
 what is essential to the narrative that follows. Comp. Mk xii. 18 " Sadducees 
 (R.V.) -which (o'inves) say," where the "saying" is not a detached fact but bears 
 on the following discussion. But initial Bans means " and accordingly or con- 
 sequently " in Acts viii. 15 "They sent to them Peter and John, who accordingly 
 (o'iTives) went down and prayed." It has been shewn (2273 a) that A.V. differs 
 from Shakespeare, and R.V. from both, in the use of relative pronouns ; and we 
 must not expect Gk writers always to agree with one another in their use. 
 
 303 
 
[2414] PRONOUNS 
 
 (a) "Octic an, or eAN 
 
 [2414] "Oo-tis with uv or lav in the Johannine Gospel and 
 Epistles occurs, certainly, only in the neuter, ii. 5 " Whatsoever (aV) 
 he may say," xiv. 13, xv. 16 " w/iatsoever (av) ye may ask." It is also 
 probable in 1 Jn iii. 20 " [in] whatsoever (on lav) our heart may 
 condemn us." Bruder (Moulton) marks under this head xxi. 25 ecrriv 
 
 Se Kai aAAa ttoWo. a iiroL-qatv 6 'I^croi'S, axiva lav ypa^rai 1 . But 
 
 lav here is generally regarded as meaning "if," in which case the 
 construction would be quite different from that of ooris av (or 
 lav), and the meaning would be " Of such a kind that if they should 
 be written 2 ." It is certainly strange that otto and lav should be 
 placed together by any N.T. writer except in the sense of " whatsoever 
 things* " ; and the fact is one of several that render the text extremely 
 doubtful 4 . On av and lav interchanged see 2739. 
 
 1 It is not so marked in the original Bruder (1888). 
 
 8 SS "t/iat if one by one they were written," a, b, e,f,ff, "quae si." 
 
 3 [2414a] "E>a.v or av, meaning "soever,"' immediately follows some form of 
 outls in Mk vi. 23 r "Ori iav' 1 (marg. on '0 iav), Lk. x. 35, Acts iii. 23, 1 Cor. xvi. 2, 
 Gal. v. 10, Col. iii. 17. I do not know any passage in N.T. where edv, in such 
 a position, means "if," except the one under consideration (if genuine). There 
 is not the same ambiguity about 6-rrep iav, which occurs in Ox. Pap. vol. iii. 653 
 oirep idv prj iroir)(Tris apparently meaning "and unless you do this" (A.D. 162 — 3). 
 This is closely followed by 6v iav ah Sips apparently meaning "whomsoever you 
 appoint," not " whom, if you appoint." For further evidence from the Papyri see 
 2416 a. 
 
 4 [2414/'] Origen quotes Jn xxi. 25, as follows (omitting avrbv) Philocal. 15 
 (pyjcriv 6 'Iwavvrjs uis apa Ovdi tov Koapov ofyicu x w P^ v Ta ypacpdpeva ptpXla, 
 continuing "For the [saying] that 'the world has not room for the books 
 to be written ' must be understood not [as being true] on account of the 
 multitude of the writings, as some [say], but on account of the greatness of the 
 acts, since the greatness of the acts cannot possibly be either written or reported 
 by tongue of flesh, nor signified in languages (diaXiKrois) and sounds of men." He 
 seems to take "the world" as meaning "mankind," and "has not room for" 
 as meaning "has not capability to express." But it is not easy to see how he 
 obtains this meaning : it needs either the omission of to. ypacpbptva /3i/3.\fa, or else 
 a conjunction oi'5e rbv K6crp.oi>...ov5e ra ypacpbfxtva /3tj3\/a, "neither the world... 
 nor yet books." 
 
 [2414 f] In a second quotation, after describing Jesus as being (lit.) "a 
 multitude of good [things] (ttXtJ^os d7a0i2>c) " Origen says about these "good 
 [tilings]," (Huet ii. 12) "They have not however had room found for them 
 (Kexupy^wv) by writings (virb ypap.pa.rwv). And why say I ' by writings,' when 
 I < dm says even (Kai) concerning the whole world [that] 'Not even the world itself 
 I think would have room for (ovSi avrbv olp.ai rbv tcbapov x u PV iTa '-) 'I"-' l> l||| ks to be 
 written'?" Here Origen .seems to understand "the world would not have room" for 
 the necessary books as meaning that not only "books," but even the "world," 
 
 304 
 
RELATIVE [2414] 
 
 would be insufficient to " find room for " the expression of the acts of the Logos. 
 The context and the quotation would make excellent sense if the two ran thus, in 
 effect, " Why say I ' not by writings,' 1 when John says ' not even by the world ' ? " — 
 omitting "the books to be written." 
 
 [2414 tf\ In a third quotation, the context of which resembles that in the 
 Philocalia above, Origen (Huet ii. 201 Ttfoll.) says that "writing (ypa<prj) " in 
 some cases, and "the tongue of man" in others, "have not made room for (ov 
 KexuprjKe)," i.e. have not been capable of expressing, the highest mysteries of 
 God ; and he proceeds, "Ecri yap Kai <x\Xa woXXa a iiroirj^ev 6 'I. artva iav 
 7pd07?rat Kat)' £V ovde avrbv {rbv Koajnov is omitted] olfiai x u} PV cr€l1 ' Ta ypa<pop.eva 
 @ij3\ia. Both in the Philocalia and here, he illustrates his view by St Paul's 
 hearing (2 Cor. xii. 2 foil.) "words not to be uttered." 
 
 [2414 1*] Again, in a fourth quotation, Origen (Huet ii. 326 D — e) speaks 
 about the numerous words {py\y.arwv) of God "not only those that are written 
 but also those that are (2 Cor. xii. 4) ' not to be uttered, which it is not lawful for 
 a man to speak,' and these about which John says, ov5' avrbv 01/j.ai rbv KOffnov 
 Xuprj&aL to, ypafib/xeva j3tj8\ta " : and he alludes to xxi. 25 as shewing that John 
 could have written more Gospels than the world would hold (Huet ii. 88) 
 lwavvov, 8s evayye\iov £v Kara\£\onrev, bpLo\oyu>v bvvacdai rocravra iroi7)<jtiv a. 
 ovbk b KbfffMOS x w P^I <JCLl ibvvaro. He adds Sypa\j/€ be Kai ttjv ' Aw 0K&\v\ptv KeXevadeis 
 ffLUTrrjcrat. Kai /it) ypa\pai rds ruiv errra fipovrQv <pwvds — apparently as an instance of 
 divinely commanded reticence. 
 
 [2414/] In his Conim. on Lk. iii. 18 " Multa quidem et alia exhortans 
 annunciabat," Origen freely refers to Jn thus, " De Christo refertur quia multa 
 et alia locutus est quae non sunt scripta in libro isto quae si scriberentur neque 
 ipsum puto mundum capere potuisse libros qui scnbendi erant " (combining xxi. 25 
 with xx. 30 "not written in this book" and substituting "locutus est" for "fecit" 
 so as to afford aparall. to Lk. iii. r8 " annunciabat "). On Lk. iv. 1 he has " Sicut 
 mundus capere non poterat omnes libros si scripta fuissent quae fecit et docuit 
 Jesus." Bearing on the manysidedness of Christ's acts and words is a remark of 
 Origen in his Comm. on Mt. xxvi. 55 indicating that he was disposed to believe 
 that Christ's form was transfigured not only in the Transfiguration but on many 
 other occasions : " Venit autem traditio talis ad nos de eo quoniam non solum 
 duae formae in eo fuerunt, una quidem, secundum quam omnes eum videbant, 
 altera autem, secundum quam transfiguratus est coram discipulis suis in monte, 
 quando et resplenduit facies ejus tanquam sol, sed etiam unicuique apparebat 
 secundum quod fuerat dignus. Et cum fuisset ipse, quasi non ipse omnibus 
 videbatur : secundum quod de manna est scriptum, quando Deus filiis Israel 
 panem misit de coelo omnem delectationem habentem, et ad omnem gustum 
 convenientem : quando desiderio offerentis obsequens, ad quod quis voluerat 
 vertebatur. Et non mihi videtur incredibilis esse traditio haec, sive corporaliter 
 propter ipsum Jesum, ut alio et alio modo videretur hominibus, sive propter ipsam 
 Verbi naturam, quod non similiter cunctis apparet." This belief comes out in the 
 Acts of John (§ 2) where Christ standing on the shore of Gennesaret appears to 
 James as a " child " but to John as a man, and afterwards in different shapes. 
 
 [2414^] Again, Pamph. Mart. Pref. quotes from Origen "Ejus [Christi] 
 gloriamur esse discipuli, nee tamen audemus dicere quod facie ad faciem ab 
 ipso traditam susceperimus intelligentiam eorum quae in divinis libris referuntur : 
 ' quae quidem cerlus sum quod ne ipse quidem mundus ' pro virtute ac majestate 
 sensuum ' capere potest ','" and ib. 3 "Sicut scriptum est: ' Ne ipsum quidem. 
 
 A. VI. 305 20 
 
[2415] PRONOUNS 
 
 [2415] On the whole it seems probable that the writer or editors 
 of this Gospel have put down at its close a grammatically irregular 
 utterance (perhaps one of the last utterances) of the aged Disciple, 
 which combined the spiritual meaning of Philo with the hyperbolic 
 expression customary among the teachers of Palestine. It also 
 corresponded to the evangelist's saying in the Prologue that "the 
 law [of God] was given through Moses but the grace and the truth 
 [of God] came through Jesus Christ," and it came well here as a final 
 warning : " Law may be put into writing but Grace and Truth 
 cannot. No, even if a world full of books were written, more books 
 would still need to be written, and yet the Grace of the Father and 
 the Truth of the Father — which were the ' works ' of the Son — would 
 remain unexpressed." This statement has been placed in such 
 a context that it might seem to refer to the great number of Christ's 
 "mighty works," or "miracles." But that was probably not the 
 Disciple's intention. 
 
 [2416] According to this view, in its original utterance the saying 
 meant, in effect, " Whatever things (anva lav) may be written about 
 the Lord Jesus Christ, in detached narrative, [they will not suffice, 
 nay,] even the whole world will not suffice to hold — [I will not say 
 
 mnndum capere posse arbitror libros qui scriberentur'' de gloria et de majestate 
 Filii Dei. Impossibile namque est literis commiltere ea quae ad Salvatoris 
 gloriam pertinent." Here there is a distinct statement that the truths "cannot 
 be committed to writing." This is quite a different statement from "the world 
 could not hold the books," or "the mind of man could not take in the meaning." 
 [2414//] Origen's view that xwpetJ', "make room for," has for its object, not 
 "books" but the attributes of the Logos, agrees both verbally and substantially 
 with Philo (i. 253) rls av ex^pijce deov \6yuv icx^'v tu>v curdarjs Kpeiaabvwv aKoijs... 
 ovoe yap el ttXovtov iiribeUvvadai ^ovXrjdeirj rbv eavrov, x^PV'™ av (yireipudeiaris 
 xal OaXdacrrjs) iq crvfj-irdcra yrj, (i. 362) ovde yap twv oupeQiv inavbs ov8eis x w P') lTa ' 
 t6 acpOovov nXfjOos, icus Se ov5e 6 k6o-/xos, (ii. 218) opiyu} tw x a P*- T °s <*s'V ""acras 
 Scras av olds re 17 de^acrdai dwpeds, tt\v de euijv KardXruf/iv ovx olov dvOpunrov <pvais 
 ■dXX' ovd' 6 crvfnras ovpavds re nal K6ap.os dw^aerai x^prjcrai. In the context of 
 the first of these three passages, Philo describes the flow of (Jod's "graces 
 ixdpiTas)" eripas dvrl iKelvwv aai rpiras avri rue oevre'pwv ... in language remarkably 
 like that of John (i. 16 X°-P LV «" T ' X"P tT0S " grace for grace") ; in the context of 
 the second he quotes Proverbs (viii. 22) as attesting the existence of the Wisdom 
 of God (which John calls the Logos) from the beginning. Add Long. DeSubl. 
 ix. 9 6 tCiv 'lovoaibiv 0ecp.odirris...T7}v rod Oelov 5vva/.uv Kara ttjv a^lav i\wp7)(re 
 
 Ka^e(j>7)vtv. Wetstein {ad /or.) quotes hyperbolical and literal traditions from the 
 Talmud, that the world and the sky and the sea would not supply paper pens 
 .ml ink sufficient to write out the knowledge of this or that Rabbi. 
 
 306 
 
SUBJECT [2419] 
 
 the portrait of the Lord, but] the books that would have to be 
 written [in the attempt to represent Him] 1 ." 
 
 Subject 2 
 
 (i) Collective or noun group 
 
 [2417] When the subject is a collective noun it may have in 
 agreement with it a singular participle followed by a plural verb as 
 1H vii. 49 6 o^Aos ovtos 6 fxn] yLvaxrKiov tov vo/xov i-rrdpaTot elcrw, xii. 12 
 6 o^Ao5 7toA.ii? 6 iXOiov eis ttjv kopTrjv aKovaavra . . . eXafiov. These 
 
 two instances favour the plural reading in vi. 22 6 6';vAos 6 ecm^Kux; 
 Tre'pui' rrjs 6a\dcra7]<; eJ8ov (marg. tSoji) 3 . In a subsequent clause, 
 referring to " the multitude," the plural would naturally be used as 
 in English, vi. 2 "There followed him a great multitude because 
 they beheld''' (comp. xi. 42, xii. 9, 18). 
 
 [2418] When the verb precedes several nouns that constitute its 
 subject, the verb is mostly in the singular 4 . But in a few cases 
 where perhaps the intention is, from the first, to set a list of names 
 before the reader, the verb is plural, as in xix. 25 " Now there tvere 
 standing... his mother, and his mother's sister, and...," xxi. 2 " There 
 were together Simon Peter and Thomas and...." When a second 
 verb subsequently refers to two subjects introduced by a first verb in 
 the singular, the second verb is plural, xii. 22 Ipyerai 'A. /cat <E>. «ai 
 
 Xeyovariv, XX. 3 i^rjXOev ovv 6 II. kcu 6 aAAos /ULa8r)T7]s kcl\ yp^ovro. 
 
 (ii) Neuter Plural 
 
 [2419] When the subject is a neuter plural, John's usage varies 
 strangely. In most authors, the neuter plural with plural verb can 
 often be explained on the ground that though the author zvrites a 
 
 1 [2416 </] Deissmann (pp. 203 — 5) has given, from Papyri, more than fifty 
 instances of idv with os, baos, oirore, olos, us, et tis, octtis, ottov (from B.C. 27 to 
 A.D. 586). From the same collections of Papyri he gives only eight instances of 
 &v with similar words. His conclusion concerning the use of eav for av with these 
 relatival words is, "the first and second centuries A.D. constitute its definite 
 classical period ; it seems to become less frequent later." These lists are not 
 put forth as exhaustive ; but they decidedly favour the conclusion that in xxi. 25 
 aTiva idv means " whatsoever." 
 
 2 See also Anacoluthon, Ellipsis, and Number. 
 
 3 [2417a] The changes are interesting in vi. 22 — 4 "The multitude that was 
 standing (sing.)... [all] saw (pi.).... When therefore the m. saw (sing, before the 
 vb, eldev 6 6'xXos)...they themselves embarked ((vij3ijcrav avToL)...." 
 
 4 [2418a] i. 35, ii. 2, 12, iii. 22, iv. 53, xviii. 1, 15. In i. 45 Se Zypa-^ev M. 
 iv ry v6/xw Kal oi TrpcxprJTat., the last three words are of the nature of an appendix. 
 
 307 20 — 2 
 
[2420] SUBJECT 
 
 neuter noun, he is thinking of a masculine or feminine noun. But 
 XIX. 31 iv a. fxrj p-tivr) Ittl tov aravpov to crw/xaTa. . .iva Kareayiocriv avrwv 
 
 to. a-Kikr) ko.1 dpduxriv exhibits the two constructions side by side : and 
 it can hardly be argued that o-kcA?; is more suggestive than o-w/xara of 
 " a masculine noun." Is it possible that to aKeXyj is accusative, 
 a construction very common with Kareayevai in such phrases as "to 
 have one's head, skull, collar-bone etc. broken 1 "? This would have 
 the advantage of avoiding the abrupt change of subject in passing 
 from Kareaywo-tv to apOuxTtv (which, in classical Greek, would require 
 avTOL before dpOwaiv : " that their legs should be broken and the men 
 themselves {avToi) carried away"). Without avroi, if o-Ke'A/r/ is nomin- 
 ative, the text reads as though the meaning were "that their legs 
 should be broken and carried away." But if o-Ke'A.17 is accusative, the 
 meaning is "that they should have their legs broken and be taken 
 
 away." In vi. 13, KXaiTpaTOiV.-.d iirepLO-crevo-av AN have -rxev, but the 
 
 tendency to make this correction would be strong in some scribes ; 
 W.H. have -o-av without alternative. 
 
 [2420] The following variations deserve attention, x. 3 — 27 
 
 to 7rp6/3a-a rrj<; <f><Dvr}<; avrov aKOvei. . .to TrpofiaTa avraj nKnXovOil, otl 
 
 otSactr aAAorpia) 8e ov p.rj aKoXovOrjaovo'LV ovk 7/Kovaav avTW 
 
 to Trp6(3a.Ta...ov ovk eaTiv to irpofiaTa iSia. . .aAAa irpofiaTa e^co a ovk 
 earnv Ktti Trjs <fn>}vrj<; p.ov (Lkovo-ovo-lv. . .to irpofiuTa to ipd tt}<; 
 
 (fnovrjs p,ov (iKovovmv. At the beginning of the Parable the sheep are 
 regarded as a flock, collectively, acting in a certain way, " the flock 
 hearkens and follows.'''' But the thought of motive introduces the 
 thought of individuality and hence the grammatical plural, "they 
 know... they will not follow." Thenceforth individuality and plurality 
 prevail, except in the phrases describing to whom the flock "belongs" 
 where personality is merged in collectiveness. 
 
 (iii) Suspended 
 
 [2421] 'O TricrreiW, in vii. 38 {"He that &/&»*//&... rivers... shall 
 
 flow from his belly") might be defended by some grammarians as 
 implying ootm dv nio-Tfvo-r) (where oo-tis might be regarded as having 
 
 1 [2419<z| Steph. (Kar&yvvfxi) qu. Plat. 34? B, 515 E with aira, Pollux iv. 188, 
 with K\eiv, Demosth. I«68. 3 and many others with Ke<pa\r)v. 
 
 [2419/^] The objection to this suggestion is thai airwv should not have been 
 inserted, as "their" is sufficiently expressed by the article. No authority omits 
 aiiruiv, but a renders it " illis." I) and SS are missing. Syr. (Walton) has "lit 
 confringerent crura eorum suspensorum atque deponerent eos," and so has the 
 Diatessaron. tri Nonnus, 7r65« t^voivto favours the usual rendering. 
 
 308 
 
SUBJECT [2422] 
 
 avrov for its antecedent). But the construction is Hebraic (1920 — 2) 
 as well as natural. In one or two passages, a word, or clause, with 
 neuter noun or adjective, might be either subject or object, e.g. xv. 2 
 
 irav KXrjfxa ev ifxol fxrj (pepov Kap-rrov cupei avro. In the Parable of the 
 
 Sower, Matthew and Luke have 6 cxwv where Mark has o? £x ct '» but 
 there 6 c^wv is the subject of a/cove'rco. 
 
 (a) TTan o AeAwKAC (xvii. 2) 
 
 [2422] The following requires separate discussion, xvii. 2 (R.V.) 
 " Even as thou gavest him authority over all flesh, that whatsoever 
 thou hast given him, to them he should give eternal life" (A.V.) '■''that 
 he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him 2 ." R.V., 
 though closer to the Greek than A.V., has substituted "whatsoever" 
 for "all that." Grammatically, the Greek of the italicised words can 
 only be construed as follows : " That he may give all that thou hast 
 given him — [namely] eternal life — to them." But the previous 
 sentence mentions no persons that could be here referred to as 
 " them," so that this makes no sense. D alters " he may give " into 
 " may have " and omits "to them," leaving "that all that thou hast 
 given to him may have eternal life." This makes excellent sense 
 and grammar, but there is no reason for supposing that it was the 
 original text. Later on, we find " Father, [that] which (o) thou hast 
 given me, I will that where I am they also may be with me 3 ," which 
 again indicates a desire to give prominence to the clause " that which 
 thou hast given me" by assigning to it an irregular position in the 
 forefront of the sentence. In these two passages, " all that (-n-dv o) 
 thou hast given me" (with or without "all") means the Church 
 collectively, and the subsequent pronoun (" to them," " they also ") 
 means the members of the Church individually. In the second of 
 the two passages the pronoun happens to be capable of an apposi- 
 tional construction 4 , in the first it is not (1921 — 2). See also 2740 — 4. 
 
 1 Mk iv. 9, Mt. xiii. 9, Lk. viii. 8: so Mt. vii. 24 iras ovv octtis &Kouei = Lk. 
 vi. 47 iras 6...&kovujv. Comp. Rev. iii. 216 vuaZv dwuca avTui, and Prov. xi. 26, 
 where, with a nom. particip., Aq. alone retains the Heb. idiom, KaTapdaovrai 
 avrdv, while Theod. has Sij/xoKardpaTos, Sym. XaoKardparoi. 
 
 - xvii. 2 Kadws ZduiKas avrop i^ovaiav Tracys aapKOS, 'iva irav 8 5^5w/cas avrqi 
 8d>aet aiVois iwrjv aiibviov. 
 
 3 xvii. 24. Here D makes no alteration. 
 
 4 [2422 a] In xvii. 24, we might theoretically explain the construction as de\w 
 'iva 6 d^SaiK&s p.01. — indvoi. wcriv p.er' e/xou : but the author must not be supposed to 
 have premeditated any such construction. 
 
 309 
 
[2423] SUBJECT 
 
 (iv) Omitted in partitive clauses 
 
 [2423] For the omission of the subject in a partitive clause as in 
 xvi. 17 "[Some] of his disciples therefore said," and for consequent 
 ambiguity, see 2042 and 2213—5. 
 
 (v) " They " non = pronominal 
 
 [2424] The subject is sometimes omitted by John — not quite 
 after the manner of Mark when he uses the 3rd pers. pi. of a verb to 
 mean "people" — if " they" can be implied from something in the 
 context, e.g. ii. 10 "Every man first putteth the good wine [before his 
 guests], and, when [they] have drunk freely... 1 ," iii. 23 "Now John 
 also was baptizing in /Enon...and [they, i.e. 'those whom he 
 baptized '] came thither (TrapzyivovTo) and were baptized." 
 
 [2425] In xviii. 25 "Now Simon Peter was. ..warming himself. 
 [They] said therefore...," we must not render "they" by "people" 
 but must go back to xviii. 18 " Now Peter also was standing with them 
 and warming himself," treating the intervening words (xviii. 19 — 24) 
 as a parenthesis' 2 . In xix. 29 "there was set there a vessel full 
 of vinegar," the evangelist probably assumes that "vinegar" would 
 be understood to mean " wine for the soldiers on guard" (just as, in 
 ii. 10, "wine" implied "wine for the guests"). Consequently he 
 assumes that the following words, " so [they] put a sponge," would 
 be understood to refer to "the soldiers." In xx. 1 — 2 "Mary 
 Magdalene... seeth the stone taken away from the tomb ; she runneth 
 therefore... and sayeth...['They] have taken the Lord out of the 
 tomb,'" "they" cannot mean "people." Mary's mind is full of the 
 thought of Christ and of what His enemies have done to Him. 
 She infers, from what she naturally regards as a hostile act, that the 
 chief priests, not content with killing Him, have removed the body, 
 and "they" means "the chief priests," or "the Lord's enemies." 
 
 1 [2424a] R.V. supplies "men." But "putteth" means " puts on the table, - ' 
 and the subject appears to be "those at the table,'' not "men [in general].'' This 
 
 omewhat different from the indefinite "they" so frequent in Mark — and 
 common in vernacular English, like the French "on" — where the pronoun does 
 not refer to any noun expressed Or implied in the context. 
 
 - [2425r/] Similarly, in ix. i\ "\they\ therefore called." we have to pass over 
 the immediately preceding verse about the man's "parents" and to go back to the 
 statement about '• the Jews." 
 
 310 
 
SUBJECT [2427] 
 
 Reviewing the instances, so far, we do not find any in which the 
 missing subject cannot be supplied from the context 1 . 
 
 [2426] We come now to omissions of the subject in words 
 of our Lord. In one of them, " they" appears to refer to "the 
 world " previously mentioned " If the tvorld hateth you, reflect that it 
 hath hated me... remember the word that I said unto you, 'The 
 servant is not greater than his Lord.' If [they] persecuted me they 
 will persecute you also 2 ." But there is nothing for the pronoun to 
 refer to in the earlier instance " If a man abide not in me he is cast 
 forth as the branch [of the vine] and is withered, and THEY gather 
 them and cast them into the fire and they are burned 3 ." Here, 
 theoretically, we might supply "people," and if the passage occurred 
 in Mark that would perhaps be the best rendering ; but as there has 
 been no previous mention of vine-dressers, and as there has been a 
 previous mention of the Father as " cleansing " the vine, it is probable 
 that THEY — in accordance with frequent Jewish tradition as well as 
 occasional Synoptic usage — means " the powers of heaven " or " the 
 angels." 
 
 (vi) " We " non = pronominal 4 
 
 [2427] " We " non-pronominal — i.e. expressed by verbal inflexion 
 and not by pronoun — in i Jn i. i " that which we have heard, that 
 which we have seen with our eyes...," appears to mean the writer of 
 the Epistle and his companions, as " we " means in the opening 
 sentences of a Pauline Epistle: but it may mean "we all," "we 
 disciples of Christ," as probably in i Jn ii. 28 " And now, little 
 children, abide in him, that, if he shall be manifested we [a//] may 
 have confidence." The most serious ambiguity arising from this use 
 of "we" is in xxi. 24 "we know that his witness is true." Are these 
 
 1 [2425/;] With these contrast Mk i. 32 (Mt. viii. t6 sim.) "But in the 
 evening... [they'] brought unto him all that were sick" (where Mk i. 29 — $1 has 
 previously mentioned the healing of Peter's mother-in-law without any suggestion 
 of persons that could be called "they"); the parall. Lk. iv. 40 has "All that had 
 sick folk.., .led them to him." 
 
 - xv. 16 — 20, where "the world" is six times mentioned. 
 
 s xv. 6. On THEY, see 667 a, 738 a — b. On the alleged omission of an 
 indefinite subject, "any one," and on the question whether 6 irar^p clvtou is 
 predicate or subject, in viii. 44, see 2378 — 9. 
 
 4 [2427 a] The difference between the non-pronominal and the pronominal 
 "we" is illustrated by 1 Jn iii. 2, v. 15 {bis), 19, 20 o'iSa/xeu and iii. 14 rjixeh o'ida/j.ev 
 (where "we" is opposed to "the world"). In Jn vi. 42, ix. 24, 29 "we (w«s) 
 know" implies "we know, even if others do not" (2399 — 2400). 
 
 311 
 
[2428] SUBJECT 
 
 the words of the evangelist, and do they mean " We all know that 
 the witness of the Son to the Father is true " ? Or are they the 
 words of some unknown persons, e.g. the elders of the Church of the 
 city where the evangelist was writing, and do they mean, in effect, 
 " We [elders of Ephesus, Antioch, or Jerusalem] hereby certify that 
 the witness of this evangelist is true " ? 
 
 [2428] Before discussing this very important passage, we may 
 mention some instances in which our Lord includes Himself in the 
 non-pronominal "we": — iii. n (to Nicodemus) " We speak that 
 which we know and testify that which we have seen and ye receive not 
 our testimony," vi. 5 (to Philip) " Whence are we to buy bread that 
 these may eat?" xiv. 31 "Arise, let us go (ayw/xei/) hence." In the 
 first of these, there may be, on the surface, some slight irony — when 
 our Lord ranks Himself with other teachers of spiritual truth, in 
 addressing Nicodemus, who had called Him (iii. 2) "a teacher," and 
 whom He had called (iii. 10) " the teacher." But there is also 
 an inner meaning, namely that the Son is " not alone " in His 
 testimony, which corresponds to that of "two men 1 ," being the 
 testimony of the Father and the Son, so that " we speak " means 
 " the Father and I speak." A similar inner meaning seems to belong 
 to vi. 5 " Whence are we to buy bread," where the Johannine 
 "buying"— an entirely new version of the parallel Synoptic 
 "buying 2 " — appears to be typical of the procuring of the Eucharistic 
 " flesh " and " blood," the sacrifice ordained by the Father and offered 
 by the Son. The third instance has been discussed elsewhere, and it 
 has been shewn that " Arise ye, let us go" is a tradition of Mark and 
 Matthew omitted by Luke and liable to be misunderstood as meaning 
 flight, but really meaning appeal to Justice. It ought however to be 
 added that the insertion of "hence" by John ("Arise ye, let us go 
 hence") assimilates the words to a famous tradition recorded by 
 Josephus that before Jerusalem was taken by the Romans there was 
 a noise in the Temple as of a rushing host, and the gate opened, and 
 a Voice was heard, " Let us pass hence (ivrevOev) 3 ." Of course these 
 last two passages also have their literal meaning, in which Christ 
 associates Himself with the disciples : but the non-pronominal "we," 
 
 1 viii, 16, 17 anil context. 
 
 1 [2428</J Mk vi. 36 — 7 "that th,y may buy. ..arc we to buy," Mt. xiv. 15 
 "that they may buy," Lk. ix. 1,5 "unless... ;,-'<• are to buy." In Mk-Lk. "we" 
 means the disciples. Chrys., however, in |n, omits the " buying." See 2745. 
 
 '•'• Sec Paradosis, 1372 — 7 ami Joseph. Bell. vi. 5. ). 
 
 312 
 
SUBJECT [2428] 
 
 in a saying of Christ, is so fraught with probabilities of latent 
 mysticism that it gives us very little help on the words, not uttered 
 by Christ, now under discussion (xxi. 24) " We know that his testimony 
 is true 1 ." 
 
 1 [2428(5] In ix. 4 "We (ii/J.as, al. efj-e") must work (Set epydfreadai) the works of 
 him that sent me (/xe, al. r/ttas)," the insertion of T/tta? differentiates the passage 
 from those quoted above: but it will be discussed here, because, unless it can be 
 shewn to be corrupt, it would seem to shew that, here at all events, Christ does 
 place Himself on a level with His disciples in the emphatic i)p.ds. The preceding 
 words are IV a tpavepudfj to. tpya rod deov eV aiirul, "that the works of God might 
 be manifested in him," i.e. in the man born blind. Then follows, in B, rjfias Set 
 epyafeade {i.e. -at, to work). Origen twice (Huet i. 125, ii. 25) omits rifids del 
 and quotes the saying as beginning with epydfeade "work ye." 
 
 [2428 1 ] D has 5t 7]/j.as epyafeatiai. This might mean "for our sakes. Work 
 ye." But D means 5et by <5t, "it is necessary for us to work." MSS. often express 
 et by t (see Boeckh Inscr. Gr. 4588 «ce 5t = *at 5e?) and errors arise in consequence. 
 Again Otitis and v/acls are liable to confusion — as may be seen from Jn viii. 54, 1 Jn 
 i. 4 where W.H. give the two (v/j.Qv and t/aiwc) as alternatives. Origen, then, 
 might easily have read the words before epydfeade as 5t' v/j.ds "in order that the 
 works of God may be manifested in him, i.e. the blind man, for your sakes.'" 
 This would make excellent sense. Comp. xi. 42 (in the Raising of Lazarus) 5td 
 tov 6'xXov...et7roj', "I said it for the sake of the multitude" xii. 30 ov 5i' i/xe 17 <puvi] 
 avrr) yeyovev d\Xa 5t' uttas , "for your sakes," and so, xi. 15 x a 'pv 01' vp.ds iVa 
 TriffTevffrjTe. 
 
 [2428 1/] SS has "and me it behoves to do...," and so Ephrem (p. 197) " et 
 me oportet operari...." The Vat. Ms. of the Arabic Diatess. (ed. Hogg) has, as 
 the preceding words, "that we may see the works of God in him" and the 
 Clementine Homilies (xix. 22 Clark) have "that the power of God might be made 
 manifest through him in healing the sins of ignorance." SS, Diatess. and the 
 Latin vss all have "me" twice ("it behoves me — him that sent me"), but N*L 
 have "us" twice. 
 
 [2428t'] Origen's first quotation is in a comment on Jer. xiii. 16 "Give glory 
 to the Lord your God before (marg.) it grow dark," thus (Huet i. 125) "Perhaps 
 we shall understand this scripture (to yeypap.ij.ivov) by applying (xpyo-dfxevoi) a 
 Gospel saying uttered by the Saviour, which runs thus (oiirws exovcrrj) ' Work while 
 (ews) it is day. There cometh night when no man can work.'" He adds that 
 Christ gives the name of "day" to "this world," contrary to custom. His second 
 is from the early part of his commentary on John (Huet ii. 25) "He says to them 
 that are partakers of His own Light, 'Work as (ws) it is day. There cometh night 
 when no man can any longer (ovksti ovdeis) work : when (otclv) I am in the world 
 I am the light of the world." It will be observed that in both these quotations 
 Origen omits "the works of him that sent me (or, us)": and the length of the 
 quotation, m the second instance, suggests that he is not quoting from memory 
 but from MS. These and other variations, if they do not demonstrate that the 
 passage is corrupt, suffice to shew that W. H.'s text cannot be relied on as a proof 
 that Jesus here uses ^as to mean "My disciples and I." 
 
 313 
 
[2429] SUBJECT 
 
 (a) " We know (oi'Aamcn) " (xxi. 24) 
 
 [2429] We return to the discussion of the words " we know that 
 his witness is true," in the hope of ascertaining what " we " means. 
 According to the analogy of the Epistle, it might mean (1) the 
 writer, associating himself with others ("we all know"), or (2) with 
 some fellow-evangelists or fellow-teachers ("we know") as distinct 
 from those who are taught, who might be addressed as "you." Both 
 these meanings occur (2427) in the Epistle. But it might mean 
 (3) " we, the elders of the Church among whom this Gospel has been 
 preached and is now being published, know that the witness of the 
 evangelist is true." This third hypothesis must not be discredited 
 by the mere fact that such an attestation is unique in this Gospel. 
 For how could it well be otherwise ? It would come naturally at the 
 end of the book, once for all. 
 
 [2430] One argument against this third hypothesis is the fact 
 that it does not come quite at the end of the book. After it there 
 comes one more sentence, which contains the first person singular, 
 xxi. 25 " But there are also many other things that Jesus did, the 
 which (?) // they are to be written (lav ypd^-qTat) one by one, I think 
 not even the 7vorhi will hold the books that are [to be] written 1 ." 
 Portions of this sentence are repeatedly (2414 b— ■/) quoted by Origen, 
 and thrice as coming from the evangelist. It could hardly come 
 from any one else, at least in substance 2 . For what mere scribe, or 
 Editor, would venture to append his own expression of personal 
 opinion to such a work as the Fourth Gospel ? Moreover, it 
 exhibits a strong sense of the inadequacy of any " books " to 
 represent the multiform action of Jesus — just such a sense as we 
 might suppose likely to be expressed again and again by a very aged 
 
 1 [2430 <?] "EaTiv 8e Kai ctXXa 7ro\\a a eTroiijaev 6 'I., artea eav ypd(prjTai ko.6' Hv, 
 ovo avrbv ol/uai tov k6<tixov x^PVO't'-" T & ypa(po/ji(va I3tj3\ia. On ariva iav as 
 generally meaning "whatsoever things" but here, possibly if the text is correct, 
 "which things, if," see 2414 — 6. 
 
 - [2430/'] Teschendorf says that xxi. 25, in N, is written by a different scribe 
 from the one that wrote the body of the Gospel. Hut this scribe (according to 
 W.I I. ad loc.) appears to have been I), the diopd^rrjs, or corrector, of the MS., 
 who also probably (according to Teschendorf (X p. xxi)) wrote the last leaf of Mk 
 and the first of Lk., as well as what may be described as the title and the 
 salutation in Rev.i. 1—4 "The Revelation. ..and from the seven Spirits which are 
 before the throne and from Jesus Christ." These farts are consistent with the 
 hypothesis that the change of handwriting may imply some special circumstances 
 but not necessarily interpolation or diminished authority. 
 
 3H 
 
SUBJECT [2433] 
 
 disciple of Jesus contrasting his personal recollections of the Lord 
 with " the books that were being written." 
 
 [2431] This postscript must be compared with a previous post- 
 script. After the manifestation to Thomas ending with the words, 
 " Blessed are they that have not seen and [yet] have believed," the 
 writer adds, xx. 30 — 1 "Many other signs therefore did Jesus in the 
 presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book. But 
 these have been written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ 
 the Son of God, and that, believing, ye may have life in his name." 
 This apparently deals solely with the Resurrection and the signs 
 wrought by the Lord " in the presence of (2335) the disciples " after 
 the Resurrection, committed to writing in order that, profiting by 
 the rebuke to Thomas, the readers of his narrative ("ye") might be 
 "blessed," " not having seen and yet having believed." 
 
 [2432] That would seem to have been a fit termination to the 
 Gospel — a statement of its object, addressed by the impersonal 
 writer to the readers in the second person " that ye may have life in 
 his name." But something seems to have happened to make 
 another termination desirable. The reputed author, or originator — 
 the disciple whom Jesus loved — lived (so says tradition) to a great 
 age prolonged past decrepitude : and it was commonly reported, on 
 the basis of an utterance imputed to Christ Himself, that he was 
 not to die till our Lord's coming. When the old man's end had 
 arrived 1 , or drew manifestly near, it would become desirable to 
 contradict this rumour and to shew how it had arisen. For this 
 purpose an account of the utterance and of its occasion and circum- 
 stances was committed to writing. And this we find in the last 
 chapter. 
 
 [2433] These circumstances would be exceptional, and might 
 well explain an exceptional conclusion. After this Appendix (con- 
 cerning what may be called the Johannine manifestation of the 
 Resurrection) had been written out, it may have been submitted to 
 the aged Disciple of the Lord, to receive, perhaps, a word or two of 
 writing in his own hand like that at the end of the Epistle to the 
 Galatians "in large letters." If so, it might be difficult to say which 
 
 1 [2432,?] The difficult words "This is the disciple that beareth witness" and 
 "he that wrote"' (2166) do not necessarily imply that he was still living to bear 
 witness. On the contrary they might be written (in any Christian Church familiar 
 with the saying (Heb. xi. 4) about Abel) to indicate that the aged Disciple "being 
 dead yet speaketh." 
 
 315 
 
[2434] SUBJECT 
 
 part of the Postscript belonged to the evangelist — who regards 
 himself as writing the Gospel in the Disciple's name — which part 
 (if any) to the Elders of the Church, and which to the Disciple 
 himself 1 . Chrysostom most certainly recognises nothing as coming 
 from Elders. And he quotes oiSa/Aev, once at least, as otoa, " / 
 know, he says, that the things that he says are true 2 ." One might 
 have supposed this to mean that the evangelist was " setting his 
 seal" to the truth of the "testimony" of Christ 3 about which the 
 Gospel speaks so often : but apparently Chrysostom means " I know 
 that the things I said about Him were true." The context is not 
 very clear, and it is possible that Chrysostom may have read otoa 
 /xev and co-Tii/ Se, although he quotes the text freely as olSa and 
 tori yap . 
 
 [2434] Some variations in the mss. and Latin versions add to 
 the uncertainty of interpretation 5 . Of course unaccented Greek mss. 
 would give no guidance as to oiAamcn whether it was to be taken as 
 two words or one. The main internal evidence for men, " on the 
 one hand," is found in the following Icttiv Se : but this is omitted by 
 SS and by the best Latin versions 6 . Yet co-riv 8e is almost certainly 
 
 1 [2433 <7] The same difficulty of distinction would arise if the Disciple died 
 before this attestation and if the writer of the Gospel or the Elders attached to the 
 MS. a fragment in the Disciple's handwriting recording a favourite saying of his 
 about the inadequacy of books. 
 
 - [2433 fr] Kai oWa, (prjcrlv, on aXrjdrj icrriv a Xeyei. Above, the text is printed 
 as ot5a/xev, but this might be an error for olda /xev. Chrys. previously speaks of 
 the evangelist as "testifying to himself (p.aprvp(ov eai'ry)." 
 
 :i iii. 33 6 \aftu>i> avrou rrpi fiaprvpiav icrcppayicrev oti 6 debs a\ridr)s icrriv, comp. 
 viii. 14 aXrjdris icrriv r\ fxaprvpia /jlov. 
 
 4 [2433 r] The p.iv after olda may have been omitted because the rest of the 
 sentence was not given, and the &m yap in Herri yap <pi)cn Kai &\\a ttoWo. may 
 have been a part of Chrysostom's framework of the quotation, not a part of the 
 quotation itself. 
 
 • r ' [2434r?] SS has the past ("dare witness") and omits 'iariv hi, ofytcu and 
 "itself" (in "the world itself"): "This is the disciple that hair witness of these 
 things and wrote them and we know that true is his witness. And many other 
 things did Jesus, that if one by one they were [all] written the world would not 
 be sufficient for them." Codex a perhaps took the Latin "/its'' for ihs, i.e. "Jesus," 
 and it repeats "scimus" and turns "qui" into "quis" thus, "Hie est discipulus 
 qui testificator de Jesu et quis scripsit haec scimus; et scimus quod verum est 
 testimonium ejus." \Y. 1 1, give txt 6 fj,apTi'pun> wept toutlov Kai 6 ypd\f/as ravra, but 
 marg Kai (before /xaprvpuiu) and [6] Kai for Kai 6, i.e. 6 Kai /xapTvpwii v. r. [6] Kai 
 ypaif/as ravra. 
 
 " [2434/'] Otdapcv occurs in 1 Jn iii. 2, v. 15 [6is), v. 19, 20, and ?;/xeis oi5afj.a> 
 
 116 
 
SUBJECT [2435] 
 
 an integral part of the sentence in which it stands. If both oI8a fxev 
 and eo-Tiv Se belonged to "the disciple whom Jesus loved," the most 
 natural explanation of "his testimony" is " Chrisfs testimony " ; and 
 the Disciple must here be regarded as declaring his conviction that, 
 whether he is to await the Lord's coming or to die — however much 
 some may have misinterpreted the words " If I will that he tarry " — 
 the Lord's testimony, and especially the testimony after the Resur- 
 rection, is absolutely true 1 . 
 
 [2435] On the whole, the most probable conclusion is that 
 ot'Sctyiei' is one word and represents the attestation of unnamed 
 persons, and that the words following the attestation in the first 
 person are an addition, supposed to come from the teaching of the 
 aged Disciple, repeating, in effect, what he had said at the conclusion 
 of the first edition of the Gospel. Then he had said that there were 
 many more details, " not written in this book," of that vivid period 
 after the Resurrection during which the Saviour was continually 
 manifesting Himself to the disciples. Now he says that "if these 
 details continue to be written," the world will not " hold " or 
 "contain" all this "writing of books" — and he probably implies also 
 that, "whatever number of these details may be written," the 
 
 in i Jn iii. 14. In all these cases it means "We, the disciples of Christ, know." 
 On the one hand, this might be urged as shewing that ot<5a txev would be assimi- 
 lated to the phrase in the Epistle by the error of scribes. But it seems to me 
 a stronger argument, that a writer so fond of otdajjav would not write ofda n-ev. 
 
 1 [2434 c] Strictly after oi5a piv we should have something like Eurip. Hippol. 
 1091 ws olSa p.kv ravr' , olda 5' oi>x ottios (ppdaui: but the clause with 84 strays away 
 as in Jn x. 41 (2169). A much more serious objection is that if the Apostle had 
 meant "Do not lay stress on me as bearing witness. It is rather He that beareth 
 witness and I know that His witness is true," he would have said 4k€wos, as the 
 Epistle, not avrds (2382—4). 
 
 [2434 ti] If oi!5a./j.ev proceeded from the evangelist as part of the same sentence 
 in which he also says ol/xai, we should have to suppose the meaning to be " We 
 {the disciples of Christ, aW\ know that the testimony of the Lord is true, but...," 
 which seems improbable. 
 
 [2434 c'] On Rom. vii. 14 olSa^ev yap on 6 vofios Trvev/xariKos £<ttlv, Alford says 
 that Jerome has li sdo." Gennadius (Cramer) certainly read oWa /jl4v, for he has 
 JTricrTafxaL on 6 fo/xos irv. e. Cyril may have done so, for he has a/jLw/j.di' <pt\(jw 
 elvai top vbixov, olde yap d/xw/xous d.7roTeAeiV. This is applied to David, as a parallel 
 to the Apostle, who lo~x v P L fc TaL ^ v 0TI - TfvevfiaTiKbs 6 vb/xos aiVtarat 5e tt]i> dvdpuiirov 
 (pvo-ii>. 0l8e and fxtv combine to suggest that he read olda fxei>. Origen (Lomm. 
 vii. 31 — 2) seems to recognise, and to correct, this interpretation, by saying — after 
 quoting the text with "scimus" — "Legem vero spiritualem esse non so/us Panlus 
 sciebat, sed et hi qui ab ipso imbuebantur." 
 
 317 
 
[2436] TENSE 
 
 portrait of the Saviour will not be " held " or " contained " in the 
 "books 1 ." 
 
 TENSE 
 
 [2436] Tense-idioms will be conveniently arranged under sub- 
 divisions of Mood. Tense-rules are sometimes interfered with 
 by word-rules, e.g. the perfects of some verbs are rarely or never used, 
 so that writers may be led to use the aorist for the perfect in those 
 words. Hence the difference between two writers can sometimes be 
 best illustrated by comparing, not their tense-usage in general, but 
 their uses of the tense of one or two words in particular : and the 
 shades of meaning intended by a single writer can often be perceived 
 in the same way. 
 
 I. In the Imperative Mood 
 
 (i) Aorist (first) and Present 
 
 [2437] The first aorist imperative is (i) sometimes more definite, 
 (2) sometimes more authoritative 2 , (3) sometimes more solemn 3 than 
 the present imperative, which may denote continuous action. John 
 uses the aorist "abide" in the Lord's mouth, but the present is used 
 
 1 [2435a] It is desirable to make "books" the last word in the English 
 rendering so as to call attention to its emphatic position. Comp. the saying 
 of Papias (Eus. iii. 39. 4) "I did not think I should be so much helped by 
 what I could get from [the] books as by the [truths that came] from living and 
 abiding Voice," ov yap to. £k [tQv] (li/3\iu)i> to<tovt6i> p.e uxpeXew i'ire\dfjif$avoi> ocrov 
 rd irapd juices (pwvrjs nai fxevoixnjs. Nonnus omits the words /ecu oiSapiev 8ti a\r]dr)S 
 avrov r\ fiapTvpta icriv. 
 
 - [2437 a] But different writers might take different views of the authoritative- 
 ness of the same utterance. Comp. Mk vi. 10, Lk. ix. 4 fiivere, but parall. 
 Ml. x. 11 fieivare. Here we might say that Mk-Lk. meant "continue to abide." 
 No such explanation avails for Mk vi. 11, Mt. x. 14 eKrivd^aTe, Lk. ix. 5 
 air or ivda a ere. Put note that Lk. ix. 5 8aoi av fii) 5e , x m ' TaL ---° L7rOTLl ''*- <TaeTe > twice 
 uses the pres., while Mk vi. 11, Mt. x. 14 6s hv (Mk + r67ros) p.-q d^Tjrai... 
 e'KTiv&Za.Te twice use the aorist. Perh. Lk. means "do so habitually." Comp. 
 Lk. ix. 23 "take up the cross daily" where the parall. Mk viii. 34, Mt. xvi. 24 
 omit "daily." 
 
 :: [2437 /'j "More solemn." E.g. Jn xiv. 8 5e't^ov, in Philip's mouth, is 
 "solemn' - ami reverential (but not authoritative) — like Ktpte, SiSa^ot' in Lk. xi. 1, 
 ip.(j>dvicrbv fioi ffeavrdv in the corresponding prayer of Moses (Ex. xxxiii. 13, 18) 
 anil (Xl-qoou passim. So "thou," in Elizabethan English, is used to the Highest, 
 and to the lowest. 
 
 31S 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT IMPERATIVE [2439] 
 
 by the writer of the Epistle 1 . The authoritative imperative occurs 
 in the miracle at Cana, ii. 5 (Christ's mother) ironjaaTe, ii. 7 — 8 
 (Christ) ye/jLio-oLTe, ...avrX-rjcraTe : at the Cleansing of the Temple, 
 ii. 16 apaT€, and ii. 19 Xvaare : in Christ's words to the Samaritan 
 woman, iv. 16 <pu>vqo-6v <tov toV dvSpa, and afterwards to the disciples, 
 iv. 35 lira par e...Ka\ 6zd<ja.(j6(.: in the Feeding of the Five Thousand, 
 vi. 10 7roir/o-aT€ : in the Healing of the Blind, ix. 7 viraye vlij/ai : 
 in the Raising of Lazarus, xi. 39, 44 apare, ...Xvaare : in the rejected 
 (937 — 40) prayer xii. 27 awaov p.e, and in the accepted prayer lib.) 
 So^acrov <rov to ovop.a : in the last words to Judas Iscariot, xiii. 27 
 irotrjcrov Ta'xeiov : in the Last Discourse, XV. 9 /uei'varc Iv rfj dydiry rfj 
 ip-Tj : in the narrative of the Draught of Fish and the subsequent 
 
 meal, xxi. IO — 12 iveyKaTe and dpio-TTJaaTe. 
 
 [2438] The instance in the Last Discourse ("Abide in my love") 
 is perhaps the nearest approach to an authoritative command (in 
 John) to obey a moral or spiritual precept. Our Lord never uses 
 (1507 a) the authoritative form of the imperative in "believe ye," but 
 frequently the present imperative, which occurs also in vi. 27 ipyd- 
 £ea9e, vii. 24 Kptvere, and xii. 35 Trepnra.Ta.Tc etc.' 2 The three 
 Synoptists have "thou shalt love." Two (Mt.-Lk.) have "love ye 
 (ayas-are)." John has neither. Yet his Gospel connects "love" 
 with what Christ calls " my commandment," and his Epistle abounds 
 in "love"— but never "love ye" except in the phrase "love not the 
 world." 
 
 [2439] John's avoidance of the aorist imperative of irta-Tevw may 
 be illustrated by the charge brought by Celsus against the Christians 
 who, he asserts, authoritatively exclaim " Believe ! " (aorist im- 
 perative) instead of allowing time for reasonable examination 
 (present imperative) " Do not spend time in examining (/xr) e|era£e), 
 
 1 [2437 c] Jn xv. 4, 9 /xelvare, but 1 Jn ii. 28 /xiuere (comp. 2 Tim. iii. 14 fiive). 
 Mk xiv. 34, Mt. xxvi. 38 /j-eivare wde is an utterance of the Lord. Lk. xxiv. 29 
 (xelvov fj.f6' ijixwv may represent the (id.) "constraint" put on the unknown Lord by 
 the two disciples ("thou must needs abide with us "). 
 
 - [2438 a] In ii. 8 avr\T)<T<XTe k. (p^pere, v. 11 apov k. Trepiirdrei why have we 
 not eveyKare (as in xxi. 10) and irepnra.Triaov~? Probably because only the first 
 action is to be done at once. 
 
 [2438 /;] The remarks in this section apply only to the first aorist imperative. 
 The second aorist has not this solemn or authoritative meaning. Indeed, in 
 special words, the second aorist may be less authoritative than the present. For 
 example, in iv. 16 <pdjvr)aov...K. i\de, it is probable that the substitution of tyxov 
 for i\0£ would have been more solemn (as in i. 46, xi. 34, Rev. vi. 1, 3, 5, 7, 
 xxii. 17 (61s), 20) or authoritative (as in Mt. viii. 9, Lk. vii. 8). 
 
 319 
 
[2439 (i)] TENSE 
 
 but believe at once {Triarivaov) 1 ." The aorist imperative is indeed 
 assigned to Christ once (so W.H. without alternative) by Luke, in 
 the Healing of Jairus's daughter. But the corresponding passage in 
 Mark has the present 2 . Mark again prefers the present imperative 
 in xiii. 21 "If anyone say unto you, 'See, here is the Christ,' (lit.) 
 Be not disposed to believe (fxrj 7ncrTf.vi.Te) " where Matthew has (xxiv. 
 23, 26) " Believe [them] not," fir} Trio-Te.v<jr]Tc. This use of the 
 present imperative (Mk xiii. 21 "be not disposed to believe") may 
 perhaps be applied politely to things already done (like the formula 
 " let not my lord say so," applied to what is already said) as in Jn 
 xix. 21 fir) ypd(f>£, concerning what is already written. It is equivalent 
 to " let not my lord write," and invites Pilate to cancel what he has 
 written 3 . 
 
 [2439 (i)] Both Origen and Chrysostom accept without question 
 the imperative rendering of ipawdw in v. 38 — 9 tov Xoyov...ovK 
 k^€Te. . .otl. ..ov TricTTeveTe. ipavvaTe ras ypa<pd<;, on uuels 8ok€lt€ iv 
 aureus £01771' atan'iov 6Y€lV koli. eKeivai elaiv al jxapTvpovaai Trepl e/iov- «ai 
 
 ov OeXeTe. i\$eiv 7rpo's /j.e.... But against this view is the fact that 
 in the few cases where ipawdu) is imperative in O.T. and N.T. the 
 aorist is used 4 , and that one of these passages is in John and refers 
 to the searching of Scripture. Chrysostom says that the Jews merely 
 "read" the Scripture whereas Christ bade them "search" and "dig" 
 in them. But the answer is (1) that the Jews did "search," (2) that 
 their term " Midrash " implied most diligent " searching," and (3) that 
 the Pharisees themselves exhorted Nicodemus to "search." It is 
 also antecedently more probable that Christ would have advised the 
 Jews to turn their hearts toward the love of God rather than to 
 "search the Scriptures." Moreover the indicative agrees better with 
 the indicatives that precede and follow : " Ye have not his word in 
 you... because... _>v? believe not. Ye search the Scriptures (1722^) 
 
 1 [2439 «] Orig. Cels. i. 9. He might have said fir) tortus ■$$ if he had not 
 wished to emphasize the lingering over the task of examining. 
 
 - [2439/'] Mk v. 36 ixbvov vltrreve, Lk. viii. 50 nbvov irioTcvaov nai cruidrjcrerai, 
 "only a special act of faith and she will be healed !" Comp. Epict. Fragm, § 3 
 "If you wish to be good, first believe' once for all (irlaTevaov) that you are bad." 
 
 3 The explanation "Do not persist in writing" would apply to Jn xix. 21, but 
 not to Mk xiii. 21. 
 
 4 [2439(i)aJ 2 K. x. 23 (pavurjcraTe ko.1 TSerf, Jer. 1. 26 ipavvqffaTe avT-qv, 
 [11 vii. 52 (jmvvT)ffov Kai f5e. Comp. Judg. xviii. 2 (A) i^fpawr)(jaT( (of which 
 the pres. imper. does not occur in I, XX). Of course these facts prove little except 
 that l lie pies, imper. was not in common use. 
 
 320 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT IMPERATIVE [2439 (iii)J 
 
 [book by book] because ye suppose... and they are they that testify of 
 me, and [yet] ye desire not to come to me." 
 
 [2439 (ii)] In xii. 19 01 ovv Q. elirav 7Tpo? iavTOvs, 0eo>petT€ on ovk 
 ufcXelrt oi84v, A. V. has " Perceive ye...?" R.V. " Behold " imper., but 
 marg. "Ye behold." The indicative is supported by Acts xix. 25 — 6 
 
 i-rrio-TaaOe — koI Oewpelre koI aKOvere, i.e. "ye behold with your own 
 
 eyes, or see for yourselves," where the Ephesians are asked to 
 "behold" how "this Paul" has perverted almost the whole of 
 Asia — a passage remarkably like the Johannine one, in which a 
 similar charge is brought against Jesus, ©ewpeirf is also indicatively 
 used in Acts xxv. 24 and fjewpeis in Acts xxi. 20. "Thou seest [for 
 thyself] brother [without words from us] how many myriads there 
 are...." The imperative (twice) in LXX is followed by an accusative 
 or 7rws, and nowhere by a clause with on 1 . On the whole, the 
 meaning probably is "Ye see for yourselves that ye profit nothing. 
 Behold (iSe) ! the world hath gone after him." If so, the conclusion 
 slightly confirms the view that epaware above (2439 (i)) — which is 
 similarly initial and without vpel? — is also indicative. Comp. Jas 
 ii. 24 opare otl i$ epytDv Succuovrai ai/#pco7ros where R.V. has "ye see " 
 without alternative 2 . 
 
 [2439 (hi)] Avaare in ii. 19 "destroy this temple and in three 
 days I will raise it up" is explained by Blass (p. 221) as "equivalent 
 to a concessive sentence... =iav xal Xvo-qre " and illustrated by Soph. 
 Ant. n68ff. and also (id. p. 321) by " Eph. iv. 26 O.T. 6pyi£eo-0£ 
 koI fji-i] dpupTavere, which must mean 'angry you may be, but do not sin 
 withal." This last passage, however, is from Ps. iv. 4 "Stand in 
 awe (marg. be ye angry) and sin not," and Origen, ad loc, after a 
 long discussion of LXX 6pyi£,ecr9e, which, he says, may be " indicative 
 (bpio-TiKov) " or " imperative {ttpoot<xktik6v) " decides for the former. 
 Of course he may be wrong, but his decision makes it probable that 
 the LXX meant the indicative and that St Paul took it so : " Ye are 
 
 1 [2439 (ii) <7] Comp. iv. 19 0ewpw Sri irpotpriT^s el crv, "I see [without more 
 words] that thou art a prophet." The imper. occurs in 2 Mace. vii. 17 dedipet 
 to fieyaXeiov avrou Kpdros. In 4 Mace. xiv. 13 fxrj Oavfiaffrbv r}yei(r9e...de<i)peiTe §e 
 7rtDs..., and in ^schin. p. 13, 19 (quoted by Steph.) deupeTre to irpayfia ixr\ e/c tov 
 irapbvTos, the contextual fj.rj prepares for, or subsequently suggests, the imperative. 
 In Heb. vii. 4 dewpdre 8e wrjXiKos ovtos, the 5^ makes it prob. that 6. is imper. ; 
 but it might be a parenthetic indie, following the details about Melchizedek: "But 
 ye see for yourselves how great this man was." Tob. xii. 19 (fc?) deupeTre is. 
 doubtful. The oratorical imper. is naturally predominant in Demosth. (see Preuss)^ 
 
 2 On xiv. 1 (R.V.) "Ye believe (marg. Believe)," see 2237 foil. 
 
 A.' VI. ^2 1 21 
 
[2439 (iv)J TENSE 
 
 angry [from time to time, it needs must be so], but 1 do not let your 
 anger become a sin." 
 
 [2439 (iv)] What might be called a "concessive" imperative 
 occurs in Eccles. xi. 9 "Rejoice, young man, in thy youth. ..and 
 walk in the ways of thine heart and in the sight of thine eyes, but 
 (Heb. and) know that for all these things God shall bring thee into 
 judgment 2 ." This imperative — which might perhaps be better called 
 "minatory," for it implies a threat, "do this if you will, but at your 
 peril," "do this, but take the consequences" — is well instanced in 
 Epict. iv. 9. 18, addressing those who seek other objects than virtue, 
 "If thou seekest... continue doing as thou art doing {ttoUl a -^oiels), 
 not even a god can any longer save thee." This "minatory" im- 
 perative is common to all languages, e.g. Is. viii. 9 "Make an uproar 
 ...and be broken in pieces," Soph. Ant. 11 68, in effect "Go on 
 making money and it will all be a shadow " etc. 
 
 [2439 (v)] Whether ii. 19 Aware should be called a " concessive " 
 or " minatory," or some other imperative is rather a matter of taste 
 than of grammar. I should prefer to illustrate it by the imperatives 
 in Isaiah vi. 9 "Go and tell this people, Hear ye indeed but under- 
 stand not ; and see ye indeed but perceive not" uttered in obedience 
 to the command of Jehovah, " Make the heart of this people fat." So 
 after the cleansing of the Temple by Jesus, when the Jews refuse to 
 accept the act, Christ regards them as virtually bent on defiling and 
 destroying the Temple, and says, in effect, "Destroy it, then, and 
 I will raise it up." And similarly when Judas, after the washing of 
 feet, and after receiving the "sop," adheres to his treachery and 
 receives Satan into his heart, Christ says, " What thou art doing, do 
 more quickly." With the condemnation of Israel by Jehovah pro- 
 nounced by Isaiah it is usual to connect the phrase "judicial 
 blindness " : and perhaps we might say that John regards the verbs 
 in ii. 19 and xiii. 27 as "judicial imperatives 3 ." 
 
 1 [2439 (iii) a] The Hebrew vaw, " and" so often means "but" that the 
 LXX may well have taken it thus here. Indeed Sym. substitutes d\Xd (as well 
 as 6pyladr]T€ to make it clear that he takes the verb imperatively). 
 
 2 [2439 (iv) a] Here the LXX has " walk spotless in [thy] ways and not in the 
 sight of thine eyes and know...." The Targum corrupts the text in the same way 
 so as to make all the imperatives hortative. "In. ..thine eyes " implies self-will. 
 
 3 [2439 (v) a\ On ii. 10 Origen {ait Inc.) says nothing that bears on Xvaare 
 except (Lomm. i. 348) tovtov tov vabv \v0ijvai Set vwd tQv £irtjiovXev6vTwi' t<<3 \6ytf) 
 tov Oeov. On xiii. 27 irolrioov he says (ad toe.) that Christ speaks wpoKaKovpievos 
 
 322 
 
AORIST INDICATIVE [2440] 
 
 II. In the Indicative Mood 
 
 (i) Aorist 
 
 (i) Aorist compared with Perfect 
 
 [2440] Commenting on Col. i. 16 "in him all things were created 
 (iKTi(rOr))...a\\ things through him and to him have been created 
 {(.KTio-Tai)" Lightfoot says, "The aorist is used here: the perfect 
 below. 'Ektio-&7 describes the definite historical act of creation ; 
 Iktio-tui the continuous and present relations of creation to the 
 Creator : comp. Joh. i. 3 x^P 15 clvtov eyevero ov8k eV with lb. 6 yeyovev, 
 I Cor. ix. 2 2 ey€i'6fxr]v Tots acr9cv€(TLV dcr$evr]<; with lb. tois Tracrtv yiyova 
 Trdvra, 2 Cor. xii. 1 7 fit] two. (Lv airiaTaXxa with ver. 18 kou avv- 
 a7r£(TT£tAa tov aSeAt^oi', I Joh. iv. 9 tov fjiovoyevrj u7T€CTT<iAKev o 0eo<; 
 €t? tov Koa-fJiov iva ijjatofiev 8l av'rov with ver. 10 on auros rjyairrjcrev 
 ■>jfjia<; ko.1 a7r€o-T€tXev tov vlov clvtov." This comment supplies a clue 
 to several Johannine distinctions between the aorist and the perfect 1 . 
 For example, as regards Christ's "coming into the world," or in- 
 carnation, " / came" represents the definite act, " I have come'''' the 
 continuous and present relation. But other explanations are some- 
 times called for by Johannine use, which presents the following 
 paradoxical characteristics 2 . 
 
 tov avTayu)vi.(TT7]i> (i.e. Satan) eirl ttjv itclXtju 77 tov TrpoSdTrjv eirl t6 diaKOvr/crai rrj 
 auTrjpiu) KOfffxit) io-ofx4vri oiKovo/xlg., rjv ovk ^TL...fie\\eiv ovde (3pa5vveiv dXX' 8o~rj 
 dvva/j-LS Taxvveiv ijf)e\ev. These last words favour the view taken elsewhere that 
 to-xiov means, not "quickly," but " more quickly" (1918, 2554 b — e). 
 
 [2439 (v) 6] The nearest approach to a judicial imperative in the Synoptists 
 would be, if the text were correct, Mt. xxiii. 32 Kal v/xds irXrjpwo-aTe : but W.H. 
 marg. gives TrXrjpibo-ere with B and e, and this reading is now supported by SS. 
 Alford suggests that the v. r. wXripwo-eTe and eTrX^poxrare arose from the "im- 
 perative not being understood." But it is not more difficult to understand than 
 X(''crare above, for which there is no v. r. Moreover the position of v/xets before 
 the imperative (without antithesis as in Mt. vii. 12 or yu.77 as in Lk. xii. 29 etc.) is 
 somewhat suspicious. 
 
 [2439 (v) c] In viii. 38 /cat v/xeh ovv a TjKovo-aTe irapa tov 7rarp6? TroulTe, one of 
 several renderings of that difficult passage takes iroteiTe as imperative, but reasons 
 have been given (2194 c) for taking it as indicative. 
 
 1 [2440 «] Comp. xviii. 20 eyth irappriaia \e\a\rjKa ti^ Kb<j(iqi...wavTOTe edlda^a 
 iv crvvayuyy...(v Kpvwru i\6.\t]cra ovtev, where the " continuous and present 
 relation'''' comes first, "/ have spoken openly"; and this is supported by appeal 
 to the past, "/ever taught" "Not once spake /in secret." 
 
 2 [2440$] On iv. 3 airrfkOev ttlxKlv els ttjv Ta\i\aiav, Blass (p. 192) justly says 
 that the aorist "is at least remarkable, since the aorist denotes the journey as 
 completed...." On this, and on the treatment of the passage in the Diatessaron, 
 see 2635 (i). 
 
 323 21—2 
 
[2441] TENSE 
 
 [2441] On the one hand John uses the aorist where English 
 would use the perfect, e.g. x. 32 "many good works have I shelved 
 (&>£i£a) you," xii. 28 " / have both glorified (eod£ao-a) it and will 
 glorify it again," xiii. 14 "If I have washed (evuj/a) your feet," xiii. 18 
 " I know whom / have chosen (R.V. marg. chose) (tteXctdw)," x\u. 34 
 "As / have loved (rjydTrrjo-a) you," xv. 15 "/ have made known 
 (iyvupiaa) to you," xx. 2 " They have taken away (rjpav)...they have 
 laid (W-qkclv) him 1 ," xxi. 10 "Bring of the fish that ye have now 
 caught (cTrtaWre)." These aorists may be explained in part because 
 Greek does not use the perfect so frequently as in English to denote 
 a recently completed action, but in part by the fact that the Greek 
 perfects of these particular verbs are comparatively seldom used, and 
 John, having no special reason for laying stress on the completion of 
 the action, may prefer the more usual form 2 . 
 
 [2442] On the other hand John uses the perfect where we might 
 have expected the aorist, or the present, e.g. v. 45 " Moses, in whom 
 
 1 Yet comp. xi. 34 redelKare. 
 
 2 [2441a] The Greeks seem to have avoided several active perfects, e.g. of 
 KTifa, optfw, £t)t4u, yvwpl'Cw, somewhat as we might avoid the perf. of "awake" — 
 doubting between "have awaked" and "have awoken" (2747—53). The rarity of 
 a suitable perfect may explain the aorist in vi. 70 (A.V.) "Have not / chosen you?," 
 but there R.V. has " Did not I choose!" without alternative, as also in xv. 16—19, 
 where A.V. has " Ye have not chosen me but / have chosen you... / have chosen 
 you out of the world." I do not understand why R.V. txt adopts "have chosen" 
 (Westc. "chose") in xiii. 18 alone (" I know whom I have chosen"). "Have," 
 if denoting recent choice, would seem most appropriate to vi. 70. 
 
 [2441 b] The aorist of (n\eyofj.ai is applied to God or Christ in Mk xiii. 20 
 dia tovs inXeKTous oOs e|eX<^aro (Mt. xxiv. 22 om. ovs <;£., Lk. diff.), Lk. vi. 13 
 tKXesd/u.eeos aTr' aurwu dw5eK<x (Mk-Mt. diff.). 'E^X^aro occurs in I Cor. i. 27 
 (bis), 28, Jas ii. 5, to describe God as choosing the poor and despised, and 
 Eph. i. 4 has Kadws i&\ti,a.To r)ixa% iv avry irpb /cara/3oX??s k6u)mov. In Acts, it 
 refers to the choosing of apostles or missionaries in i. 2, 24, vi. 5, xv. 7, 22, 25 etc., 
 and only once (xiii. 17) to God's choosing the "fathers" of Israel. 
 
 [2441 c] It seems clear that Mk xiii. 20 e£e\^a.TO means "chose," em- 
 phatically, implying final or irrevocable election or something of the kind. 
 This is also implied in Mk xiii. 22, Mt. xxiv. 24 ei bwarbv (Mt. + nal) tovs 
 (kXcktovs (which suggests that "the elect" could not possibly be led finally 
 astray) and in Mt. xxii. 14 " many are called but few chosen." Hut Lk. omits 
 all this, as well as (Mk xiii. 27, Mt. xxiv. 31) the gathering of the " elect." 
 
 [2441 </] Jn agrees with Lk. in applying tKX^aadai once to the choice of 
 :i].wstles, but he adds words that destroy the notion of finality, vi. 70 "Have I 
 nol I just J chosen (2254) you the twelve, and one of you is a devil ?" < m the other 
 hand, later on, he appears to exclude Judas, and to imply a different, spiritual, 
 and final election in \iii. 1* "1 know whom / chose " following the words (xiii. u) 
 "Ye are not all clean" (comp. xv. 16, 19). 
 
 3 2 4 
 
AORIST INDICATIVE [2443] 
 
 ye have hoped (rjX-n-LKaTe)," xv. 24 "They have seen and have hated 
 both me and my Father," xvi. 27 "The father loveth (</>iA.ci) you 
 because ye have loved (7re4>iXiJKaTe) me and have believed t\\a.t. . .," vi. 69 
 " We ha7>e believed (7r€7rto-T€i;Ka i u.ei/)...that thou art the Holy One of 
 God." In modern English, " I have believed in him," if the emphasis 
 is laid on "have," may mean " I have believed in him, in times past, 
 or up to the present time, but I do so no longer." In John the 
 context clearly implies persistent belief, and the same applies to the 
 other instances. 
 
 [2443] How is this Johannine use to be explained ? Probably 
 as a modification of the LXX rendering of the Hebrew perfect in 
 cases where it implies persistence. The Hebrew perfect is frequently 
 used with verbs of "believing," "hoping," "hating," and "loving," 
 to represent a feeling continued from the past into the present. But 
 LXX inadequately renders this almost always by the aorist. Thus 
 St Paul quotes the Psalms "/ have believed (LXX i-trio-revo-a) 
 therefore I spake," and continues, " We also believe therefore also we 
 speak," thus applying the Hebrew perfect (LXX aorist) to himself in 
 the present tense 1 . In that Psalm, A.V. has "7 believed" and R.V. 
 txt " 1 believe" (marg. " I believed") ; but elsewhere the two agree in 
 the perfect (Ps. cxix. 66) u I have believed in thy commandments." 
 So when the Psalmist repeatedly says to God, " I have hoped (yX-n-iaa) 
 in thee, or in thy mercy," the meaning (however it may be rendered 
 in English) is " I steadfastly hope" or "my hope is fixed 2 ." The 
 aorist " I hated (ifxlarjaa) " occurs several times in the Psalms, 
 variously translated by R.V. and A.V. ; and always in the sense of 
 "steadfastly hating." In Proverbs, it is uttered by the Wisdom of 
 God (Prov. viii. 13) "Pride and arrogancy...do I hate," and there 
 LXX has the perfect ^jxtcnqKa, but Symmachus, Theodotion, and 
 "another," have the aorist. The perfect also occurs in Judges 
 xiv. 16 "only hast thou hated me (/xe/iicr^Kas) and hast not loved me 
 (rjya.Trrja-a%, but A Tjya.TT^Ka';)," where R.V. has " Thou dost but hate 
 me and lovest me not 3 ." In all these cases, it is quite clear that the 
 
 1 2 Cor. iv. 13 quoting Ps. cxvi. 10. 
 
 - [2443 a] "H\7Ticra in the Psalms = Ps. vii. i, xvi. i (R.V. and A.V.) " I do put 
 my trust," xiii. 5 (R.V. and A.V.) "I have trusted," xxxi. 1, 6, 14 (R.V. and A.V.) 
 "Ido put my trust," "trust," "trusted" etc. 
 
 3 [2443(6] The Heb. perf., LXX aorist of /xamj/ = Ps. xxvi. 5 A.V. perf., R.V. 
 pres., xlv. 7 A.V. pres., R.V. perf. : in Ps. v. 5, 1. 1 7, cxix. 104, 1 13, 128, exxxix. 2 1, 
 R.V. and A.V. agree in having present. It is interesting to note that in Heb. i. 9, 
 
 325 
 
[2444] TENSE 
 
 " hate " described by the Hebrew perfect is a permanent and intense 
 feeling ; and the same statement applies to the other verbs. Nothing 
 like this usage can be alleged from Greek literature, and the coin- 
 cidence of Hebrew usage as to these particular verbs makes it 
 a reasonable conclusion that a Hebrew origin must explain the 
 Johannine use of them. 
 
 [2444] In another Hebraic use of the perfect the speaker regards 
 a future action as already accomplished or, as we say, " as good as 
 done." This is particularly common with the verb "give," e.g. in 
 Genesis, in promises made by God, " / have given you every herb," 
 "Unto thy seed have I given (LXX, / will give) this land,"' but also 
 made by Ephron " / have given thee the field... / have given. ..I have 
 given..." and by Abraham, in return, " I have given thee money," 
 where R.V. has thrice "give" and once "will give" and LXX has 
 Si'Sw/ai and Sc'oWa or omissions 1 . This Hebraic idiom may have 
 suggested the Johannine phrase "all that thou hast given me (or, hast 
 given him)" so frequently used (1921, 2454 — 5) to denote the future 
 Church. It might also explain xvii. 18 "Even as thou didst send me 
 into the world, so I also sent them into the world." Here the aorist 
 is used in both cases, and " I sent " has been taken by some as 
 
 quoting Ps. xlv. 7 rjya.Tryj(Tas...(/jLicTr]aas..., R.V. — -which usually renders aorists as 
 aorists— follows A.V. in the perfect, "thou hast loved... and [hast] hated." 
 
 [2443c] This Hebraic "Aorist of Persistence" in LXX is quite different from 
 (a) the Greek aorist used to describe what happened before now and will happen 
 again, i.e. the aorist of experience or habit. It is also different from (b) the Greek 
 use of (Jelf §403. 1) ewfiveaa., wapyveaa, rjveaa, airtirrvcra, qlfioj^a, ide^dfj.^f, Zyvuv. 
 Jelf explains these as "referring to a thought supposed to have been long and 
 firmly conceived in the speaker's breast." But in many cases they refer simply to 
 what is "before," and sometimes only "<z moment before" or "a moment ago," as 
 in Kurip. Med. 63 — 4, where, in answer to the nurse's appeal ("What dost thou 
 mean? Do not begrudge to tell me?") the old servant replies "Nothing. / 
 changed my mind [ji/st this moment'] about even what I had said before {OvSiv, 
 fieTtyvw Kai to. irpbad' dprjfiiva)." So drrlTrrva-a may mean "/ spat at [your 
 words as soon as they were uttered] " etc. In no instance probably do these aorists 
 contain any notion of anything " long and firm." Goodwin {Moods and '/'cases § 60) 
 renders Aristoph. Eq. 696 "H<70r?i/ airei\als, (yi\a<ra \po\oKO/uTrlais, "/aw amused... 
 / cannot help laughing," but the English past would there express the sense better 
 '• / was amused.../ could not but laugh," as soon as you opened your mouth. 
 So r)aOr)v in \u/>. 174, 1240. And that is the meaning — though perhaps idiomatic 
 English will hardly allow the past tense— in Soph. Electr. 668 "/ welcomed 
 {iSf^d/xrjv) your [well-omened] utterance [as soon as uttered]." 
 
 1 [2444<zJ lien. i. 29 otduKa, xv. 18 Suntw, xxiii. 11 om., Sldwfii, 5t8wKa, 
 xxiii. 13 om, 
 
 326 
 
AORIST INDICATIVE [2446] 
 
 referring to the previous mission of the Apostles into Palestine. 
 But it is more consonant with the high tone and Hebraic thought of 
 the context to suppose that the Lord, after the manner of Hebrew- 
 prophets, mentions the ordained future " sending " into the world at 
 large (not Palestine merely) as already past. 
 
 [2445] In xv. 6 (lit.) " If a man be not abiding (/xeVr?) in me — 
 [behold] he was cast (ifiXijdrj) outside... and was withered," the reader 
 is asked as it were to pause after the statement of the conditional 
 " not abiding." Then he looks back and — the branch " has been 
 cast out." This is not like the Greek instantaneous aorists above 
 mentioned (2443 c), all of which are in the first person. Probably 
 it springs from Hebrew literature, which regards the sweeping away 
 of things evil as an act of Jehovah so speedy that it is past before 
 there is time to speak of it as future or present : " A thousand years 
 in thy sight are but as yesterday ivhen it is past, and as a watch in the 
 night. Thou hast carried them away as with a flood}." The most 
 conspicuous instance of this is in Isaiah's prophecy (Is. xl. 6 — 8 
 LXX, (lit.)) "All flesh [is as] grass... the grass was dried up and the 
 flower fell away... but the word of our God abideth for ever," which 
 has been reproduced in the Epistle of St James with aorists thus, 
 " Like the flower of the grass he shall pass away. For the sun rose 
 up (avereiXev) with the scorching wind and dried up (e^'pavev) the 
 grass and its flower fell away and the fair show of its countenance 
 perished (aTrwA-cro) 2 ." In the light of these passages, and of the above- 
 mentioned (2443) instances of Hebrew influence on Johannine tense 
 construction, i^\y]8r] appears to be a Hebraic, not a Greek, 
 instantaneous aorist. But see 2754 — 5. 
 
 [2446] According to different contexts, the aorist of the same 
 verb may have very different meanings. For example, in xv. 8, 
 iv Toy™ €So£ao-#i7 6 -rraTtjp /jlov appears to mean (2393) " Herein 
 [namely, by your abiding in me, the Vine] was my Father glorified," 
 
 1 Ps. xc. 5, Sym. ws Karaiyis i^erlva^as clvtous. 
 
 2 [2445 a] Jas. i. n, comp. Jas. i. 24, 1 Pet. i. 24. Some excellent Greek 
 scholars call these aorists "gnomic," on which see 2754—5. In view of the 
 Hebrew origin of the quotations, the Hebrew use of the past tense, and the 
 corresponding LXX use of the aorist, Hebrew thought seems to suggest the best 
 explanation of the aorists in Jas. and Pet. "Gnomic" implies an inference of 
 regularity: but the context in these Epistles calls attention to rapidity. It will 
 be found, however, that an aorist, even in the 3rd pers., when in apodosis, some- 
 times expresses instantaneousness in non-Hebraic Gk. Hence xv. 6 may be 
 independent of Hebrew influence. But it is certainly not "gnomic." 
 
 327 
 
[2447] TENSE 
 
 and the reference is perhaps to the definite fact that when one 
 " branch," Judas, fell away from the Vine, the rest abode in it, or else 
 it is to their whole past "abiding." But in xiii. 31 Nw eSogdaOr) 
 6 vto? t. di'OpwTrov k. 6 6e6s i&o£d<r9r) iv cii'to), there may be a twofold 
 meaning. The "glorifying" certainly refers to the sacrifice of the 
 Son upon the Cross, and that is future, and the aorist, if referring 
 solely to that, would be the Hebraic aorist of prophetic anticipation 
 above mentioned (2444 — 5). But it might also refer to the "going 
 out" of Judas, just mentioned, and to the resignation of the Son 
 to the treachery that had (xiii. 21) "troubled" Him "in the spirit,'"' 
 so that He made no further attempt to hinder it. In that case 
 the tense would refer to what has just passed, " Now at last has the 
 Son of man been glorified," because the spiritual act had taken 
 place. This latter seems to be the primary meaning. 
 
 [2447] In xv. 15 "all things that / heard ("jKovaa) from my 
 Father (R.V.) I have made known (iyvwpi<ra) unto you," the R.V. is 
 justified — so far as grammar is concerned — in rendering the two 
 aorists differently, because of the rarity or non-existence (2441 a) of 
 the perfect of the latter verb, whereas forms of aKiJKoa are frequent 
 if we include instances in the Epistle. But the meaning of iyvwpura 
 must depend on the context, which represents Jesus as " no longer'''' 
 calling the disciples "servants" because He has now revealed to 
 them the things that He "heard from the Father." This seems 
 to refer to the recent sign of the Washing of Feet and to the 
 doctrine of " loving " as being the sign of discipleship. If so, the 
 meaning may be, " That which I heard from my Father when I came 
 into the world to do His will / made known to yon just now in the 
 Washing of Feet." 
 
 [2448] In order to distinguish between the aorist and perfect of 
 yivwKw it is well, in many passages of John, to render the verb 
 "recognise," thus, xvi. 3 "These things they will do because they did 
 not recognise {pw tyvwcrav) the Father nor me," xvii. 7 — S "Now [at 
 last] (vvv, 1719/) have they recognised (ZyvioKav) that all things as 
 many as thou didst give me are from thee, because., .and they 
 recognised (tyvuicrav) truly that I came forth from thee." In the 
 second passage, the perfect describes the present completed result of 
 the previous definite recognition 1 . In xvi. 3, R.V. lias "they have 
 
 1 |2448</| SS has "And now I know that all what thou hast given me is from 
 thyself, because the words that thou didsl give to me 1 have given to them, and 
 
 328 
 
AORIST INDICATIVE ' [2449J 
 
 not knozvn" : but the aorist should mean " they did not recognise" 
 either Father or Son, when the Son announced the Father to 
 them. 
 
 [2449] In viii. 29 "And he that sent me is with me : he did not 
 leave me (R.V. hath not left me) (ovk d^rJKev fxe) alone," the aorist (if 
 not used as a perfect (2441) for the rare a<£euca) would mean that the 
 Father when He sent (aorist) the Son into the world did not leave 
 Him alone. R.V. has " hath not left me alone," and some have 
 taken these words with the following ones, " because I do always the 
 things that are pleasing to him," as though the Father's presence, 
 throughout the life of the Son on earth, has been the spiritual reward 
 or spiritual consequence of the Son's conduct ("The Father has been 
 with me because I have done right "). But on means more probably 
 (2178) " [I say this] because," introducing the ground of the state- 
 ment : " The Father when He sent me hither did not deprive me of 
 His presence. [I have a right to say this] because I do such deeds 
 as could not be done without His presence 1 ." 
 
 they have received them from me and they have known truly...," and X has 
 Zyvuv for isyvwKav. Some MSS. support Chrys. in reading 'tyvwaav for gyvwKai>, 
 and one or two have iyvwuaaiv. Several mss. omit teal Zyvwaav. The textual 
 variations of tyvuKav are easily explained as resulting from an original erNCOKA 
 and from a failure to perceive the shade of difference indicated by the perfect and 
 the aorist: — "They are now at last grounded in recognit ion... because I have 
 definitely given them the regenerating words of life and they [at once] received 
 them and [at once] recognised in truth that I came forth from thee." That is to 
 say, the present steadfastness of the disciples arises not only from the word of Christ 
 but also from a certain affinity between that word and the disciples, which affinity 
 caused them to receive it at once with a certain amount of recognition. Comp. i. 1 2 
 6aoi 8£ Fka(3oi> aiiTou, and note the immediate "reception" of Christ by Andrew 
 and his companion and their brethren and successors. 
 
 1 [2449 a] In xii. 40 "He hath blinded (reTiKpXuKev) their eyes and he 
 hardened (iirdipuoev) their heart," irwpbw represents Isaiah's word (vi. 10) " make 
 fat," e-rraxuvdr), and means not "make stiff" oicK-qpiivu, but "make callous." Buhl 
 gives no other instance of Ileb. " make fat" applied to "heart"; and it was 
 very natural that St Paid in w riling to the Romans (Rom. xi. 7 oi 5e Xonrol 
 ewupud-qaav) and Corinthians (2 Cor. iii. 14 twup<l)d-q to. vorip-ara avrQv) should use 
 TrwpSco instead of iraxvvu} in alluding to this famous passage — which describes the 
 "heart" of Israel as "hardened" in the sense of "made callous" although a 
 remnant (Is. vi. 13) was to be faithful. Ilwp6w is used by Mk (vi. 52, viii. 17) 
 alone elsewhere in N.T. Its occurrence there, and in Hermas (Mand. iv. 2. 1, 
 xii. 4. 4), and always applied to "the heart," suggests that the rare phrase " make 
 the heart callous" found its way into the Roman Church — and thence into the 
 works of Mark and Hermas which have Latin characteristics — through St Paul's 
 Epistle to the Romans. The mention of " blindness " in the context of Isaiah 
 
 329 
 

 [2450] TENSE 
 
 (2) Aorist of special Verbs 1 
 
 (a) 'Axoy'co 
 
 [2450] 'Akovo} in the Fourth Gospel may be illustrated by olkovu) 
 in the Epistle, where aKrjKoa/xev occurs thrice at the beginning to 
 denote the sum total of the doctrine of Christ possessed by the 
 writers, who " have heard" that which was from the beginning; and 
 the same notion of completeness and satisfaction appears in the 
 saying of the Samaritans, " We ourselves have heard and know that 
 this is truly the Saviour of the world 2 ." 'HKovo-are occurs five times 
 in the Epistle in connexion with the definite word " heard " by the 
 readers at the beginning of their Christian profession ("from the 
 beginning" being thrice inserted to define the aorist). This is the 
 general distinction in the Epistle 3 . 
 
 (vi. 10) and Jn xii. 40 might lead scribes to confuse irwpdu with irrjpoco "make 
 blind" (comp. Job xvii. 7 "mine eye also is dim," B-n-eirwpwvTat, AX- Treirripwi'Tai) 
 and Hesych. explains ireirwpwuivoi as i(TK\-qpuix£voi T€Tv<p\wfiivoi, but this may 
 mean that he took the verb to mean literally "hardened," and hence "hardened 
 against true impressions," which seemed equivalent to "darkened," or "blind to 
 the truth." 
 
 [2449 b] A corrector of Codex B has altered iiru>pw<rev in xii. 40 to ireirwpwKev 
 to conform it with the preceding perfect Ter6(p\wKei', and this is very natural. 
 There appears no reason for the change of tense, so far as sense is concerned. 
 Perhaps, however, Jn may have been influenced by Pauline and other traditions, 
 which described the act of God in visiting Israel with "callousness of heart" as a 
 historical fact in the past. Rom. xi. 7 — 8 says "That which Israel seeketh after, 
 this it obtained (aorist) not (ovk iirirvxev), but the election obtained (aorist) ; but 
 the rest were made callous (aorist) (iirupwd-qaav), even as it is written, God gave 
 (aorist) (t'Savcee) them a spirit of torpor, eyes that they should not see...," and I. XX 
 also has the aorist in Deut. xxix. 4 " The Lord gave not unto you a heart to know 
 and eyes to see and ears to hear. ..[no, not] unto this day." As Jn xii. 40 deviates 
 from the Ileb. and from the LXX, there are special reasons for thinking that the 
 writer may have been influenced by Christian tradition, perhaps oral, which 
 associated the aorist with the "callousness of heart" inflicted on Israel, as by a 
 divine decree, at the time of the Incarnation. 
 
 1 On the aorist of ay aw du, see 1744 (iv) foil. - 1 Jn i. 1, 3, 5, Jn iv. 42. 
 
 3 [2450 a] There is an apparent inconsistency in 1 Jn ii. i!S Kadics ijKovaaTt otl 
 avrlxptcTTos fy>x era '» ' v - 3 tovt6 temv rb rod 6.vtlxpL<ttov 6 aKT)K6are 6'n ZpxeTat. 
 Bui the firmer may be rendered "Even as ye were taught at the beginning." 
 The latter may be intended to include a reference to the former: "This is that 
 doctrine of Antichrist as to whom ye have heard above and on many other occasions 
 that he must needs come." Kafluij rjKovcaTe air' apxys occurs also in 1 Jn 6. In 
 Jn wiii. 21 tpuiTT)<Tov t. aK7)Ko6ras means "ask those who hare regularly heard me." 
 But with oil the perfect means (Rom. xv. 21 quoting Is. lii. 15) "have not [up to 
 this time] heard," and comp. Jn v. 37 otfre <p<i}vr)v avrov ttJ}ttot€ aKrjKbare (2764). 
 
 330 
 
AORIST INDICATIVE [2452] 
 
 [2451] 'Akovu in the Fourth Gospel is in the aorist when Christ 
 describes Himself, or is described, as " hearing " from the Father 1 : 
 and this is the case even when " heard " is parallel to " hath seen " as 
 in iii. 32 "That which he hath seen (ewpaKev) and [that which he] 
 heard] (k. rjKovo-tv) this he testifieth." The explanation here is 
 complicated by the fact that (apart from forms of o<f>8r}vai, o\pop.at etc.) 
 the perfect of 6pav is the only part of the verb used by John. He 
 might therefore conceivably use the perfect of opav, concerning 
 spiritual vision, parallel to the aorist of another verb. But the two 
 tenses may be explained as meaning " that which the Son hath seen 
 [from the beginning], and that message which He heard [when He 
 came down from the Father to save mankind]." So, whereas 
 witnesses in Mark say concerning Jesus, " We heard him say," 
 witnesses in the Acts say concerning Stephen, " We have heard him 
 say." In the former, the meaning is " we heard on one occasion" or, 
 " tve heard this definite statement 1 ''; in the latter, " we have repeatedly 
 heard him say " words to this effect, as is shewn by the context 2 . 
 
 [2452] In xi. 41 " Father, I give thanks to thee that thou didst 
 hear me (r)Kovo~ds p-ov)," uttered at the grave of Lazarus, the aorist 
 should refer to some definite prayer, and ought not to mean " thou 
 hast always heard me." Origen and Chrysostom both emphasize the 
 fact that no prayer has been mentioned as preceding ; and the latter 
 seems to say that there was no real prayer, " Why," he asks, " did He 
 even assume the appearatice of praying (twos Se eveKev kcu evxrjs o"xw a 
 avc'Aa/Stv;) 3 ?" But Origen suggests that a prayer, rising in Christ's 
 mind and not yet uttered, was anticipated by the Father, who sent an 
 answer, " It is fulfilled," into the heart of the Son. Some might 
 urge — and with logic on their side — that the prayer must have been 
 uttered some days before, when Jesus first heard " He whom thou 
 lovest is sick " and replied (xi. 4) " This sickness is not unto death 
 but for the glory of God, in order that the Son of God may 
 
 1 iii. 32, viii. 26, 40, xv. 15. 
 
 2 [2451a] Mk xiv. 58 ijfids -qKoinrafiev clutov X^yofTos, Acts vi. n — 13 cLK-rjKoa/uLev 
 avTov XclXovvtos p-q/xara ^\da<pt]fxa ets M. k. top debv...ov waverai XaXQv pfinaTO. Kara 
 TouTowov t. dylov [tovtov] k. t. v6fxov, aK7)Kt>a.fiev yap clutov XeyovTos 
 
 3 [2452 a] See the whole context, which shews the influence of controversial 
 considerations: " Let ks therefore ask the heretic, 'Did He receive the [necessary] 
 impetus (powrjv) from the prayer and [thus] raise up the dead? How then was He 
 wont to do the other works [of His] without prayer?" — and he quotes Christ's 
 words of authority ' I will, be thou clean ' etc. 
 
 331 
 
[2453] TENSE 
 
 be glorified through it." But the evangelist may intend to convey to 
 his readers the impression that, although it was revealed to the Son 
 from the first that the sickness would in some way prove to be " not 
 unto death," He nevertheless waited from day to day for further 
 revelation of the Father's will, and that the actual revivification was 
 not effected without an effort on the part of the Son, at the time 
 when He "wept" and "troubled Himself" on His way to the tomb. 
 In any case John — who neither describes Jesus as using the word 
 "pray," nor himself speaks of Him as "■praying" — here teaches the 
 lesson that prayer may be sometimes most efficacious, and perfectly 
 definite, when not expressed in words 1 . 
 
 (y3) 'ArrocTeAAco 
 
 [2453] 'A7rocrreAAaj is mostly (15 times) in the aorist, when 
 applied to God as sending Christ, but twice in the perfect, v. 36 t<x 
 
 epya a 8e8u>Kev /xol. ../j,apTvpet. . .otl o Tva-rqp /xe direaTaXKev, and XX. 2 1 
 KaOw<; d7r€trraAK€ fxe 6 Trarqp, Kayw TrepLTrw v/ias. In the former, the 
 perfect is perhaps used for parallelism with the preceding perfect 
 Se'oWei/. In the latter, the mission of the Son on earth, being 
 completed or perfected, is appropriately referred to in the complete 
 or perfect tense. 
 
 (7) AiAcomi 
 
 [2454] In the Epistle, SYSw/ai is used in the aorist to denote 
 the gifts or commandments given to believers at the commencement 
 of their Christian life ; in the perfect, to denote the same gifts when 
 regarded as present possessions. Compare " from the Spirit, which 
 he gave us," with "because he hath given us of his Spirit 2 ." In the 
 Gospel, a corresponding distinction is generally made between 
 the aorist and the perfect with reference to Christ. The aorist 
 usually describes gifts regarded as given by the Father to the Son on 
 His coming into the world to proclaim the Gospel; the perfect 
 
 1 [2452 /'j Origen (Iluet ii. 347) quotes Is. lviii. 9 "While thou art still 
 speaking I will say, lo, I am present," and argues that if Jehovah says this about 
 mere men, He would say about the Lord "Before thou speakest, I will say, Lo, 
 1 am here.*' He does not quote Is. lxv. 24 " And it shall come to pass that, before 
 they cry, I will answer" where "cry" is KeKpd^aL, a word somewhat resembling 
 the remarkable word enpati-yaatv in J 11 xi. 43. Possibly, "they" was an obstacle. 
 
 2 [2464rtJ 1 Jn iii. 24 (5<i>Kei>, iv. 13 oidwuev. Comp. 1 |n iii. 13 Katfus IdiOKtv 
 ivTo\y)v rituf : and v. 1 1 faqv aiwviov Hdwxev 6 Oebs rifuv, with iii. r idere irorani-\v 
 ayair-qv blbwutv rifxtv, v. 20 ...rJKfi, Kai d(5wKti> ij/xii> 5idi>ota.v. These are all the 
 instances of aorist and perfect in the Epistle. 
 
 332 
 
AORIST INDICATIVE [2455] 
 
 describes gifts regarded as having been given to the Son and as now- 
 belonging to Him. More particularly, the future Church is 
 frequently mentioned as "all that thou hast given me" as though the 
 Son placed Himself in the future and looked back upon the Church 
 as a completed gift. But from a different point of view the collection 
 of faithful believers may be regarded as a gift made to the Son 
 definitely at the Incarnation, and might be called "those whom (or, 
 all that) thou gavest me." 
 
 [2455] The distinction is illustrated by xvii. 6 — 9 " I manifested 
 thy name to the men that thou gavest me out of the world. Thine 
 they were and thou gavest them to me... (9) I ask not in behalf 
 of the world but in behalf of those whom thou hast given me." In 
 the opening of the Last Prayer (xvii. 1- — 2) the Church is called 
 " all that thou hast given him," but the aorist is used in the words 
 " As thou gavest him authority." Towards the end of the Prayer the 
 aorist is almost, if not entirely, superseded by the perfect, because 
 the mind of Christ is fixed on the completion of God's gifts. But 
 perhaps the aorist is to be read in xvii. 24 " that they may behold 
 the glory that thou gavest me (W.H. marg. coWas, but txt o"e'6Was) 
 because thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world." The 
 previous context says (xvii. 22) "The glory that thou hast given to 
 me I have given to them, in order that they may be one." Scribes 
 would, therefore, be tempted to conform xvii. 24 to xvii. 22. B\it 
 xvii. 22 may mean "the glory that thou hast given me [on earth] so as 
 to shew forth the unity between the Father and the Son," whereas 
 xvii. 24 may mean " the glory that thou gavest me [in the beginning']" 
 which is explained by "for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the 
 world 1 :' On itav o S £ '8<oKa S , see 2740 foil. 
 
 1 [2455 a] B has £5w/cas here. AeduKev and Zduicev freq. occur as v.r. : see 
 vi. 32, vii. 19, xiii. 15 (Tisch. 5(5uk<x, but W.H. £5w/cct without alt.), xvii. 7, 8, 24. 
 In vi. 32 ov M. iSdiKev (marg. dtduiKev) vpuv rbv aprov ex r. ovpavov the aorist would 
 mean that the bread given on that historic occasion was not the real and true 
 bread ; the perfect would mean "M. has never given you." It follows a quotation 
 (vi. 31) dpTOv €K t. ovpavov ibunev avrols (payelv, from Ps. lxxviii. 24. In vii. 19 
 ovM. ZdwKtv (marg. deduxev) v/xiv rbv vbp.ov ; the aorist would mean "Did not M. 
 give you the Law from Mount Sinai?" the perfect, in effect, " Have you not the 
 Law, given you by Moses?" To these and many other passages Lightfoot's 
 explanation (2440) applies: the aorist describes a "definite act," the perfect a 
 "continuous and present relation." With ov, the aorist means "not, on a single 
 occasion " ; the perfect "not, up to this time" 
 
 333 
 
[2456] TENSE 
 
 (8) ElrroN 
 
 [2456] Et7rc generally introduces longer and more weighty 
 utterances of Christ than those introduced by the historic present 
 Aeyet. In dialogue between Christ and a single person, ei7re very 
 rarely introduces His words as compared with Ae'yei. The former is 
 never thus used alone (i.e. without aVcKpt^ kou) in dialogue, except 
 in a few cases of momentous utterance, six of which are in narratives 
 of miracles 1 . 
 
 (e) "EpyoMAi and e2ep)(OMAi 
 
 [2457] "Ep^o/xai and e^epxo/xai are used for the most part in the 
 aorist (1637) to describe the Son as coming (or being sent) from the 
 Father, but in the perfect to describe His having arrived in the world. 
 , E£e\i]kv0a never occurs in any context, but iXr/XvOa occurs three 
 times 2 with ets tov koct/xov, and once as a sequel to i£r}\6ov thus, 
 viii. 42 " / came forth from God and am come (t]ku) ; for indeed 
 / have not come (e\rj\vOa) from myself, but he sent me." In all 
 cases the aorist points to the definite "coming" of the Incarnation. 
 On the curious contrast (viii. 14) between "whence I came" and 
 " whence I come? see 2482, 2490. 
 
 (£) MeN03 
 
 [2458] MtVw, in a past tense, is used literally of persons re- 
 maining in a place in six instances, always in the aorist except x. 40 
 W.H. txt e/Acvev, marg. l/xctvev. In four of the six instances (i. 39, 
 ii. 12, iv. 40, xi. 6) the aorist is accompanied by a mention of the 
 " days," but not in vii. 9 and x. 40. The explanation of the imper- 
 fect in x. 40 may be that the writer means " he stayed on there [i.e. 
 stayed for some time]" and the context ("many came... and many 
 
 1 [2456 a] In i. 42 (in the calling of Cephas), iv. 48 (to the nobleman before 
 healing his son), v. 14 (to the impotent man after his being healed), ix. 7, 35, 37 
 (to the man bom blind, "Go, wash," "Dost thou believe," "He that speaketh 
 with thee is he"), xi. 25 (to Martha, "I am the resurrection and the life"), 
 xii. 7 (to Judas, about keeping the ointment for "embalming"), xviii. 1 1 (to Peter, 
 "Put up thy sword"). FAwe, followed by Udrep, is also used in xvii. 1 (the 
 Prayer to the Father) and, without Udrep, in xix. 30 ("It is finished"). Atyei on 
 the other hand introduces words of Jesus in dialogue no less than six times in 
 three verses in xxi. 15 — 17. In Lk. ix. 58 — 62 dire occurs no less than four times 
 in sayings of Jesus to individuals, and it is his regular word in such cases, comp. 
 Lk. vi. S, io, vii. 43 — 50. 
 
 2 xii. 46, xvi. 28, xviii. 37. 
 
 334 
 
AORIST INDICATIVE [2461] 
 
 believed on him there") favours this view. In i. 32 " I have beheld 
 the Spirit descending... and it abode (kcu e/xeivev) upon him" (where 
 N, b, and e have "and abiding") the meaning is "it abode once 
 for all." 
 
 (3) Aorist for English Pluperfect 
 
 [2459] The aorist, e.g. eTroirjae, if preceded (a) by rjKovaav on, or 
 (b) by ws ("when"), is sometimes rendered "he had done" {"they 
 heard that he had done" " when he had done "). Thus (a) iv. 1 " the 
 Lord knew how that the Pharisees had heard (rJKovcrav)," iv. 50 "the 
 man believed the word that Jesus (A.V.) had spoken (R.V. spake) 
 (eiTTcj/)," ix. 35 "Jesus heard that they had cast (i$efiakov) him out"; 
 (b) ii. 9 "When the ruler of the feast (A.V.) had tasted (R.V. tasted) 
 (eyevaaTo)." 
 
 [2460] Quite distinct from these is the use of the aorist to mean 
 "he [previously] did" — equivalent to "had previously done " — intro- 
 ducing a mention of something that, in chronological order, should 
 have been mentioned before, e.g. v. 13 "But he that had been healed 
 knew not who it was : for Jesus [previously] conveyed himself away 
 (i^evevo-ev)," R.V. and A.V. " had conveyed himself away." This also 
 appears to be the best rendering of rj\8ov (and perhaps of eVoiTjo-ev) 
 in iv. 45 "When therefore he came to Galilee the Galilaeans received 
 him, having seen all that he had done (iiroLrjcrev) in the Feast : for 
 they also themselves had come (rj\6ov) to the Feast " — where R.V. 
 and A.V. have "went," but the Latin versions have the pluperfect 1 . 
 
 [2461] The English pluperfect is perhaps intended in ii. 1 — 2 
 "There was a marriage in Cana...and the mother of Jesus was (rjv) 
 there. Now there had been invited also Jesus (eKXijOr) SI kcu 6 'I.) and 
 his disciples to the wedding 2 ." So, after describing the Entry into 
 
 1 [2460 a] So, too, has the Syriac (Burk.). The best instance of this — which 
 might be called the aorist of " previousness " or "afterthought" — is Mk vi. 17 
 (sim. Mt. xiv. 3) eKpar-qaev "had laid hold of," describing Herod's arrest of the 
 Baptist, which had occurred long before. Lk. iii. 19 — 20 mentions it much 
 earlier. 
 
 '-' [2461a] "Vocatus erat" is also read by a and f. Chrys. expressly reads 
 twice (after iv Kava rrjs T.) /cat eKKrid-r] 6 'I. ets robs ya/j.ovs. 'He de /cat r\ nyr-rip 
 tov T. eKei k. ot ade\<poi avrov, or, in Cramer, rji> de rj ft. rod 'I. /cat oi d.8e\<pol 
 avrou iicei. Chrys. says that the last sentence was intended to "hint (TJet'^aro)" 
 that Jesus was not invited as being a "great person" but only as an acquaintance. 
 Nonnus has XptcrTOS.^.KXijroy h\v crvvdopiros 6/j.0K\ivies re fiaOrjral Ilderes faav 
 crTotxTjSoc. 'Es eiXaTrlvriv de /cat avrr) HapOeviKT) Xptcrrolo OerjroKOS t/cero firjTrjp. 
 If eKK-rjOi) is to be rendered as an aorist, the meaning may be that the mother of 
 Jesus was staying at Cana first and that Jesus was invited thither afterwards. 
 
 335 
 
[2462] TENSE 
 
 Jerusalem and the cries of Hosanna, without mention (2756) of the 
 finding of the ass, John adds, apparently as an afterthought, xii. 14 
 " But Tesus had found an ass and sat upon it (evpwv Sc. . .kKa.Q«rev)." It is 
 possible then, grammatically, that xix. 39 fj\6ev 8k /cat Ni«oSr?/Aos might 
 mean " Now there had come also Nicodemus." The preceding words 
 are, " He [Joseph] came (rjk6ev) therefore and took his [Christ's] 
 body," and the question is whether John may mean, not that Nico- 
 demus came after Joseph's "coming," but that "he also had come" 
 to the tomb, and was waiting for Joseph, having procured the spices 
 in the hope of the success of Joseph's application to Pilate. This, at 
 all events, may be the view of Acta Pilati (B) § 11, which represents 
 Nicodemus as saying to Joseph "I am afraid... lest Pilate should be 
 enraged... But if thou wilt go alone, and beg the dead, and take Him, 
 then will I also go with thee, and help thee to do everything necessary 
 for the burial." 
 
 [2462] In xviii. 24 'A7re'crTeiA.ev...ai;TOv 6 "Avvas SeSe/ieVov 7rpos 
 Kai'a'c/>ui/, A.V. has "Now Annas had sent him bound," but the 
 correct reading, which gives ovv between aVc'o-TeiA.ei' and avrov, makes 
 this rendering impossible. The ovv has been omitted by some 
 authorities, and altered by others to 84, in order to suggest that the 
 previously mentioned examination was identical with the examination 
 described by the Synoptists as occurring before Caiaphas, which is 
 omitted in the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 (ii) Future, see Present of Prophecy 2484 foil., and ov pj 2255 
 
 (iii) Imperfect 
 
 (1) The Imperfect in general 
 
 [2463] The imperfect tense, eVoiW, may call attention to the 
 beginning of an uncompleted action (" I began to do "), or to its 
 non-completion ("I was [still] doing"), or to its repetition in an 
 incomplete series of actions (" I kept on doing," " I was in the habit 
 of doing"). With a negative, "I did not begin to do" may imply 
 " I shewed no tendency to do," and with special verbs (e.g. " / shewed 
 no tendency to help, pity, forgive ") the imperfect may imply " I would 
 not." In John, who (in striking contrast with the Synoptists) only 
 once (1674 rt) uses the verb "begin," the imperfect is frequently 
 used in many shades of meaning not briefly expressible in English. 
 
 [2464] The following passage occurs soon after an act of healing 
 Oil the sabbath. Assuming that no similar act was wrought in the 
 
IMPERFECT [2464] 
 
 interval, we cannot render IvoUi " was wont to do these things " and 
 the rendering must be "was beginning to do," thus, v. 16 — 18 "And 
 for this cause the Jews began- to-persecate (eSiWoi/) Jesus because he 
 began to do (eiroi'ci) 1 these things on the sabbath. But Jesus answered 
 them, My Father worketh even until now, and I work. For this 
 cause therefore the Jews began-to-seek (e^r/row) rather (2733 a) to kill 
 him because he was not only continuing to b?rak (or, thereby breaking) 
 (e\ve) the sabbath, but also beginning to say 2 (eXeye) [that] God [was] 
 
 his own Father " Here, at all events in the first sentence, the 
 
 evangelist seems to indicate a "beginning" to persecute, dating from 
 a special act, and perhaps "these things "means "such things as 
 this." In xii. 10 — n "the chief priests took counsel that they 
 might put Lazarus also to death because, for the sake of [seeing] him 
 (1652 b), many of the Jews were going away and were believing (vTrrjyov 
 k. hruTTtvov)" the meaning may be either that these things were 
 beginning, or that they were going on under the eves of the chief 
 priests and would go on till they were stopped. In xiii. 28 — 9 
 ovSeis eyi'w... nves yap cSokow, the meaning is, "No one [exactly] 
 understood... some were [at the time] under a vague impression V 
 
 1 R.V. "did," A.V. "had done." 
 
 2 But see 2468 b. "EXeye may = "he meant." "he was virtually saying." On 
 pdWov, not "all the more" but "rather," see 2733 a. 
 
 3 [2464 a] So Acts xii. 9 eddnei 5e opap.a pXewetv. Contrast the definite 
 though erroneous supposition implied in Mk vi. 49 g5oi;av otl <p6.vTacp.d eariv, 
 Jn xi. 13 eicelvoi Se Zdo^av 6'rt irepl r. Koifj-r/crews tov tiwvov Xiyei. 
 
 [2464/;] The imperfect of custom is illustrated by Mk xv. 6 Kara de eoprijv 
 aire'Xvev (Mt. xxvii. 15 elwdei...diroXveiv), Lk. om., Jn xviii. 39 iarw Se ffvrfideia 
 vp.7v 'iva 'iva dwoXvau vp.lv [ev~\ t<x> Trdax a - The comments of Origen (on Mt. xxvii. 
 15) and of Cyril (Cramer) make it clear that they know of no such "custom" of 
 pardoning criminals, and that they are at a loss to explain the allusion to it: nor 
 is there any historical evidence of its existence. This may explain Luke's 
 omission, ^w-qdeia occurs in N.T. only here and 1 Cor. viii. 7, xi. 16 where it 
 means an "unreasonable habit." Perh. Pilate is supposed by John to mean 
 "a practice that has sprung up through my indulgence towards you." In any 
 case, this is an instance where Lk. omits and Jn intervenes. 
 
 [2464c] Kara 5£ eopr-qv (A.V. "at [that] feast," R.V. txt "at the feast" marg. 
 "at a feast") is (like Kad' ijp.e'pav) ambiguous. The best rendering is "at feast- 
 time," which (according to context) may mean "at [the approaching] feast" 
 or "at [any] feast." SS (in Mt.) has "at every Feast" and k (in Mk) has 
 "singulis autem diebus festis" : D reads ttjv in both. The ambiguity is 
 removed (whether in accordance with fact or not) by Jn's insertion of "the 
 Passover." 
 
 A. VI. 337 22 
 
[2465] TENSE 
 
 [2465] The imperfect of " come," after the aorist of another verb, 
 and before the aorist "came," means "began to come," or "were 
 coming," as follows, iv. 30 — 40 " They {i.e. the Samaritans) came out 
 (e$rj\8ov) from the city and began to co/ne (rjpxovTo) unto him. In the 
 
 meanwhile When therefore the Samaritans came (rfkOov) unto 
 
 him," xi. 29 — 32 " She (Mary) arose (riyipByj) quickly and began to come 
 (rjpx^ro) unto him. Now Jesus was not yet... The Jews, then,... 
 followed her... Mary therefore, when she came (rjXOev) where Jesus 
 was...," xx. 3 — 4 "Peter therefore came forth (e£fj\6ev) and the other 
 disciple, and they began to come (rjpxoiTo) to the tomb. Now the two 
 were running together; and the other disciple... came (rjkOev) first." 
 In all these cases the context mentions an interval between the 
 "beginning to come "and the "coming 1 ." John often uses these 
 imperfects as an introduction to some important action". 
 
 [2466] With a negative, the imperfect may mean " was not 
 beginning to do," and this may often mean " had no intention of 
 doing." In ii. 23 — 4 "many believed (or trusted, €7rto-Teixrui') in his 
 name... but Jesus himself did not trust (ovk l-trio-reviv) himself to 
 them," the meaning is " did not even begin to trust to them," because 
 He knew their character from the first. It might almost be rendered 
 "would not trust." The same phrase, applied to non-believing Jews 
 in xii. 37 means "they shewed no tende?icy to believe" "did not even 
 make a beginning to believe," and it is followed by xii. 39, " they 
 were not able to believe." Nearly the same meaning is in xxi. 12 "no 
 one shelved a tendency to venture (ouSeis eTo'A/za)," or, "so much as 
 began to vetilure." But, in vii. 5 ovSe yap 01 a8e\<pol avroi) kTriarevov 
 ets avTov, the separation of the verb from the negative favours the 
 rendering "not even his brethren were [at that time~\ believing in him." 
 
 1 [2465a] The imperf. is rendered thus, iv. 30 (A.V.) "came," (R.V.) "were 
 coming"; xi. 29 (A.V.) "came;' (R.V.) "went"; xx. 3 (A.V.) "came," (R.V.) 
 "went." 
 
 2 [2465 /■>] In xix. 3 (describing the soldiers mocking Christ), the imperfects, 
 T7PXOCTO, 2\eyov, and iolooaav, mean " kept coming " ' ' kept saying " " kept giving" 
 
 |2465<] The imperf. iwwOdveTo might be expected in J 11 iv. 5: where, 
 according to Blass (p. 191), "iwvdtTO is incorrectly used and the correct form 
 iirvvdavtTo has weak attestation (in xiii. 24 irvd^adat [which should strictly be 
 irvvOavtoOai.] is only read by AD al...)." In classical ( .k, iirvth ro would mean "he 
 ascertained" and tTrvvOavtro would be used (as in Mt. ii. 4, Lk. xv. 26 etc.) to mean 
 "//e tncJ to ascertain" In iv. 5: Chrys. has ewwddvero and n, it, f have 
 "interrogabat," but this attestation is certainly weak. It is noticeable, however, 
 that, in what follows, NI )<//;/ have Kai for ovi> (SS um. ovv) SO as to make the 
 
 33« 
 
IMPERFECT [2466 (i)] 
 
 [2466 (i)] When 6Vi r/v is used after imperfect or aorist state- 
 ments of perception ("saw that it was so "), the natural presumption, 
 in John, is that the meaning is " saw that it had been " ; for, in order 
 to express "saw that it was" John would probably use the present, 
 as in vi. 24 "the multitude saw thai Jesus was not there (€l8<lv...oti 
 'I. ovk eo-Tiv ckci) " i.e. saw [and said to themselves] " Jesus is not 
 here" (comp. Mt. xviii. 25 "commanded him to be sold... and all, 
 [said he], that he hath (ex et ) ")• With other imperfects, distinguishable 
 from aorists, the imperfect meaning may be retained, e.g. xvi. 19 
 " recognised that they 7vere and had been desiring (-rjOeXov) to 
 question him," but not with rjv. In v. 13 ovk r]8ei tis £<ttiv, D reads 
 tjv : but the Pharisees have just asked "Who is it?" TVs io-riv ; and 
 now it is added that the man "did not know [and could not answer 
 this question] Who is it?" and then (v. 15) "he said to the Jews 
 (lit.) that ' It is Jesus.'' In vi. 22 elSov (marg. i8wV) on irXoiapiov 
 aXXo ow rjv eK€t, the sense requires " that there had been no other 
 boat," and (as there are v. r. eioW, iSor, eiSe^, and e has " scirent "), 
 Blass's (p. 192) suggestion that the orig. was eiSw's is probably right : 
 " the Jews knew there had been no other boat there on the previous 
 
 night." In ix. 8 01 Oewpovvres avrov to -rrpoTtpov on TrpoaaiT7j<; r)r, the 
 
 present eo-ri could not have been used, because the meaning is not 
 " Beheld [and said] He is a beggar," but " those who formerly were 
 in the habit of beholding that he was a beggar." SS has " those by 
 whom it had been seen that he was begging," and this conveys 
 correctly the pluperfect meaning, that " the begging " belonged to 
 the sphere of the " had been 1 ." 
 
 meaning, "He therefore ascertained the hour — and they said, 'Yesterday about 
 the seventh hour...,'" i.e., in effect, "the father ascertained the hour and found 
 it was the seventh." But as the text stands, In must be admitted to have 
 used iirtidero incorrectly, erring, however, with Plut. fit. Denietr. ch. 27 (1076c) 
 rod Arj/j.rjTpiov vvdofxiuov, Tt aoi 5okbl; (also id. ch. 28) and with Hesychius, who 
 says, livdeadai ' axovcrai., epwrrjaai, yvdxreaQai. 
 
 [2465c/] On the other hand the v.r. xiii. 24 irvdtadai may be defended as 
 meaning "to ascertain.'" Similarly, in LXX, irvdeadai, "to ascertain," in Gen. 
 xxv. 22 and 2 Chr. xxxii. 31, is as justifiable as ewwddvero and eTrwdavo/j.e6a, 
 "tried to ascertain," in 2 Chr. xxxi. 9 and 1 Esdr. vi. n; but Esth. iii. 13 
 irvdop-evov is an error for irvvdavojxevov which is read by AN 2 . In Ox. Pap. 533 
 (edd.) "sell the grass-seed and ask (irvdecrde)... whether he wants...," I should 
 prefer "ascertain." It would be quite correct to say thata man, " trying to ascertain 
 something (irvudavh/j-evos)" sends messengers "to ascertain it (rod irvdeadai.)" 
 
 1 [2466 (i) a] Comp. Mk xi. 32 elx " T ° v 'lua-v-qv ovtws otl irpocp-qry)^ r\v, 
 Mt. xxi. 26 ws 7r po<f>r\T7)v ^x ot " Tl1 ' T ° v 'I-i Lk. xx. 6 Treireia/j.i'vos yap ecrrtv I. 
 
 339 22 " 
 
[2467] TENSE 
 
 (a) "EAeroisi 
 
 [2467] John very frequently uses e'Aeyov to describe what " was 
 being said " about some one subject, first by some, then by others, 
 of a chattering multitude 1 , or what people " began to say," or "said 
 repeatedly" to some one person 2 . But he also uses it sometimes to 
 introduce Christ's sayings, as follows ii. 2 r e/ceuos Se eAeye v 7repi tov 
 vaov tov (xco/u.a.TOS avrov, vi. 6 tovto Se eAeyev 7retpa^ojv avrov, vi. 7 1 
 eAeyev Se rov IovSav, xii. 33 tovto Se eAeyev cr77p.au ojv ttolw ^avaTto 
 rj/K-Wev a.Tro8vt]o-K€iv. In all these cases the saying is mysterious and 
 not understood by the hearers, and eAeyev means "he was saying [all 
 the while this or that, though the hearers did not perceive it]." Once, 
 this is expressed by the pluperfect xi. 13 uprquei Se 6 'I. -n-ept tov 
 Oavarov avTov. This statement of Christ's meaning follows a state- 
 ment of the misunderstanding: "Lord, if he is asleep, he will recover. 
 But Jesus had been saying [this] about his death." 
 
 [2468] In each of these instances Se follows the verb ; and Se', 
 and the context, indicate that the evangelist is adding something to 
 make clear to his readers that which was not clear to the hearers at 
 the time when Jesus was speaking 3 . A somewhat similar meaning 
 may be conveyed by €i7rev with Se', as in vii. 39 tovto Se ei7rev (v. r. 
 eAeyev but not marg.) 7repi tov 7rvevp.aTos, xxi. 19 tovto Se ei7rev 
 o~f/p.cu'i'a)v. In both these cases more emphasis is laid upon the 
 weight of the authoritative prediction than on its being misunder- 
 stood : and indeed, as to the latter, it is quite possible that Peter is 
 regarded as perceiving that the prediction pointed to a death upon 
 the cross. Ae'yw, in Greek literature, must often be rendered " I 
 mean." so that eAeyev may often be rendered " he was [all the while] 
 meaning," as in viii. 27 "They did not understand that he was [all 
 the while] meaning the Father [in speaking] to them 4 ." 
 
 it po<pr\r-r\v dvai. Mk's rjv, with reference perh. to his recent death, means that 
 "he had been a prophet." Acts iii. 10 eirtyivwaKov.. 6tl oiVos rjv "began to 
 recognise further that this man was..." is rather different. Jn peril, would have 
 here written IotIv which (Alf.) is read by some authorities, including Chrys. : but 
 the meaning may be " had been but lately sitting as a beggar." The wpbTepov in 
 Jn ix. 8 differentiates it from Acts iii. 10. 
 
 1 iv. 33, vii. ii, 12 etc. - iv. 42, v. 10 etc. 
 
 :; [2468a] Comp. x. 6 ixtlvoi Si ovk tyvucrav, xi. i_^ tKea>oi 5t Z5oi;av, where 5e" 
 luces a statement of misunderstanding. 
 
 •' [2468 /'| This sentence may be illustrated by xvi. 17 "what is (emph.) (tI 
 iuTiv) this that he says (\tyei) to us?" which seems to be a blending of (i) 
 
 340 
 
IMPERFECT [2470] 
 
 [2469] After ii. 21 "But he was speaking (e'Aeyev) about the 
 temple of his body " there arises some doubt as to the meaning 
 in ii. 22 " When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples 
 remembered that he (R.V.) spake (A.V. had said) (eAeyci/) this, and 
 they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus (R.V. and A.V.) 
 had said (eta-ci/)." It is but fair to assume that the writer means two 
 slightly different things by eXeyev and d-rrzv, and that e'Aeyev in the 
 two consecutive verses has the same meaning. Also "remembered" 
 may be used here as in the Entry into Jerusalem, where it is said 
 that the disciples (xii. 16) "remembered that these things were 
 written concerning him [Jesus] and that they had done these things 
 to him " — perhaps (2757) meaning, " remembered that Zechariah had 
 written about the King riding on the ass, and re?nembered that 
 certain similar things had happened to Jesus, and inferred that 
 'these things were written concerning him." So here, in this 
 prediction about the Temple, " remembered '" is probably a short 
 way of saying "remembered and recognised"; and ekeyev irept is 
 but a longer form of Zkeyev, " he was speaking [about], or speaking 
 [of]," thus : " But he was [all the while] speaking about the temple of 
 his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples 
 remembered [and recognised] that he was [all the while] speaking [of] 
 this ; and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had 
 said." 
 
 [2470] In two instances eXeye appears to be used by John as in 
 Mark to mean "began to say," or "went on to say," or "used to 
 say 1 ": vi. 64 — 5 "...but there are some of you that believe not. — 
 
 "What really is this?" rl eoTw tovto; (2) "What does he mean?" rl Xeyei; 
 (3) "What is he saying to us?" tl Xeyei tj/jliv; in v. 18 0TL...waTipa Zdioi' ZXeye rbv 
 6e6v, the meaning is uncertain (2464) because of the context: but it may mean 
 "because.../^ was [virtually] declaring God [to be] his own father." This differs 
 a little from exdXet. Comp. Mk xii. 37 Xtyei avrov Kvpiou "[virtually] declares 
 him [to be] Lord," where the parall. Mt. xxii. 45, Lk. xx. 44 have KaXet, and 
 comp. Mt. vii. 21 ov ira.s 6 Xeywv /xoi, Kvpce, K6pie with parall. Lk. vi. 46 rl de /xe 
 KaXeire, Kvpie, KOpie; 
 
 1 [2470a] In Mark, ZXeyev (which is often (535 (v)) corrected by Matthew and 
 Luke) may sometimes mean "used to say." In the A both the sayings of a Rabbi 
 are introduced [a) sometimes by "was," with participle "saying," as in i. 2, 
 3 etc., (b) sometimes by "saying" without "was," as in i. 4, 5, 7 etc., (c) very 
 rarely by the past tense, "said," in the case of sayings to special persons etc., 
 ii. 7 "he saw a skull. ..and he said to it," ii. 12, 13 "He said to them, 'Go and 
 see....'" Dr Taylor renders (a) by "used to say," (b) and (c) by "said." The 
 
 341 
 
[2471] TENSE 
 
 For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not 
 and who it was that should betray him. — And he began to say (kou 
 ZXeyev), For this cause I have said unto you that no man can come 
 unto me except it be given to him from the Father...," viii. 30 — 1 
 "While he was saying these things many believed on him. Jesus 
 therefore began to say unto those that had believed him [those that 
 were] Jews." In the former, besides other variations in the text 
 (2636) the Latin e has " et dicebat propterea quia nemo," i.e. "And 
 it was on this account that he said No man can come unto me 1 ." This 
 is equivalent to, "And this was what he meant when he said." But, 
 as the text stands, eAeyev must be rendered as in Mark. These two 
 exceptional instances as compared with the multitude of instances in 
 Mark, make John's ordinary deviation from Mark all the more 
 striking. 
 
 (/3) "HeeAoN 
 
 [2471] Both rjOekev and rfdik-qaev occur in John. The latter in 
 i. 43 (R.V. " was minded to" A.V. "would") means "it was his 
 pleasure, he resolved, to go forth to Galilee." Also in v. 35 y)&zkr)<ja.Tz 
 (A.V. and R.V. "were willing") there is perhaps a suggestion of a 
 decision on the part of the rulers of the Jews to accept John the 
 Baptist, " // was your pleasure to rejoice for a season 2 ." The aorist 
 
 LXX often renders the Hebrew participle, when used as a tense of the indicative, 
 by the Greek imperfect. These facts indicate that the habitual sayings of 
 a Jewish teacher might easily be confused with his sayings on special occasions. 
 
 1 To take Sid. tovto as non-initial (as e does) would be contrary to Johannine 
 usage (2387 — 91). For vi. 65 compared with vi. 44, see 2548 a. 
 
 - [2471 a] In LXX and N.T., (apart from negative and relative clauses, in 
 which it is very frequent in LXX) rjdiXrjcra with an infinitive is rare. In Judg. 
 xx. 5, Tobit iii. 10 (K), it is used of a desire entertained but not accomplished. 
 In N.T. it is similarly used, of a desire frustrated, in Alt. xxiii. 37, Lk. xiii. 34 
 irocra.KL's i]dt\y)ffa, and in Lk. x. 24 T)dt\-r)crav ISelv (where the parall. Mt. xiii. 17 
 has-iTredvfxv<Tav). Comp. 1 Thess. ii. 18 r)de\r)<ra/j.ev i\d£v irpbs vfias tyu p.ev II. 
 k. d'7nz£ k. 5Ls, k. eveKO\pev i)/j.as 6 Saravas, which seems to mean "resolved once, 
 yea twice." 
 
 [2471 /'J In Mt. xviii. 23 (R.V.) " which would (i)64\r)<re) make a reckoning," the 
 modern English might be "who decided to have an audit, "and so Acts xvi. 3 " Paul 
 decided that he [Timothy] should go forth with him." SoXen. Cyrop. i. 1. 3 "We 
 know that many made up their minds (edeX-rjcravras) to obey," Winer (p. 587) 
 quotes Isocr. Callim. 914 ol...TrpOKiv5vi>eveii' 6flQ» i)d£\ri(jav, which should be 
 rendered "made up their minds to meet danger for your sake": so in Lucian 
 ii. 40S {Amor. 10) eOeXrjo-avras auToi/t iwrjydfirjv, it means "of their own free-will 
 and resolution." 
 
 342 
 
IMPERFECT [2472] 
 
 in LXX sometimes means "// was the pleasure'" of God, or a king, 
 where it conveys the notion of a decree 1 . The meaning of deliberate 
 resolve is also usually conveyed by the aorist when used affirmatively 
 in classical Greek. 
 
 [2472] In John, the imperfect rjOeXov occurs (apart from a 
 negative or relative) in vii. 44 tivcs 8e rj0e\ov...7ridaat, "now some 
 would have liked to have taken him," where it is perhaps (2575) 
 implied that their desire was frustrated because (vii. 30), His "hour 
 was not yet come...." In xvi. 19 r)6e.\ov (s rj^eWov) avrbv Ipurav the 
 meaning is, " Jesus knew that they were ivishing to ask him " so that 
 the imperfect has its proper force. In Mark vi. 19, 48 (1735^), 
 Acts x. 10, xiv. 13, xix. ^^, rjOeXe refers to a desire given up, or not 
 fulfilled, owing to something intervening. On the strength of these 
 facts, coming to the most important of all the Johannine instances 
 vi. 21 rjdtXov ovv \af3eii', we are justified in saying that the desire 
 must be supposed unfulfilled : " They began to wish to take him into 
 the boat." The sequel shews that the wish was not fulfilled, for 
 want of time: "Straightway the boat was at the land 2 ." 
 
 1 [2471 <] Job xxiii. 13 o yap avrbs r]6eXr]ae icai eTrolrjae, comp. Ps. cxv. 3, 
 cxxxv. 6, Esth. i. 8, 1 K. ix. 1. 
 
 2 [2472 a] A.V. "they willingly received him" makes quite a different sense. 
 R.V. " they were willing to receive him" is ambiguous, for it might mean "they were 
 willing [as before]." Chrysostom says, "Why did He not go on board the vessel 
 (riVos 8e eveKfv ouk ave(3r] els to ttXoiov ;) ?" So Cramer ova evifir] de els to ttXoiov. On 
 the occurrence of -ijdeXev in the parall. Mk. vi. 48, see 1735 b. The 1st pers. in 
 Gal. iv. 20, i)de\ov 8e -rrapeivai, A.V. "I desire," R.V. "I could wish," Lightf. 
 "I would I had been," is equivalent to our curious expression " / could have 
 wished," the literal meaning being "I began to wish but gave it up as the thing 
 was impossible." But the 1st pers. usage is not a safe guide as to the general 
 meaning because it is often used to express modestly a wish that the speaker has 
 not given up, as in Hermas Mand. v. 7 r)QeXov yvuivcu. 
 
 [2472/*] Comp. Lk. xxiv. 21 ridels be ifKTri^ofiev otl cu't6s eariv 6 [itWuv 
 XvTpovadai top 'lcrpar]\. R.V. has "But we hoped that it was he which should 
 redeem Israel." Apart from the context, "we hoped" might mean "we hoped 
 that it was — and it proved to be so" and R.V. is not the English of any particular 
 century. A.V. is good seventeenth century English (except for the "which"): 
 "But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed"; and it brings 
 out the non-fulfilment of the "trust," though it does not directly attempt to render 
 the imperfect. The meaning is, " We were hoping [almost up till to-day and 
 saying] that 'This is he that is destined to redeem Israel.'" (B has 7]\iri£a/j.ei>, 
 and, in the context yevap.evcu and -qXdav (an interesting cluster of forms in -a).) 
 The tense of-qX-rri^o/xev, like that ofijdeXov in some of the above-mentioned instances, 
 implies frustration. On -fjdeXov implying unfulfilled desire, see 2716 — 7. 
 
 343 
 
[2473] TENSE 
 
 (iv) Perfect 
 
 (i) As the result of Johannine style 
 
 [2473] It has been pointed out above (2442—3) that, in part, 
 the Johannine perfect corresponds to the LXX aorist representing 
 the Hebrew perfect "I have loved," "I have hated" meaning "I 
 have always loved," " I have always hated," with the implication 
 " I continue to love and hate." We know from Epictetus and Pliny 
 that Roman gentlemen borrowed the Greek KeVpiKu to express what 
 the French call chose jugee, "I have decided [once for a//] 1 ." John 
 takes advantage of the Greek distinction — non-existent in Hebrew 
 and Latin — between the aorist and the perfect so as to represent 
 Pilate as saying (xix. 22) o yeypa4>a ycypacpa, i.e. "What I have 
 written, I have written [and shall not rewrite]." This is the usual 
 meaning of the Johannine perfect— permanence. For example, 
 ficfxapTvpyjKa (i. 34) might mean " my testimony is completed," as 
 though the Baptist were thinking of himself as released from a com- 
 pleted task. But it probably means " I have witnessed [and abide 
 as a witness]." So in i. 32 " I have beheld (A.V. / saiv) (reOiap-ai) 
 the Spirit descending," the meaning might be "I have [just] beheld"; 
 but — in view of 1 Jn iv. 14 " ive have beheld (TeOed/xtda) and testify" 
 — it more probably denotes the present and permanent result of the 
 vision, such as Luke (ii. 30) expresses by the Hebraic el&oi', "mine 
 eyes ha7>e seen [once for all] (etSov) thy salvation"." 
 
 [2474] The most interesting uses of " the perfect of permanence " 
 are tjXttiko. and TreTrioTevKa. As to the former which occurs in v. 45 
 (R.V.) " Moses, on (eis) whom ye have set your hope (^XTriKare) (A.V. 
 in whom ye trust)," there can be no doubt that the perfect in N.T. 
 corresponds to the LXX aorist ^Xinaa above described (2443) and 
 it is fairly frequent in N.T. 3 It may be contrasted with the imperfect 
 
 1 [2473a] Epictetus ii. 15. 5 calls on a friend, who has decided to starve 
 himself to death: "I called on him and began to ask him what had happened [to 
 cause this]. ' / have decided ' [K&pura],' he replied." Comp. 1'lin. Epist.i. 12. 10 
 "Dixerat sane medico, admoventi cibum, iciicpiKa." 
 
 [2473/'] In xx. 23 &v rivwv KpaTiJTe KeKparriVTai, the meaning of Kpariw is 
 doubtful, but the perfect appears to imply mstan taneousness, see 2517 — 20. 
 
 2 Comp. i. 34 iupaKa A.V. "I saw," R.V. "1 have seen." 
 
 :i [2474a] 1 Cor. xv. 19 eV Xp. 7';\7Tik6t€j (apiiv, R.V. "we have hoped in 
 Christ," A.V. "we have hope in Christ": 2 Cor. i. 10 et's 6v r)\irlKap.(:i>, R.V. "on 
 whom we have set our hope," A.V. "in whom we trust"; 1 Tim. iv. 10 i)\niKanei> 
 4ttI Oey 'Cwvti, R.V. "we have our hope set on the living Cod," A.V. "we trust in 
 the living Cod," and sim. in i Tim. v. 5, vi. 17. 
 
 344 
 
PERFECT INDICATIVE [2476] 
 
 7)\TTi£ofxev describing, in Luke, the disappointed, hopes of the disciples 
 a few moments before the manifestation of the risen Saviour (2472 b). 
 [2475] Il€7r6crT£u«a/x€i/ occurs in the Epistle i Jn iv. 16 "We 
 have a perfect knowledge and we have a perfect belief" and in the 
 Gospel vi. 69 " We have a perfect belief and we have a perfect 
 knowledge," which have been explained above (1629). In the latter 
 passage Peter speaks, and, in another, Martha, xi. 27 " I perfectly 
 believe {TreiricnzvKa) that thou art the Christ." Peter's belief fails for 
 a time in the hour of trial, and Martha's faith does not enable her to 
 enter into the Lord's purpose; but these facts do not preclude "I have 
 believed " from meaning, on the lips of the two speakers, perfect 
 conviction. And, although the disciples had not attained a perfect 
 belief in Christ, they may have "believed perfectly" that He "came 
 forth from God." This might explain an apparent inconsistency 
 where Jesus says (xvi. 31 — 2), "Ye believe for the moment" and 
 predicts that the disciples will " be scattered," and yet He has 
 previously said (xvi. 27) "ye have a perfect belief (ireiriaTevKaTe) that 
 I came forth from the Father." Even in the reproof to Thomas in 
 xx. 29, the perfect may retain the meaning of completeness, the 
 reproof being based not on the incompleteness, but on the cause, 
 of the belief 1 . This use of the perfect extends even to the expression 
 of "a perfect hatred" in xv. 24, where — in spite of the saying " No 
 man hath seen God at any time " — Jesus says of the Jews " They 
 have both seen and have hated (/ecu iwpaKaa-iv Kal /xe/xtcr^Vao-tv) me and 
 my Father," meaning that so far as their vision goes, they are perfect 
 haters of the Light. 
 
 (2) As the result of Johannine thought 
 
 [2476] In contrast with 7T€7rio-T€i;Ka, ^kTTLKa, and fJL€[Ai<Tr]Ka. the 
 
 form rjyaTrrjKa is not found either in the Gospel or in the Epistle 
 (not at least without a negative to deny the existence of such a 
 "love") 2 . But the perfect of (/)iA.e'a) occurs once thus, xvi. 27 " For 
 
 1 [2475 a] If so, there may be intended a suggestion of incongruity (comp. 
 Rom. viii. 24 "What a man seeth, how doth he yet hope fori") between "seeing" 
 and "perfect belief": "Because thou hast seen me thou hast attained \_ivhat 
 seemeth to thee] perfect belief." The only other Johannine instance of ireirlarevKa. 
 is in iii. 18 8n /jlt] tt€ttl(7T€vk€v "condemned for not having believed," where the 
 tense may have merely a temporal force ("disbelieved up to this very moment") 
 or may mean "for having no settled belief." Elsewhere it is without the negative. 
 For (viii. 31) 7re7rioTev/cu)s, see 2506. 
 
 2 [2476 a] If W.H. txt is correct, the perfect occurs in 1 Jn iv. 10 ovx otl rip-els 
 
 345 
 
[2477] TENSE 
 
 the Father himself loveth you because ye have loved (ire(f>L\7]Ka.Te) 
 me." It has been maintained elsewhere (1716^,/, 1728 m — -p, 2584^-) 
 that John always uses <£<Aea> to denote love of a lower kind than that 
 expressed by aya-iram. Using the higher term, St Paul says " Owe ho 
 man anything save to love one another 1 " ; and perhaps the evangelist 
 thought that "loving," in the higher sense, is the one spiritual action 
 that must never be spoken of as completed. Desiring to describe 
 the disciples as having attained — even before the Resurrection and 
 before the gift of the Holy Spirit — to a complete love of their Master 
 in the lower sense of the word, he uses 7re</>iA?7/<a. 
 
 [2477] If this is the correct explanation of the use of Tr(.<$>L\.r]Ka. 
 and the non-use of r/yd-n-qKa, it follows that we must be prepared in 
 other instances for similar explanations — that is to say, explanations 
 not based on Greek style like yiypa<j>a, nor on attempts to render the 
 Hebrew "perfect of permanence," but on Johannine thought. In 
 the first century, when Christian evangelists were comparing or con- 
 trasting prophecy with the Gospel, one might say " The prophets 
 prophesied" another, " They have prophesied!'' Thus, Matthew and 
 Luke have " All the prophets and the Law prophesied until John " 
 and " From that time the kingdom of God is being preached' ''." John 
 has " Other men have laboured and ye have entered into their labours 3 ." 
 John often prefers the latter aspect, viewing the present as a co?n- 
 pleted result of the past. Sometimes the perfect may include the 
 notion of instantaneousness — the thought being that one has not 
 time to say "God is doing" but must say "God hath done." Thus 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews says "In saying 'new covenant,' he has 
 [by the mere word, at once] made antiquated the first [covenant] 4 ." 
 So, when the Lord has washed the feet of the disciples, and when 
 He has for the first time called them " friends," the evangelist may 
 perhaps indicate the sudden introduction of that which is new in the 
 words, " Understand (2243) what / have done unto you " and " But 
 you I have called friends 5 ." And when He speaks of the inevitable 
 
 ■rjya.TrrjKa/j.a' rbv deov dXX' 6ti ai'ros rjya.Trrjcrei' 7]fia.s, "not that 7<>e have loved God, 
 but that He loved us." Here the actual redeeming love of God for man is 
 expressed in the aorist, and the statement in the perfect, "we have loved God," is 
 slated only to be denied. But W.I I. marg. has riyair-qoantv. 
 
 1 Rom. xiii. 8 el fxi] to d\\?;\ous ayairav. 
 
 '-' Mt. xi. [3 ami parall. Lk. xvi. 16. 3 Jn iv. 38. 4 Heb. viii. 13. 
 
 •'' [2477a] xiii. 1 2 yivwo-Kerf ri Tre-rrolrjKa, contrasted with xiii. 14 el iyw iviipa. 
 (but this is partly the result of the general non-use of the pelf, of vlirrw), XV. I.S 
 e/xas 5£ itprjKO. (f)i\ovs. 
 
 346 
 
PERFECT INDICATIVE [2479] 
 
 sequence of divine judgment and reward, He says that the unbeliever 
 " hath been condemned already," and that the believer " hath passed 
 from death into life 1 ." Similarly, placing Himself where He sees 
 future glory and victory as already achieved, He says u I have been 
 glorified in them," " I have conquered the world 2 ." The Johannine 
 perfect is never " used for the aorist " (2747 — 55). 
 
 (3) Second Perfects 
 
 [2478] iYyoi'a is, no doubt, correctly (so far as tense is concerned) 
 rendered by R.V. in i. 3 "hath been made" (A.V. "was made"). 
 But there is difficulty in vi. 25 ttotc wSe yeyovas; (R.V.) ''when 
 earnest thou hither?" The perfect would seem to accord better with 
 " how long " (" How long hast thou been here ? "). Perhaps it is a 
 condensed expression for " When [earnest thou, and how] art thou 
 [thus suddenly] here?" Some instances in which Matthew applies 
 yeyove. to the fulfilment of prophecy suggest that he uses it as an 
 aorist 3 . But the general Johannine use keeps the sense of the 
 perfect 4 . Nonnus has IIotc Sevpo 7rapeVXees; Chrysostom asks 
 whether ttotc may be here used for ttcSs, but does not explain 
 yeyovas. The Latin and Syriac versions paraphrase it by "come." 
 
 [2479] Ke/vpaye in i. 15 'Icuav^s fxaprvpet irepl olvtov k. K€Kpay€v is 
 rendered by R.V. "John beareth witness of him and crieth," A.V. 
 
 1 [2477 <$] iii. 18 rfdrj KeKpirai, v. 24 fx.eTa(3eflriKev e/c r. davarov eh ttjv 'Cwqv, 
 where the judgment and transition are regarded as having actually taken place, not 
 as being vividly predicted by means of a perfect. In xvi. 11, KiKptrai applied to 
 the " prince of this world " describes an invisible condemnation that has just been 
 ratified; and xiv. 7 ewpaKare describes a vision of the Father that has just been 
 imparted to the disciples. 
 
 8 [2477 r] xvii. 10 SeSiijao-jUCU iv avrols, xvi. 33 eyw vevtKijKa rbv Kbcr/xov. It 
 would be impossible to say how far these perfects are proleptic, how far regarded 
 as actually expressing completion (in the eyes of God). 
 
 :i [2478 a] Mt. i. 22, xxi. 4, xxvi. 56 R.V. "is come to pass," which seems 
 contrary to English idiom (A.V. " was clone"). In 1 K. x. 20 (R.V.) " there was 
 not the like made in any kingdom," ov yiyovev is parall. to 2 Chr. ix. 19 owe 
 iyev-qdr). 
 
 4 [2478(5] Jn i. 15, 30, v. 14, xii. 30, xiv. 22. In 1 Cor. xiii. 11, A.V. "But 
 when I became (yeyova) a man," is rightly corrected by R.V. to "now that / am 
 become." Feyova (Steph. ii. 623) = "natus sum" in such phrases as "I am ten 
 years old," ytyova '4tt) 5^Ka, comp. Rom. xvi. 7 " my seniors in Christ (irpb i/xov 
 yeyovav iv Xp^r^)." Alford and Thayer quote no instance of yiyova meaning 
 "I am come," or "I came" : ND and the Latin and Syriac vss. substitute in Jn 
 vi. 25 some form of the verb "come." The aorist in Jn vi. 21 evdiws iyivero rh 
 Tr\dioi> iirl rrjs yrjs, seems to imply supernatural and instantaneous arrival. Is that 
 the meaning in Jn vi. 25 yiyovas "suddenly come"? See 2758. 
 
 347 
 
[2480] TENSE 
 
 " bare witness... and cried." Kocpaya, " cry aloud," is connected by 
 Origen 1 with the effort of voice needed to make the deaf hear, and is 
 distinguished by him from "cry," /3oaw, the word used in the LXX of 
 Isaiah (quoted by the Synoptists) " the voice of one crying in the 
 wilderness." John probably associates it with the " crying aloud" of 
 Wisdom in the Book of Proverbs " Ye fools, be of an understanding 
 heart." But why does he use the Second Perfect instead of eKpa&v? 
 Partly, perhaps, for the purpose of differentiating the cry of the 
 Baptist, whose whole mission was " crying " and " crying aloud," 
 from the " crying aloud " of our Lord Himself, which took place on 
 three special occasions of public teaching or warning, vii. 28, 37, 
 xii. 44, always e^pa^cv 2 . But partly also the reason may be that he 
 wishes to make the verb of " crying" parallel to the verb of " bearing 
 witness," puprvpeL — his first use of the historic present (2482) so 
 frequent later on in this Gospel. It is as though the Prologue of the 
 drama had almost concluded, bringing us down from the Word in 
 heaven to the Word on earth ("In the beginning was the Word... 
 and the Word became flesh... full of grace and truth"). Now, before 
 the curtain rises on the terrestrial scene, the dramatist inserts, as it 
 were, a stage direction, "John is discovered testifying (I. paprvpCt) and 
 crying aloud (k. KeVpaycy)." 
 
 (v) Pluperfect 
 
 [2480] The pluperfect is perhaps more frequent in John than in 
 any of the Synoptists, and his use of it (like his use of the perfect) 
 shews a disposition to represent distinctions not capable of being 
 represented in Hebrew (which has no pluperfect). It often expresses 
 
 1 [2479a] Orig. Huet ii. 11 IB "But he cries and cries aloud {{ioq. be koX 
 Kixpayev) that those who are far off may hear the speaker, and that those who are 
 dull of hearing (papvrjKooi) may understand the greatness of the things that are 
 being spoken. " As regards the "r/zc//," lit. "heavy" of hearing, comp. Is. vi. 10 
 (LXX) " For the heart of this people lias been made fat and with their ears they 
 have heard dully (papews fiKovaav)." Those who are "far off" are the Gentiles; 
 those who are "dull of hearing'' are the Jews. For the former, "crying" suffices, 
 for the latter, "crying aloud " is resorted to and yet does not suffice. Comp. l'rov. 
 viii. 1—5 "Doth not wisdom cry (LXX K-qputjeis, but Theod. KeKpd^eTai)... she 
 cricth aloud (vp.vtirai)...0 ye simple, understand subtil ty, and, ye fools, be of an 
 understanding heart." Chrys. has Tt (<xti to, Kiicpaye; Mera wappricrlas, <t>ri<rl, 
 fjLfTa 4\ev0tpLas, x<°P' s iVoaroX^s airaaris dvaKrjpvTTti. But Origin's hypothesis of 
 the "dull of bearing" seems far better. Com p. Oxyrh. Pap. 717, a petition of 
 " late ist cent. lt.C, ? ' iyw ovv ijiouv nal ^KpaiOf...pouiv Kai Kpdfav oti tovt6 icm.... 
 
 '* Comp. xi. 43 (Kpavyaatv, in the Raising of Lazarus, and see 1762 a — /. 
 
 34* 
 
PLUPERFECT [2481] 
 
 a parenthesis, or a statement out of its chronological place, of the nature 
 of an after-thought : iii. 23 — 4 " Now there-was John also baptizing 
 in Aenon — -for not yet had John been cast (ovtto) yap rjv fizfiXruxivos) 
 into prison " (which corrects a misapprehension likely to arise in 
 readers of the Synoptic Gospels 1 ) : iv. 8 "for his disciples [I should 
 have said before] had gone away": ix. 22 "These things said his 
 parents because they were afraid of the Jews. For [/ should have 
 said that] some time ago (17877) the Jews had agreed together..." ; 
 xi. 17 — 19 "Jesus therefore, having come [thither], found him 
 [Lazarus] already four days in the grave. Now (8e) Bethany was 
 near Jerusalem... Now (8e) many of the Jews had come to Martha," 
 where the writer goes back from " having come and found " to the 
 circumstances that preceded the " coming " and the " finding " : xi. 30 
 "Now (8«) Jesus had not yet come into the village": xi. 57 "Now 
 (8e) the chief priests and the Pharisees had given commandments... 
 that they might take him." 
 
 [2481] This tense takes the reader, as it were, behind the scenes 
 — after some mention of deeds or words — to tell him what really had 
 been the cause of the result, or what had been the motive or meaning of 
 the words. Thus the non-arrest of Jesus is twice explained, vii. 30, 
 viii. 20, " because his hour had not yet come." The disciples say 
 about Lazarus "Lord, if he is asleep, he will recover," but the 
 explanation comes, xi. 13 "But Jesus had said [it] (elp-rJKec, i.e. had 
 said "is asleep ") concerning his death." In i. 19 — 24, terminating 
 with the words k. aTreo-TaXfxei'ot rjaav €k twv Qaptxraiiav, the reader 
 may naturally ask why these " Pharisees " had not been mentioned 
 in i. 19 along with "priests and Levites." The explanation is. that 
 the deputation is first described from one point of view, as having 
 ecclesiastical status and as baffled in the attempt to extract from the 
 Baptist an answer satisfactory to themselves. Then the Pharisees, 
 who have the status of teachers of the Law, are on the point of 
 stepping in to ask by what right he baptizes, and at this point the 
 evangelist breaks the course of events to tell us that Pharisees "had 
 been" (2214) included in the deputation 2 . 
 
 1 [2480 a] Luke (iii. 19 — 20) narrates the imprisonment of John the Baptist, 
 and then proceeds (iii. 21) " Now it came to pass when all the people were (or, 
 had been) baptized and when Jesus was (or, had been) baptized...." This, if 
 connected with what precedes, might easily give the impression that the imprison- 
 ment of the Baptist immediately followed the baptism of Jesus. 
 
 - [2481(7] The pluperf. pass, also occurs in xix. 11 el /atj t}v 5e5ofxivov, and xix. 
 41 iv ip ovdeTTW ovSels tjv Ttdeifj.ivos. 
 
 349 
 
[2482] TENSE 
 
 (vi) Present 
 
 (i) Historic Present 
 
 [2482] The historic present, which is much more frequent in 
 Mark than in the other Synoptists 1 , is also a striking characteristic 
 of John. But Mark and John differ in their use of it. For example, 
 before the historic present of ZpxzaOai, Mark makes a rule of prefixing 
 kcu 2 . and uses it rather monotonously. John frequently uses it in 
 asyndeton, often at the beginning of a sentence, and in such a way 
 as to give life and vividness to the narrative, sometimes perhaps also 
 (when applied to the " coming " of our Lord) suggesting that the 
 Messiah is "he that cometh " to deliver (1632 — 6) 3 . John also, 
 alone of the evangelists, uses /3Ae7rei and — with one Synoptic excep- 
 tion — evpia-Ket as historic presents 4 . When the risen Saviour came for 
 the first time to the Disciples it is said that He " came (rjXdev) " : but 
 when, after Thomas had refused to believe, He comes to help 
 
 1 [2482 «] Comp. Horae Sy7iopticae, pp. 114 — 7, where it is shewn that, of 151 
 historic presents in Mk, Mt. has only 21, Lk. only r. In some passages of LXX, 
 the historic present represents the Hebrew "converted future," e.g. 1 S. xxxi. 1 — 3 
 eiro\tfjLoui> . . . TriwTovcTiv . . . avvdirTovffiv . . . Tvirrovaiv . . . (iapi'verai . . . evpiaKOvenv, with 
 parall. 1 Chr. x. 1 foil, tirokeixrjffav ...'iweaov ...Kareoiu^av ...ewdra^av ...epapi/vdr]... 
 evpov, also 1 S. xxxi. 8 "and it came to. pass when (lit. and) they came... then (lit. 
 and) they found," Kai iyevridr) ry iwaiipiov, ZpxovTat oi d\\...Kal evplaxovGLV. 
 Contrast this with parall. I Chr. x. 8 km. iyevero rrj ix°^ v V Ka ' y^Oov d\\.../cat 
 tvpov 
 
 2 [2482(5] Mk i. 40, ii. 3, 18, iii. 20, 31, v. 15, 22, 38, vi. 1 etc. An exception 
 is v. 35 '4ti avTov \a\ovvros fyxovrai, which is the only instance where the parall. 
 Lk. has historic present. 
 
 3 [2482 c] It is applied to Philip and Andrew (twice) in xii. 22 coming to 
 introduce the Greeks, and thrice to Mary Magdalene on the morning of the 
 Resurrection, xx. 1,2, 18 concluding with tpxercu M. t\ M. ayyiWovaa roh p. Stl 
 
 ' Ewpa/ca tqv KtipLov, where ed>pcu<a, of direct speech, is followed by dwev, of 
 reported speech. Somewhat similarly in vi. 24 ddev 6 6'x^os on 'Itjo-ovs ouk Zgtiv 
 ckc?, there is a blending of (1) "The multitude perceived and said 'Jesus is not 
 here,'" and (2) "The multitude perceived that Jesus 7t>as no longer there.'' The 
 historic present of other verbs is also frequent in (xiii. 4 — 6) the Washing of Feet 
 and (xx. 1 — 18) the description of the Resurrection. When John says that the 
 Samaritan woman (iv. 7) "cometh" to draw water— almost immediately after 
 saying that (iv. 4—5) "it was necessary" that Jesus should go through Samaria— 
 and that lie " cometh therefore" to a city of Samaria near Jacob's well, he may 
 have in view the coincidence of the two acts of "coming" appointed by a divine 
 " in. essity." 
 
 4 [2482</| B\<?tt« i. 29, xx. 1, 5, \\i. 9. 20; evplaKei i. 41. 43, 45, v. 14. The 
 Synoptic exception is Mk xiv. 37, Mt. xxvi. 40 evpiasei aiiTovs KaOevdovras (where 
 parall. Lk. xxii. 45 has evpev). 
 
 350 
 
PRESENT INDICATIVE [2483] 
 
 Thomas and other doubters, it is said that He " cometh (epxeTcu) 1 ." 
 The former, like the coming into the world at the incarnation (2457), 
 is described as a matter of past history ; the latter as the action of 
 
 6 e'p^o'/aei'os. 
 
 [2483] There is difficulty in xxi. 12 — 13 "Jesus saith unto them, 
 [Come] hither, break your fast. None of the disciples would be so 
 bold as (eToXfxa (2466)) to question him, Who art thou? — knowing 
 [all of them] that it was the Lord. Jesus cometh (epx €Tat '!•) and 
 taketh the bread and giveth to them, and the fish likewise." If the 
 disciples are commanded to come "hither" by their Master, how is 
 it that He is described as "coming" to them? One suggested 
 explanation is that they "hang back 2 ." But Peter had previously 
 leaped into the water, uninvited, to hasten towards the Lord. Would 
 he now "hang back"? Even if he had done so, would the beloved 
 disciple "hang back"? Again, the evangelist comments on the 
 mere silence of the disciples ("none of them durst question him"). 
 If there had also been a "hanging back," would not the writer have 
 commented on this also (e.g. " But when they were afraid and did not 
 draw near, He Himself came unto them")? It is more in accord- 
 ance with the tone of this Gospel to suppose that the writer assumed 
 obedience. The Apostles come, as commanded, and recline, as for 
 a meal, around the bread and the fish : then " cometh Jesus," i.e. to 
 the disciples assembled round the food 3 . In the Washing of Feet it 
 had been said " He cometh therefore to Simon Peter." Now He 
 "cometh" to them all, severally. Then He washed their feet for the 
 journey of an evangelist ; now He gives them food to prepare them 
 for it. Both are the acts of "Him that cometh*." 
 
 1 xx. 19, 26. 
 
 ■ Westc. ad loc. "As the disciples hang back, 'Jesus cometh' and gives to 
 them of 'the bread' and 'the fish' which He had Himself provided." 
 
 :i [2483 a] This somewhat resembles Luke's account of Christ's appearing to 
 the disciples and partaking of fish in their presence (Lk. xxiv. 36 — 42): and it 
 suggests that there may have been various traditions combining a literal and a 
 symbolical meaning (1) about the catching of fish, (2) about a Eucharistic meal 
 (after the Resurrection) in which fish formed a part. In that case, ^p%erai might 
 be variously interpreted as "cometh to help," "cometh suddenly," or "cometh 
 into the assembly of the disciples." 
 
 4 [2483 l>~\ It is worth noting that, in describing the Eucharist, £px ercu i s usec l 
 by Mk xiv. 17 epx ercu /xera twv 5u>5e/ca, where the parall. Mt. xxvi. 20 has dveKeiro, 
 and Lk. xxii. 14 aveireaev. 
 
 351 
 
[2484] TENSE 
 
 (2) Present of Prophecy and Present of Law 
 
 [2484] "Whoever stirs dies" contains a prophetic present ; but 
 "Whoever is convicted of murder dies" and "If a stone is dropped 
 it falls," contain ordinary presents, describing what is the law (either 
 conventional or natural). The latter might be called the Present of 
 Law. " The present of law " and " the present of prophecy " are not 
 always easily distinguished, especially in an author prone to 
 contemplate in the present a future — a future when a Law now 
 invisibly at work will be visibly fulfilled. John is such an author, 
 and in his Gospel it is best to take the present (wherever the sense 
 permits) as the present of law, or as the literal present, and not as 
 the present of prophecy. The present in x. 15 "I lay down my life 
 for the sheep " is certainly intended to include a reference to the 
 Crucifixion. But it might refer also to the whole of Christ's work as 
 being a " laying down of life," in so far as it realises the ideal of the 
 Good Shepherd, of whom it is said, not that he will, if need be, do 
 this, but that he does it : x. 11 " The good shepherd layeth down his 
 life for the sheep." In iii. 18 "He that believeth in him is not 
 judged" the meaning is, "does not, noiv or ever, come under the 
 operation of judgment." That the present is not prophetic is made 
 almost certain by the context, " He that believeth not hath been 
 judged already (17817 KUpiraC)" — which indicates that "judgment" has 
 been in operation in time past, tip to the present moment. If a law in 
 present operation is contemplated in the latter clause, it must be 
 contemplated also in the former. 
 
 [2485] This notion of a law in present operation occurs also 
 in xii. 25 "he that loveth his life loseth (A.V. shall lose) (airoWvei) it, 
 and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep (<t>v\d$ei) it to life 
 eternal." It seems to mean "is destroying," rather than " loseth" or 
 " shall lose," and the writer desires to suggest the present operation 
 of the corrupting influence of self-love when it takes the form 
 of selfishness. He might have said " shall lose" \n strict antithesis 
 with "shall keep," but he is glad to break the antithesis in order to 
 emphasize the fact that "he is already losing 1 ." 
 
 [2485 <?J The thought of a law already acting invisibly and soon to be 
 manifested, may perhaps be illustrated by some uses of the phrases (</) " 'The hour 
 cometh? and {/>) " The hour comelh ami now is" especially where the two occur 
 together. The former refers to the tune when (iv. :i) Jerusalem and Gerizim will 
 
 to !"■ ili'- special homes of worship; the latter to the earlier and immediate 
 
 352 
 
PRESENT INDICATIVE [2487] 
 
 [2486] (i) The present in x. 32 "For which of those works are 
 ye stoning met" and in xiii. 6 "Thou (em ph.) washest my feet!" 
 is interrogative or exclamatory, and refers to actions of which the 
 beginnings have been described — as it does also in xiii. 27 "What 
 thou art doing (77-oiets), do more quickly." In xxi. 3 "/ am going 
 (wrayw) fishing," the phrase "V am going" is so suggestive of the 
 future that it may be almost called a form of the future in Greek, as 
 it certainly is in English. This also applies to "/ am coming" which 
 may be combined with " soon " or other temporal adverbs so as to 
 denote a speedy future. Hence xiv. 3 " If I go... I come back (irdXiv 
 Zpxopai) (2649 (ii)) and will receive you unto myself," " I come " or 
 "am coming" may combine the notion of speed with that of pro- 
 phetic certainty. The present in xxi. 23 "that disciple is not to die 
 (ovk aTTodvijaKet) " and " he said not, ' He is not to die,' " may perhaps 
 be explained by the Greek usage of that particular word (2530), 
 as in 1 S. xx. 32 "wherefore should he be put to death? (Heb. why 
 shall he die?)," LXX, "Why dieth he?" ha ri diroOv^o-Ka ; 
 
 [2487] (2) In xii. 26 "...let him follow me, and where I am (oirov 
 dfxl eyoj) there shall my minister also be," a suggestion is probably 
 intended that the Son, even while on earth, is in heaven, or with the 
 Father ; and the writer wishes to turn the reader's mind to something 
 more than a local heaven. EI/jI lyw is repeated in xiv. 3, xvii. 24, 
 and always precedes the antecedent clause (" that where I am ye 
 also may be," "that where I am they also may be with me"). It 
 is distinguished by the order of the words from ETQ EIMI (2226 — 8). 
 So, too, is the simple eifit in xvi. 32 "ye shall leave me alone, and 
 yet I am not alone because the Father is with me." Yet even there, 
 " I am " is not prophetic present, but expresses the real, and existing, 
 though invisible fact 1 . 
 
 time when worship is to be (iv. 23) "in spirit and truth.*' The former is used to 
 predict (v. 28) the resurrection of those "in the tombs"; the latter to predict 
 (v. 25) the proclamation of the Gospel to those who are "dead [in sins]." In 
 xvi. 2, 25, the shorter form is used to predict the persecutions and revelations 
 that await the disciples after Christ's death ; in xvi. 32, a version of the longer 
 form, "the hour is coming and hath come," predicts the "scattering" of the 
 disciples on that same night, and, perhaps literally, in that same "hour." 
 
 1 [2487 a] What is the precise difference between vii. 34 oirov elfil iyu vfxeh ov 
 dvuaade e\0eiv and viii. 21 oirov iy<l> virdycj v/xe'is ov duvaade eXdeiv? The former 
 is preceded by 'in \p6vov fiLKpbv /xed' vp.Q>v el/xl ko.1 vwayu) irpos top irefj-xpavra. /xe, 
 which says, in effect, "jam on earth where ye are...I go to the Father where ye 
 cannot be." There is an apparently intentional inconsistency in saying to the 
 
 A- VI. 353 2 
 
 
 
[2488] TENSE 
 
 [2488] The following passage is noteworthy because it represents 
 Jesus as varying His own words by converting a future into a present : 
 xvi. 14 — 15 "He [the Holy Spirit] will glorify me: because he zvill 
 take (X.7]fjiij/€Tat) from what is mine and will announce [it] to you. 
 All things as many as the Father hath are mine. For this cause said 
 I that (on) ' He taketh (Aa/x/3aVet) from what is mine and will 
 announce [it] to you.' ' The change is perhaps best explained, not 
 as though our Lord meant " [Yea, already] he taketh " — for in that 
 case He would have hardly added " I said " — but as a transition 
 of thought from what the Spirit will do to what the Spirit does 
 in accordance with eternal Law. After a mention, in the future, of 
 what the Spirit will do ("will glorify me...7vill take. ..will 
 announce") the Law is stated in the present ("All things that the 
 Father hath are mine") which leads to a re-statement of the Lord's 
 words about the action of the Spirit as though He had said " the 
 Spirit taketh.'''' But the future is immediately resumed in the phrase 
 " will announce [it] to you." 
 
 [2489] The present is apparently used as a future in xx. 17 
 " Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to the Father : but go 
 unto my brethren and say to them, / ascend 1 (dvafiaivw) unto my 
 Father and your Father...." In vii. ■$?> — 4 Jesus says to the Jews 
 " a little time / am with you" and, in the same sentence, " Where 
 I am ye cannot come." Here He says " I have ?wt yet ascended" and, 
 in the same sentence, " / ascend." In some authors this present 
 might mean simply "I am on the point of ascending." But this 
 is unusual in John — at least as the sole meaning of the present. 
 More probably the words are intended to suggest the thought of 
 a spiritual ascending, already begun, " I have not yet ascended...! am 
 ascending." The mysterious words " Touch me not for I have 
 not yet ascended " seem to mean that when the Lord had ascended 
 
 Jews " Where I am ye cannot come" immediately after saying "/ am with you" — 
 the object being to indicate that "/ am" in the Saviour's mouth, often has a 
 spiritual meaning, especially when it follows such a phrase as "I go to the Father." 
 Tli'- two sayings, then, represent the same fact from two points of view, heaven 
 being regarded first as a state in which one is and then as a place to which one 
 goes — "Where I am [i.e. with the Father] ye cannot come. [Do ye not understand 
 1I1 ? I ben] where I go, there ye cannot come." The difficulty of "am" has 
 caused some authorities (2190 a) to take tifu as d/xi "I go." So Nonnus, 65eiVw. 
 1 1 2489./ 1 < > 1 1 l; « ■ 1 1 (Hurt ii. 144. :(>-. .; ; 1 i freq. (though not always) has 5T0/>eiJ- 
 ofxai (and so does C'hrys. ad loc.) for dvajialvw. Nonnus, dni...avris ixdvu. 
 
 354 
 
PRESENT INDICATIVE [2491] 
 
 His disciples would be able to " touch " Him (perhaps as being the 
 Bread of Life). The Ascension may be regarded in two ways, 
 i st, as an uplifting from the material earth up to and beyond the 
 material clouds and out of sight, 2nd, as an uplifting of the Messiah 
 in the invisible world, and simultaneously in the hearts of the 
 disciples, to the throne of God. Luke describes the former in the 
 Acts. John may be thinking of the latter here, and, if so, dvafiaivw 
 may mean, not " I shall ascend " but " / am ascending" i.e. the 
 Father is preparing the moment when the Son shall be exalted to 
 heaven in the sight of angels above and in the hearts of believers 
 below 1 . 
 
 [2490] In viii. 14 "I know whence / catne (r/\8ov) and where 
 I go... ye know not whence I come (ep^o/nai) or where I go," a contrast 
 seems to be implied between the particular place from which 
 a traveller may " have come," and the quarter or direction from which 
 a man met in the street may " be coming." IIo#ev rjXOes would be the 
 more definite, serious, and important question. U6$ev Zpx*t- (almost 
 equivalent to "What have you been recently doing?" " What have 
 you been about ? ") might be asked out of mere curiosity. The 
 distinction seems intended to express that the Jews have not even an 
 indefinite notion of the origin and mission of the Son 2 . 
 
 [2491] In xiv. 7 et iyvu>K€LTe yu.6, Kai rbv irarepa fxov av ^SeiTe" oltt 
 olotl yivu><TK€T€ avrbv Kal iwpdi<a.T€ (marg. + airov), the reading is un- 
 certain (2760 — 6) 3 . If yivwo-Kf-re is correct, it seems to mean "ye are 
 
 1 [2489 b] Of course the spiritual Ascension may be manifested to believers by 
 a vision of a local Ascension, such as Luke describes in the Acts, and Isaiah in his 
 vision of the Lord in the Temple, "high and lifted up." Origen (Huet ii. 418 — 9) 
 points out that Christ's presence with the disciples is dependent on them, as well as 
 on Him. Where two or three are gathered together in His name, He is "in the 
 midst of them " even after His death. When He says to the disciples (xiii. 33) 
 " Yet a little while am I with you," He does not mean " I shall be dragged away 
 by the guard of the chief priests " but " I shall be parted from you by your want 
 of faith, because ye will be 'scattered ' from me." Similarly the moment for His 
 full and final ascension will not have arrived till He can be so "lifted up" as to 
 "draw all men" unto Himself: and until the moment arrives when the disciples 
 will be ready to be "drawn" to Him, the Ascension, for them, is non-existent. 
 For that moment the Lord prepares by calling the disciples "brethren" ("Go 
 unto my brethren and say I am ascending unto my Father and your Father"). 
 
 2 [2490 a] Chrys. says nothing about this distinction. Origen (Huet ii. 262 c) 
 omits from irov vwdyw to ttov uirdyw (homoeotel., 2549 a). On Nonnus see 2759. 
 
 3 [2491 a] D and X have el eyvwKare e/ni Kai top irarepa /xov yvucreadai (d scietis) 
 Kal dwdpri. yewuxTKere (d cognoscite) (N yvuicreadai) avrbv Kai eupaKare aiirov : Iren. 
 
 355 2 3— 2 
 
[2491] TENSE 
 
 recognising" or "ye begin to recognise." If so, what is the meaning 
 of the addition "and ye have seen"? How can a person begin to 
 " recognise " unless he "has seen" previously? The passage must 
 be compared with that in the Epistle " Every one that sinneth hath 
 not seen him [i.e. the Son], nor even known htm 1 ." In both, according 
 to the general Johannine usage, " hath seen " must be regarded as 
 indicating not material but spiritual vision, and " seeing " is higher 
 than mere "recognition" or "coming to know." In ordinary Greek, 
 and indeed in ordinary language of any nation, "knowing" a person 
 would be taken as a later and higher stage than " seeing" him ; and 
 Chrysostom (in his comment " those whom we see we may simul- 
 taneously see and yet not know ") appears to have been misled by 
 ordinary usage into adopting the corrupt " ye shall know (yvwo-ecr^e)," 
 as though that were the goal to be reached after "having seen 
 (ewpa.Ko.Te;)." But John seems to mean, in the Epistle, "hath not 
 seen nor even recognised" and, in the Gospel, "Ye are beginning to 
 recognise, [yea] and [what is more] ye have seen"." One may " recognise" 
 
 in. 13. 1 "amodo cognovistis eum et vidistis eum," and iv. 7. 3 " Si cognovissetis 
 me et Patrem meum cognovissetis et amodo cognovistis eum et vidistis eum"; 
 a "Si me cognovistis et Patrem meum cognovistis: jam ex hoc nostis ilium et 
 vidistis ilium," b andj^" Si cognovistis me et Patrem meum cognovistis : et amodo 
 nostis eum et vidistis eum,"/" "Si cognosceretis me utique et Patrem meum 
 cognosceretis et amodo cognoscetis eum et videtis eum "; e, alone of the latt. vss. , 
 has the present tense of ywuxTKu, but in the wrong place as follows, " Si cognovistis 
 me et Patrem meum cognoscitis et amodo nostis ilium et videtis eum." 
 
 [2491 £] Chrys. is printed by Migne as commenting thus: ITws be elirtl:v,"OTrov 
 vvdyu o'ibare, Kal rr\v 68bi> o'ibare, eirrjyayev • Ei e/j.e iyvuKeire, Kal rbv Ylaripa nov 
 iyvwKeire av, Kal drrdpri yvdoaeade avrbv, /cat ewpd/care avrbv; 0^%' evavrioXoywv • 
 ijoeaav fiev yap avrbv, 011% ovrw be cl>s exPV"- Qebv fxev yap rjbeaav, llarepa be 
 ovbiirw' varepov yap rb Tivevfj.a eTre\0bv, iraaav ev avrois Kareo~Kevao~e rr]v yvwaiv. 
 be \iyei, roiovrbv effnv Et rjbeire rrjv e/xr/v ovaiav Kal rrjv d^iav, Kal rr)v tov 
 Harpbs ybetre. Kal dirapTL yvuaecrde avrbv, Kal ewpd/care avrbv (rb fxtv /xiWovros, 
 rb be rrapbvros) • rovrtariv , 81' e/xov. "QiJ/iv be \e'-yei rr\v Kara bidvoiav yvQoiv. Toes 
 /j.ev yap bpwpAvovs bvvdfxeda Kal bpqiv /cat dyvoelv rovs be yivwo~KOfxivovs ov bwd/jLeffa 
 yivwaKeiv Kal dyvoeiv. Atd rovrb 4>t)(ji- Kat ewpaKare avrbv w<xirep <pr)tjlv, "ti<pdri 
 Kal dyyiXon (1 Tim. iii. 16). Perhaps eyvuKeire and fibetre have been confused 
 here in the text or in the comment. But it may be taken as certain that he read 
 yvuxreaOe for yivwvKere, so that he is able to say, in effect, "the 'knowing' is 
 future, the 'seeing' is present." On Nonnus, see 2760. 
 
 1 1 |n iii. f) 7ras 6 a/xaprdvuiv ov\ ewpaKev avrbv ovbe tyvuKev avrbv. 
 
 - [2491^1 Winer-Moulton (p. 34a) illustrates this passage by one from 
 Demosthenes /.urn'/. 597a (error for 937a) "Do the terms of the bond bid the 
 defendants to lend our money, — and this, moreover, to a man with whom we have 
 no acquaintance and \ have never seen (dvOpwiru 6V ijfieh oihe yivtbaKo/xev 
 
 o\S0' (updKaixev nwirore) ?" but the negative makes a great difference in all phrases 
 
 356 
 
PRESENT INDICATIVE [2491] 
 
 about "knowing." And, if yivwaKw and opdw are used by John in a spiritual 
 sense, the usage of Demosthenes may be misleading as a guide to Johannine 
 meaning. In John, when a person is described as "being known," the present, 
 yifuicrKw, always implies sympathetic or moral knowledge, insight, understanding, 
 as in i. 48 " Whence knowest thou me?" — that is " that I am an Israelite indeed 
 without guile"; ii. 24 "Because of his knowing (yivwcrKeiv) all men" (comp. 
 ii. 25 "he knew (eyivuaicev) what was in man "), x. 14 " I know my own and my 
 own know me," x. 15 "Even as the Father knoweth me," x. 15 "I knoiv the 
 Father," x. 27 "I know the sheep," xiv. 17 "doth not know it — but ye know it 
 {i.e. the Spirit)." Comp. xvii. 3 "that they may know {yivwaKwaiv, Tisch. yivuxr- 
 Kovcnv) thee the only true God," and 1 Jn v. 20 " in order that (iva) we may 
 know [yivwaKOfxev) the true [one]." In almost all these cases sympathy — and in 
 many of them mutual sympathy — understanding, or insight, is implied. 
 
 [2491 d] In ii. 24 above, the knowledge or understanding had for its object the 
 weakness or imperfection of human nature : and, still more distinctly the Epistle 
 uses the present, ywwaKw, concerning moral understanding or knowledge of evil, 
 as well as of good, repelling disciples of Christ antipathetically from the evil, and 
 attracting them sympathetically to the good, 1 Jn iv. 2 — 8 "Herein ye understand 
 (yivuxTKere) the Spirit of God. ..he that understandeth God hearkeneth to us... 
 From this we understand the spirit of truth and the spirit that deceives and leads 
 astray (to tt. tt)s TrXdvqs). Beloved, let us love one another, because the love [of 
 the brethren] is from God, and everyone that loveth [his brother] is born of God 
 and understandeth God." 
 
 [2491 1 ] Whence did John derive his use of the present, yivuxTnw, to mean 
 personal knowledge and sympathetic insight into character? Probably not from 
 the LXX. The very first use of yii>u<ncu in LXX (Gen. ii. 17, iii. 5 22) refers 
 indeed to the "understanding" of good and evil, but this is expressly distinguished 
 from "life," and it brings upon itself the curse of death. Tlvwctkw is occasionally 
 applied (2 Chr. vi. 30, Ps. xliv. 21) to God's knowledge of the human heart, in 
 Gen. xxix. 5, and Tobit (passim) to " knowing" a person in one's town or village 
 so as to be able to direct a stranger to him. But the style of Genesis and Tobit is 
 not like the style or styles of most of the books of LXX, in which, as a whole, the 
 pres. , yivwaKw, signifying knowledge of a person, is very rare. Nor does it appear 
 to be common in the Greek translators of the first century. For example, in 
 Jer. xii. 3 crv, Kvpie, yivwcrKeLs /xe, Aq. and Sym. have 'iyvws. 
 
 [2491/] More probably John derived his use of the present, yivuxTKU}, from 
 Greek literature. In Homer and the tragedians it is often used of " distinguishing," 
 or "recognising" persons, and friends, and also of recognising one's own nature 
 and the nature or purpose of others, e.g. in Aesch. Prom. 309 ylvuatce aavTov, 
 "recognise thy weakness," Soph. Phil. 1388 " Thou wilt destroy me, I see through 
 thee (yivuaKuj <re) with these words of thine," comp. Eurip. Her. 639, Hel. 567, 
 El. 768. The Eudemian Ethics of Aristotle (vii. 4) speaks of mothers of children 
 out at nurse as preferring " to recognise rather than be recognised (yivwtTKeiv 77 
 yivicaKeadai)." In the Sibylline Oracles (i. 74 yvwurovs 5' ovk iylvuGxov) the 
 imperfect means "recognise [as having the claims of kindred]." The use of 
 "know" in the sense of "recognising," or "acknowledging," or "appreciating" 
 persons (Gesen. 394 a) is fairly common in Hebrew, and is not absent from St 
 Paul (1 Thess. v. 12 dteuai, 1 Cor. xvi. 18 iwiyLvuxxKere) and from Ignatius 
 (Smym. 9 nahths %x €l ^ eop K - iiriffKoirop eidevat). But these passages do not contain 
 the pres. ywuGnw. Perhaps John's principal debt is to Plato (2763 a — b). 
 
 357 
 
[2492] TENSE 
 
 to some extent, God's being and attributes long before one has 
 "seen" Him, in the Johannine sense, as revealed in the Son. 
 
 [2492] No one has satisfactorily explained the extraordinary 
 statement attributed to the Pharisees in vii. 52 "Out of Galilee 
 
 ariseth no prophet (e/c T7S T. -n-pocprJT-qs ovk eyeipercu)." On this, 
 
 Westcott remarks, "Jonah, Hoshea, Nahum, and perhaps Elijah, 
 Elisha, and Amos were of Galilee." How then could the Pharisees 
 first say to Nicodemus, "Search and see," that is, in effect, "Look at 
 the Scriptures [for you know nothing about them] " and then make 
 such an astounding statement, inviting from Nicodemus an obvious 
 refutation. " Search _y<? the Scriptures — and ye will learn that prophets 
 do ' arise from Galilee ' " ? The only approach to an explanation is 
 that the present " arises " means " arises as a rule." But this — besides 
 being forced — would expose the Pharisees to the charge of impiety, 
 " Would you lay down ' a rule ' for God and assert that He cannot 
 do anything but what you say He does ' as a rule ' ? " As it stands, 
 the text seems inexplicable. And there is no variation of the text 
 sufficient to afford a solid ground for emendation 1 . Otherwise the 
 conjecture would be obvious that, after the final c in " Galilee," o has 
 dropped out. The result of this would be to convert " the prophet" 
 (mentioned just before in vii. 40) to "prophet." Concerning " the 
 prophet \" the Pharisees might have' traditions identifying His birth- 
 place with that of the Messiah so that they might say " the prophet 
 ariseth not from Galilee." In that case the present would be pro- 
 phetic — " is not to arise." 
 
 [2493] In xi. 47 ri 7roiov/xev, Wetstein simply refers to Acts iv. 16 
 tl Troiijawfxev ; as though the meaning were " What ought wc to do ? " 
 
 1 [2492 a] In vii. 52, B and L have i5e on e/c ttjs y. wpo<p. ovk eyeiperai 
 (L eyriyeprai). The order is given differently ("a prophet from Galilee") in 
 N t5e otl irpo<p. e/c tt/s y. ovk eyeiperat, D i8e ras ypcupas on irpocp. e/c tijs y. ovk 
 eyeiperai, SS "see that a prophet from Galilee hath not arisen," and in a (o is 
 missing) and/ Origen has (Huet ii. 278 b) the order of B, but ovk e^px eTC " 0( ^e 
 eytiptTai. There happens to be no other instance in the Gospels of f5e 6'ri 
 (Lk. xxiv. 39 i'5ere 6Vt not being to the point). T5e is used absolutely in i. 46, 
 xi. 34 "come and see." If the Greek ran originally L k. i'de, 'O Trpo(pr]TTjs e/c r. I\ 
 ovk (yeipercu, "Search and see, The prophet ariseth not out of Galilee," scribes 
 and editors mit;ht be inclined to alter i5e TrpocprjTTjs because according to Johannine 
 usage (i. 29, 36, xix. 14, 26, 27) it would mean " Behold, [here is] the prophet." 
 This might explain why I) inserts " the scriptures " after "behold." Among other 
 changes, on might be substituted for 0. The o before irpo<pr)Tr)s is omitted in 
 i. 21 by X and in i. 25 by C. Moreover SS, although it has "the prophet" 
 correctly in i. 21 — 5, has " a prophet" incorrectly in vii. 40. 
 
 35* 
 
PRESENT INDICATIVE [2494] 
 
 But there, as in Lk. iii. 10, 12, 14, Acts ii. 37, the aorist subjunctive 
 is used. Also the subjunctive in Jn vi. 28 (ti iroiw/xev) (2512) 
 indicates that John would have used that mood here if he had meant 
 " What is to be our course of action ?" If ri iroiov^ev ; could be used 
 like ti 71-outs; "what folly art thou committing?" (Epict. ii. 15. 7, 
 iii. 5. 15, Aristoph. Nub. 723, Vesp. 1443) li might mean here " How 
 foolishly are we acting in doing nothing ! " Such exclamations in 
 the first person are existent in ri 4>rjfx(, ; and ti irda-^a; but they are 
 not given in the Thesaurus under 7rou3. 
 
 [2494] Philo i. 205 says that ti iiroi-qcras is Icrov ra ovhzv eVo/r/o-as 
 or ov&lv rjvvo-as, and this meaning, — i.e. non-accomplishment — is very 
 suitable here, "What are we accomplishing?" i.e. "We are accom- 
 plishing nothing." This also brings out more clearly the play upon 
 Christ's "doing" mentioned in the context, saying in effect, "We are 
 doing nothing while this man is doing miracle after miracle." More- 
 over it prepares the way for the utterance of Caiaphas, who tells 
 them what to " do " (" it is expedient that one man should die "). It is 
 on the same line of thought as xii. 19 "Ye behold that ye are doing 
 no good (tu^eAeu-e ov8iv). See, the world is going after him ! " Up to 
 the time when they exclaim, " what are we doing? " they had been 
 "doing" nothing: it was (xi. 53) "from that day," that they "took 
 counsel to put him to death." The note of interrogation should 
 follow Troiovfxev, and cm, as frequently in John (2178), should be 
 taken as an initial "for," thus, "What are we doing [apart from 
 talking] ? For this man is doing signs daily. If we let him continue, 
 he will be our ruin 1 ." 
 
 1 [2494a] Blass says (p. a 10) "The pres. indie, is used very rarely in a 
 deliberative sense in place of the fut. ind. (§56, 8): Jo. xi. 47 (Herm. Sim. 
 ix. 9. 1) rt iroiodfiev; for which there are parallels in colloquial Latin." But he 
 alleges no parallel from Gk and he adds " Plato Symp. 214 A ttCos iroiovfiev is not 
 quite a similar case ; it is not deliberative like ri iroi.Q/xev ibid. B, but the present " 
 — i.e. the present indicative — "contains a gentle rebuke." This appears to me to 
 apply to t'l irotov/xev in John, which also "contains a rebuke" and is distinct from 
 ri iroiConev; For ri iroioxifxev ; in Epictetus, distinct from rl iroirjcw/j.a' ; see 
 2766 (i). 
 
 359 
 
[2495] TENSE 
 
 III. In the Infinitive Mood 
 
 (i) Infinitive compared with iVa and Subjunctive 
 
 [2495] The accusative and infinitive as the object of 6e\w in 
 affirmations is rare in the Gospels 1 . In xxi. 22—3 {bis) lav avrbv 
 Oi\(M /xeveiv, the context is somewhat parallel to that in xvii. 24 
 6£\<n Zva ottov elfA «yw KaKelvot <haiv [A€t 1/j.ov. The comparison 
 suggests that Iva conveys some notion of spiritual effort and purpose 
 (2093 — 2104), which is not implied in the accusative and infinitive 
 ("if I desire his abiding"). 
 
 (ii) Aorist and Present 
 
 [2496] The difference between the aorist and the present in- 
 finitive, in John, may be illustrated by his use of both after Swa/xai. 
 Where, for example, the infinitive represents what one can habitually 
 " do," or " not do," in accordance with the law of one's nature, ttolzZv 
 is used 2 . And, as John deals principally with this aspect of "doing," 
 he never uses 77-0070-ai, except in xi. 37, "Was not this man [i.e. 
 Jesus], who opened the eyes of the blind man, able (lit.) [so] to do 
 (TroLrjcrat) that this man also [i.e. Lazarus] should not have died (iva 
 kcu ovtos /at) d.Tro8dvr)) ? " — where the aorist is used because the reference 
 is not to a course of action, but to a particular act. Hence i\8eiv 
 regularly follows ov owapi or ouoYis Svvarai, denoting the definite act 
 of entering into the Kingdom of God, or of going with Christ on 
 the path of the Cross 3 . Hence, too, a distinction is to be drawn 
 between v. 44 71-ws SvvacrOe u/xeis 7TL<TTevaai, which may be paraphrased 
 as, " How is it possible for you (emph.) so much as to reach the 
 threshold of belief? " and the ordinary course of action contemplated 
 in xii. 39 " For this cause they were not able to believe (ovk yfivvavro 
 
 1 [2495 a] With negative, it occurs in Mk vii. 24 ovS^va rjde\ev (Tisch. rjdfXrjo-ev) 
 yvQvat (contrast Mk ix. 30 ovk rfdeXev iva tis 71*01), Lk. xix. 14, 27 ; without 
 negative in Lk. i. 62 to tI ai> 8t\oi KaXeladcu clvt6. In the Epistles it is more 
 freq., Rom. i. 13, xi. 25, xvi. 19, 1 Cor. vii. 7 etc. 
 
 - [2496 a] For iroie'ii' with dvva/j.ai. see v. 19, 30, ix. 16, 33 etc. 
 
 12496/'] There is great difficulty in x. 29 oi>8ds Svfarai apirafriv . The Greek 
 mss. present no variation. But SS, Origen, and perh. Chrys., seem to have read 
 oudels apirdfct, and this is prob. right (2767). 
 
 :i [2496 r] So, too, Ide'tv and ei(reX0dv, yevvridrivai etc., see hi. 3, 4, 5, vi. 44, 65, 
 vii. 34, 36 etc. Comp. Mk viii. 34, Mt. xvi. 24 i\$t1v with parall. Lk. ix. 23 
 fyxurOat (about the pith of tin- < i".,,| where Lk. indicates continuousness by 
 adding "daily" to "take up (lie cross." 
 
 360 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT INFINITIVE *[2498] 
 
 TriaTeveiv) 1 ." In iii. 27 ov Svrarai dv6pwrro<; Xafi/3dvuv, the Baptist is 
 
 enunciating a general law, that no man can from time to time 
 "receive" except what is given him ; but xiv. 17, 6 koV/aos ov SiWrcu 
 XafSetv, perhaps refers to the preceding definite promise " He will 
 give you the Spirit of truth," and means " cannot receive when you 
 receive it." It may however mean "the world cannot even reach 
 the state of reception." 
 
 [2497] In xiii. 36 — 7 (W.H.) ov hvvacrai p.01 vvv aKoXovdyjaat... 
 6\a tl ov Swa/xcu crot clkoXovOciv apri ; the first clause speaks of the 
 " following " as a new act, the second treats it as the continuance of 
 an old one: ''Why can I not continue following thee — [both at all 
 times and] at this moment?" Or else the present may mean "be at 
 t/iis very moment follozving" as in xvi. 12 "But (lit.) ye are not able to 
 [be] bear\ing\ them (fSao-rd^etv) at this moment (apri)," contrasted with 
 Rev. ii. 2 ov hvvy fiao-rao-ai ko.kov<;, " thou art not able so much as to 
 tolerate evil [men]," or " ever to tolerate." 
 
 [2498] With 6iXu> and ov 6iXw the present infinitive means "go 
 on doing," as in vii. 1 " he did not wish to continue teaching (-rrepnra- 
 T€(V) (2342 e — -/) in Judasa," vii. 17 "If any one be willing to continue 
 doing (■jroietj/) his will" (comp. viii. 44), ix. 27 "Why do ye desire to 
 be hearing [it] (dxoveiv) [all over] again (7raA.1v) ? " xxi. 22 — 3 (bis) 
 " If I desire him to remain permanently (p.eveiv)." There is an inter- 
 esting difference between vi. 21 rjOeXov ovv Xafidv and vii. 44 Ttves 8k 
 
 rj0eXov...Tna.o~ai, contrasted with xvi. 19 rjOeXov olvtov epwrav. All 
 
 three refer to particular actions ; but perhaps Ipturdv, " to be asking," 
 means "to ask all about" the mysterious saying, and not merely to 
 put a definite question. Or possibly, as in the Acts, the present 
 may denote an action almost begun but stopped because Jesus anticipated 
 the question, "they wished [and zuere almost beginning] to ask 2 ." 
 
 1 [2496^] The latter may mean "form a habit of belief." Comp. Arrian's 
 introductory remarks about the fascination of the uttered words of Epictetus, so 
 that, "whenever he himself was uttering anything, it was inevitable that his 
 hearer should feel on every occasion (irdaxei-v) what Epictetus desired him to feel on 
 that special occasion {tiirep eKelvos avrbv iraOetv rifio^eTo)." 
 
 2 [2498 a] Comp. ijdeXe foil, by Acts xiv. 13 dveiv, xix. 33 airoXoydadai, where 
 the actions are stopped severally, by the Apostles and by the multitude, and 
 see 2472 and 2716 — 7. 'Hpuirr^ca suggests "cross-examine" in i. 2 i (comp. 19), 
 25, xviii. 19; but not in ix. 1 TjpdbTTjaav avrbv oi txaB-qral avrou Xeyovres, 'Pa/3/3«, ris 
 TJ/jLaprev... ; Hence it does not seem likely that John would avoid the aorist infin. 
 from a feeling that it suggested disrespect. 
 
 361 
 
[2499] TENSE 
 
 IV. In Participles 
 
 (i) Aorist 
 
 [2499] The aorist participle with the article is comparatively 
 rare in John except in the phrase " he that sent me " or "the Father 
 that sent me 1 ." In some instances it occurs in reference to future 
 time, where we might have expected the future participle. But the 
 meaning is "those that [shall] have," as in the Synoptic Tradition, 
 " But he that shall have endured (d Se uVo/Aetvas) to the end, he shall 
 be saved 2 ." So in John v. 25 — 9 "The hour cometh, and now is, 
 when the dead shall hear... and they that shall have heard (01 S.kov- 
 o-avTe?, i.e. really heard, or hearkened, or obeyed) shall live... they that 
 
 shall have done (o\ Trotrjo-avTv;) good they that shall have practised 
 
 (ot 7rpa£avTes) evil... "; vii. 39 "Now he spake concerning the Spirit, 
 which they (lit.) were destined to receive that should [hereafter] have 
 
 believed on him (ov e/xeWov Xa/i-fSdveiv ol TTLO-Tevo-avTes (al. ttlctt€Vovt£s) 
 eh avrov)" xvi. 2 " the hour cometh that every one that shall have 
 
 killed you (iras 6 a7roKT£tvas vftas) shall think " ; xx. 29 "Blessed 
 
 [are] they that [hereafter (1554)] shall not have seen and shall [yet] 
 have believed (/jl. ol fxrj iSoWes ko.1 7n.o"r€i;o-avTes) 3 ." 
 
 [2500] In xvii. 20, " Neither for these only do I pray, but for 
 them also that (R.V.) believe (A.V '.■ shall believe) (Tno~Tev6vTwv) on me 
 through their word 4 ," the R.V. might give the impression that "them 
 that believe" denoted the converts already made by the Twelve 
 
 1 [2499 a] See Bruder (1888) pp. 588-9. In the sing., without irar, it probably 
 ahvays refers, in John, to a definite person, as in v. 11, 13, 15, xi. 2, xviii. 14. On 
 iii. 33 probably referring to the Baptist, see 2501 — 2. 
 
 2 Mk xiii. 13, Mt. x. 22, xxiv. 13. 
 
 3 [2499 U\ In view of the freq. use of ixr\ with participles where ov might be 
 logically expected, some may urge that ol p.7] i. iced jr. may refer to those -who, in 
 the course of the last seven days, had believed in the Resurrection of the Saviour, 
 not having seen it themselves, but having accepted the testimony of the disciples 
 that had seen it. But, if so, would not the Evangelist have stated, however briefly, 
 that certain persons did thus believe? And does it seem likely that he would 
 suppose the Saviour to have thus limited His benediction? Moreover, if that had 
 been the writer's meaning, he could have made it clear by using ov as in 1 l'et. ii. 
 10 and Rom. ix. 25 (from the LXX). In Mt. v. 11 (sim. Lk. vi. 22) (R.V.) 
 "blessed are ye (/xaKapiot eo-re) when [men] shall reproach you (Srav oveMauxnv 
 bfi&s)," the reference is to future time, although the blessing is indicated (by the 
 insertion of "are") as present. Much more might the reference include future 
 time when "are" is not inserted (see 1554—6). 
 
 4 W.II. wioTevbvTwv. Some authorities read irio-revo-bvTWv. 
 
 362 
 
AORIST PARTICIPLE [2502] 
 
 when previously sent out by Jesus to preach the Gospel. On the 
 other hand, A.V. ("shall believe") has probably followed the in- 
 accurate authorities that have altered the difficult present into an 
 easy future. But ol 7tl<7T€voi'T£<; may be regarded as a noun, 
 " believers " or " converts " ; and, without regarding the present 
 participle as "prophetic," we may say that the prayer "for the 
 converts through their word" includes future converts (as well as 
 present) made through the preaching of the apostles and their 
 successors. 
 
 [2501] The aorist participle presents difficulty in iii. 32 — 3, "No 
 one receiveth his testimony. He that received (6 \a/3oiv) his testimony 
 set his seal [to the statement] (ia-cfypdyLcrev) that God is true." The 
 words are (Preface, p. ix) part of an evangelistic comment im- 
 mediately following the Baptist's last words, " He must increase 
 but I must decrease." The " testimony " is that of Christ, and the 
 question arises, What person or persons does 6 Xafiwv indicate? It 
 is probably John the Baptist, who was the first to " receive " that 
 "testimony" to the Messianic character of Jesus of Nazareth which 
 was conveyed to the prophet by Christ's inherent grace, truth, and 
 power. This view is confirmed by other passages. If the writer had 
 meant " he that hath at any time received," we should expect, in 
 accordance with Johannine style, either (i. 12) "as many as received 
 (00-01 Se eAa/3oi')," or (as in vi. 45, 7rSs 6 a.Kova-a^...p.a6wv and comp. 
 xvi. 2) "every one that hath received," or the plural participle, 
 "those that [shall] have received" (comp. v. 25, 29 01 d/coixravTes, 
 
 01 tu. dya0a TToirjcravT^'i) 1 . 
 
 [2502] The usage of the Gospel, then, suggests a definite person. 
 And the usage of the Epistle tends in the same direction. For there, 
 the aorist participle with d (nom.) in one of the two instances in 
 which it occurs probably refers to Christ, and in the other certainly 
 does so 2 . On the whole, both context and idiomatic usage indicate 
 that the words are a part, so to speak, of the Baptist's epitaph, 
 
 1 [2501 a\ Besides 6 Karafias and 6 n^fji\pas, the sing. aor. part, occurs in v. 1 1 
 6 iroirjcras, v. 13 6 5e iadels, v. 15 6 iroiricrai, xi. 2 17 aXeixf/aaa, xi. 37 6 dvoi^as, 
 xviii. 14 6 <jv/j.^ov\evcTas. All these refer to single persons and definite acts. 
 
 2 [2502a] Bruder p. 592 — 3 gives, in the Epistle, about 47 instances of the 
 article with participle; of these about 40 have d (nom.) with pres. particip., but 
 only 2 have (nom.) with aorist particip., i.e. 1 Jn v. 6 6 e\6wv and v. 18 6 
 yevvr^deh e/c t. deov. The latter occurs in the same sentence with 7ras 6 yeyevvr)^evo% 
 tK t. deov, from which it appears to be deliberately differentiated. 
 
 363 
 
[2503] TENSE 
 
 declaring that he sealed an attestation to the truth of God. This 
 accords with the Johannine account of the Baptist. The Fourth 
 Gospel is the only one that represents the Baptist as declaring that 
 God had said to him, i. 33 " On whomsoever thou shalt see the 
 Spirit descending and abiding on him, he it is that baptizeth in the 
 Holy Spirit." And the next words describe the Prophet as attesting 
 the truth of this message from God : " And I have seen and have 
 borne witness that this is the Elect (815 — 6) of God 1 ." 
 
 [2503] The aorist and the present participle are used in two 
 different contexts to describe the " descending " of the Son of man, 
 or of the Bread of Life. The first is as follows : " No one hath 
 ascended into heaven but he that descended out of heaven 3 , the Son 
 of man." In the next passage, addressed by Christ to the multitude 3 
 after the Feeding of the Five Thousand, 6 may mean either " the 
 [bread] that," or "the [man] that": "The bread of God is the [one] 
 that (o) descendeth from heaven and giveth life to the world 4 ." The 
 multitude obviously take " the [one] that " to mean " the bread that"; 
 for, without shewing any surprise, they reply " Give us evermore this 
 bread." Then Jesus answers "I am the bread of life," and "I have 
 descended (KaTafiefirjKa) from heaven." 
 
 [2504] At this point, "the Jews" are introduced. We are not to 
 suppose that the scene is shifted to Judaea, for we are subsequently 
 told, "these things he said, teaching, in synagogue, in Capernaum 5 ." 
 Here, as elsewhere, " the Jews " mean the Pharisees, and more 
 particularly Pharisees of eminence in Capernaum, who had ap- 
 parently heard of Christ's doctrine to the "multitude." The 
 
 1 [2502 />] When Samuel anointed David to be king of Israel on the strength 
 of the word of the Lord 1 Sam. xvi. 12 "Arise, anoint him, for this is he" this 
 may be called — and truly, in the spiritual sense — witness from God : but it might 
 also be called a witness from David himself, from the personality of the future 
 king, appealing to the heart of the Prophet and saying "/ am he." 
 
 [2502 cj .Matthew, in a tradition peculiar to his Gospel, indicates the effect that 
 might naturally be e\po ted to be produced upon the Baptist by the personality of 
 Jesus of Nazareth, (606 — 9) (Mt. iii. 14) "I have need to be baptized by thee" — 
 even before the culminating revelation. 
 
 2 iii. 13 6 £k rod ovpavov /cara/3ds. This is either an utterance of Christ to 
 Nicodemus, or an evangelistic comment on Christ's utterance to Nicodemus 
 (which, in that case, terminates with the words "how shall ye believe if I tell you 
 of heavenly things?"). 
 
 3 Comp. vi. 24 — 6, which shews that in the following dialogue "the multitude" 
 are the interlocutors, at all events up to vi. 41, where "the Jews" are introduced. 
 
 4 vi. 33. ° vi. 59. 
 
 364 
 
PERFECT PARTICIPLE [2506] 
 
 narrative — which seems to imply an interval after the address to 
 "the multitude," but does not say how long it was — proceeds thus: 
 " The Jews therefore began to murmur concerning him because he 
 said I am the bread that descended (d apros d Kara/^ds) from heaven 1 ." 
 Jesus is not recorded to have said this as yet, but it appears to be 
 their inference from Christ's words " I am the bread " and " I have 
 descended." In replying to them Jesus says, "I am the bread of 
 life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness and died. This 
 is the bread that descendeth (d a. d Kara^SaiVwr) from heaven that 
 anyone (ns) may eat of it and not die 2 ." But when He repeats 
 the phrase in the first person, the aorist is used, " I am the living 
 bread that descended (d a. 6 Kara/^as) from heaven 3 ." The aorist is 
 also repeated in the last sentence of the discourse, "As the living 
 Father sent me and I live on account of the Father, so he that eateth 
 me he also shall live on account of me. This is the bread that 
 descended (d d. 6 Kara/Ja's) out of heaven... 4 ." 
 
 [2505] Reviewing all the passages about "the descending bread" 
 we are led to the conclusion that besides the contrast between the 
 bread from heaven and the bread from earth, some distinction is 
 intended between (i) the Bread that is, and has been from the 
 beginning, descending to man from God through the ordinary 
 influences of animate and inanimate Nature 5 , and (2) the definite 
 and supreme gift of that Bread in the Incarnation. The former is 
 expressed by the present, the latter by the aorist. 
 
 (ii) Perfect 
 
 [2506] In viii. 31 "Jesus therefore said to those Jews (R.V.) 
 which had believed him (A.V. which believed on him), If ye abide in 
 my word...," the words tovs TreTrto-TevKoras cu/raJ mean (as R.V.) 
 simply " had believed," without conveying any such suggestion of 
 completeness as often attaches itself to the Johannine perfect in- 
 dicative. For here the context excludes the notion of completeness. 
 
 1 vi. 41. 2 vi. 48 — 50. 
 
 4 vi- 57 — 8, on xayib see 2123 — 4. 
 
 5 [2505 a~] Comp. the saying of Deut. viii. 3 quoted in Mt. iv. 4 that man lives 
 "by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God," and Heb. i. i, which 
 indicates that these "words" had been "proceeding" long before the Incarnation. 
 See also below for the illustration of the discrimination between Kara^aivoiv and 
 Karafids, applied to "the bread," by the discrimination between epxofxevov and 
 ri\dev applied to "the light" (2508). 
 
 365 
 
[2507] TENSE 
 
 As there is no pluperfect active participle, John, like other authors, 
 employs the perfect participle as an equivalent. The preceding 
 verse says, "As he spake these things many believed on him (ets avrov)." 
 The perfect participle seems to refer to this recent "believing," and 
 to mean "those that had just entered on belief 1 ." But in any case 
 there is no intention to imply perfect belief. On the contrary, the 
 subtle change in passing from " believed on him " to " believed him" 
 indicates an inferior belief in the latter case (1522 — 3). The context, 
 too, indicates that these believers soon fall away and pass into the 
 bitterest enmity. For such an issue the order of the words is perhaps 
 intended to prepare us: "Jesus therefore said to those that had [just] 
 believed him [being] Jews" — a term that in this Gospel almost 
 always means that part of the nation which identified itself with 
 the Pharisees and was systematically hostile to Jesus. 
 
 (iii) Present 
 
 [2507] The present participle, with the article, is regularly used 
 by John (as in the LXX " he that curseth (o /caKoAoywi') father or 
 mother 2 ") in stating a general law so as to include future as well as 
 present, and sometimes referring mainly to the future : xiii. 20 "He 
 that receiveth (o Xaix(3dvwv) whomsoever I send (av nva iri/xif/w) 
 receiveth me," vi. 35 "he that cometh unto me shall not hunger," 
 vi. 37 "him that cotneth unto me I will in no wise cast out." In the 
 above quoted instances a class, not an individual, is denoted. But 
 the context shews that an individual, not a class, is denoted in i. 15 
 (W.H. marg.) "John testifieth concerning him, and crieth aloud, 
 saying, '(lit.) This was he that I said, He that cometh after me is become 
 
 before me' " Here 6 0V10-00 fxov ZpxofJLevos, according to Johannine 
 
 usage, would naturally mean " whosoever cometh after me " : but the 
 preceding words, " This ivas he that I said" shew that a special 
 person is intended, and make the meaning clear. W.H.'s text 
 " This was he that said" would not make the meaning clear, or 
 
 1 [2506 a] The perfect participle often refers to quite recent events in John, 
 e.g. ii. 9 "the water just wade {yeytv-qfxlvov) wine... those that had just drawn 
 (i]VT\T]K6Tes) the water," v. 10, vi. 13 etc. 
 
 [2506/^] It has been shewn (1703 a) that John uses the perf. of opav much more 
 freq. than the Synoptists do. But it may be added that he is also far more prone 
 than the Synoptists to the general use of perf. participles. 
 
 2 Ex. xxi. 17 quoted in Mk vii. 10, Mt. XV. 4. 
 
 366 
 
PRESENT PARTICIPLE [2508] 
 
 rather would make the meaning different from what is intended. 
 For this and other reasons the marginal reading is preferable 1 . 
 
 [2508] The present participle without the article is variously 
 interpreted in i. 9 " The true light, which lighteth every human 
 being (iravra avOpunrov)' 2 , coming (ipx6p,evov) into the [whole] world." 
 A.V. " every man that cometh " is not in accordance with the usage 
 of John, who would probably have written WiTa tov kpypi^vov if 
 that had been his meaning. R.V. marg. "as he cometh" is liable 
 to the objection that it introduces an inappropriate metaphysical 
 suggestion as to the precise moment when the Light shines on the 
 soul; and it is not supported by the Hebrew phrase "all that come 
 into the world" (which favours A.V. rather than R.V.) 3 . The 
 context, and the tone of the Fourth Gospel, favour the connexion 
 of "corning" with "light." Like the distinction above (2505) 
 between KaTafiatvoiv and Kara/fo's, there appears a distinction here 
 between epxpjxevov and tfkdev, and the passage says, first, that the 
 Light was "continually coming" to all mankind (more especially to 
 the prophets and saints) and then that it definitely "came" in the 
 Incarnation 4 . 
 
 1 [2507 a] W.H. marg. bv elirov, txt 6 elirwv. The Syr. and Lat. vss have 
 " This was he that I said," or "about whom I said." But B has, at end of line, 
 06ITTW with a corrector's n above the o and o above the 60 > C has Xeytj ovtos i)v o 
 eurwv with o eiirwv corrected into ov ekeyov : X omits \eywv and has Kexpayev ovtos 
 t]v o o7ncrw, a corrector has ins. \eyuv...o eiiruv (altered into ov et7roi') : D (Latin 
 lost) has Ketcpayev ovtos r/v ov eiirov o oiriaw with ymTh (sir) above the line after 
 eiwov. The facts point to early confusion between eiTT^ and eino> which might 
 spring from the interchange of O and (X> frequent in MSS. (2691). Origen has 
 (Lomra. i. 154) Ss ftapTvpuv tce'icpaye, X^w 'O diriffu..., omitting ovtos rjv 6v elwov, 
 (ib. 177) 6v elirov, (ib. 184) 8v elirov (Huet 6 flir&v, but the context, protesting 
 against the view that the Baptist's words are "broken " by the evangelist's, favours 
 elirov). Nonnus has elirov, Chrys. has it thrice. 
 
 - [2508a] See Lightf. on Col. i. 28 where he says that "every man" is "three 
 times repeated for the sake of emphasizing the universality of the Gospel." 
 
 3 [2508/;] Hor. Heb. ad loc. quotes four instances of this freq. Heb. phrase, "all 
 that come into the world," but none have ";«<!«" in the Hebrew. 
 
 4 [2508r] Comp. i. 9 — 11 epxofJ-evov els tov K6ap.ov...els tol iota r/Xdev, "coming 
 continually into the world... into his own house he rame [once for all]." Alford 
 says that Origen, Chrysostom and most of the Greek commentators take epxofJ-evov 
 with dvdpwirov. It is true that the Latin translations of Chrys. and Origen have 
 "venientem," but the argument of Chrys. suggests (though it does not prove) that 
 he followed Origen in regarding the metaphor as that of the sun "coming to," and 
 shedding its light on, "the world." Moreover Cramer's version of Chrysostom has 
 irdvTas r/Xde (puirlo-ai., and Theodorus says (Cramer) elirwv tov epxop-evov els t6v 
 
 367 
 
[2509] TENSE 
 
 [2509] Exact instances of the prophetic present participle in 
 John are very rare. Strictly speaking, if the Holy Spirit must be 
 described as "not yet" being (vii. 39) till Jesus was "glorified," 
 then i. 33 " This is he that baptizeth in the Holy Spirit " is prophetic 
 present, and the same must hold good about i. 29 6 a/Avo5...d alpwv 
 " the Lamb. ..that taketh away the sin of the world," unless the Lamb 
 of God may be regarded as already beginning to do its work. Both 
 these instances are in words of the Baptist, and perhaps the evan- 
 gelist deliberately assigns to the last of the prophets the prophetic 
 present. Elsewhere xxi. 20 "Who is it that delivereth thee up?" is 
 a repetition of the question xiii. 25 '•'Who is it?" which follows 
 xiii. 21 "One of you shall deliver me up" so that it meant "Who 
 is the man that shall deliver thee up?" Possibly, then, xxi. 20 is a 
 case of prophetic present. But it must be remembered that xiii. 2 
 has previously described the intention of " delivering up " as having 
 been put into the heart of Judas, and the Synoptists tell us that the 
 treacherous compact had already been made. 
 
 [2510] At an earlier point in the Gospel the future participle is 
 used in connexion with the treachery of Judas, vi. 64 "He knew... 
 and who it was that should deliver him up (o ■n-apah'wo-wv avrov)" — 
 the only instance given by Bruder of a Johannine future participle 
 with the article 1 . Comparing this with xiii. 11 "for he knew him 
 that was delivering him up {rov 7rapa8i86vra avrov) " we can hardly 
 
 k6<t/j.oi> Trepl tov 8e<nroTov Xpiarov. Origen Cels. vi. 5 quotes Is. Ix. 1 "Thy light 
 hath come" to illustrate the " corning-" of the light "into the world," which he 
 describes as tov aWydivbv xal vot)tov apparently meaning "the hearts and minds of 
 men." So in his Coram, on Jn (Huet ii. 25) Origen says that, as the material sun 
 is the light of the material world, so the Saviour shines on the reason (rols \0yiK0Ts 
 Kal i)ye/jLoviKois). Comp. Orig. (on Jer. xi. 1 — 10, Horn. ix. ) quoting Jn i. 9 — 11 
 with the preface t) iiridrj/xia [i.e. tov X/).]...e7ri\d / ixi/'acra 6\u> ry Kocr/Mf}. In the 
 Latin Horn, on Ex. xxxv. 5, when Origen quotes Lk. xii. 49 " I have come to send 
 fire" with Jn i. 9, "' iste ignis (irvp) quern venit mittere Jesus illuminat quidem 
 omnem hominem venientem (?veniens, epxbfxtvov)" it is probable that Orig. meant 
 irvp ipx^ixevov to be taken together. See also his ("0111m. on Judg. ii. 7 (Lomm. 
 xi. 218) "Si enim intelligamus 'lumen verum quod illuminat omnem hominem 
 venientem (Perror for "venii ;/.v")in hunc mundum' et praebeamus ei ad illuminandum 
 aninias nostras, ant si oriatui nobis sol justitiae, et mundum animae nostrae 
 habemus bospitium," where men are apparently said to "have as it were the 
 ■world of their soul as the abiding-place of the Light." Similarly later on 
 (Lomm. \i- 222) the argument would be improved by substituting " veniens" for 
 " venientem." Bui Nonnus has avbpQ>v 'Vipxop-ivuv iwl yalav. 
 1 Bruder (1888) pp. 588—9. 
 
 368 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2512] 
 
 think it an improbable hypothesis that 6 TrapaStSov<; means "engaged 
 in the work of delivering up " and is not a prophetic present. 
 
 V. In the Subjunctive Mood 
 
 (i) Aorist and Present 
 
 [2511] That John, more than many Greek authors, utilises the 
 shades of difference between the aorist and the present subjunctive, 
 may be inferred from a single passage x. 38 " in order that ye may 
 recognise (yrwTc) and go on recognising (yivwa-K-qre) that the Father is 
 in me 1 ." His usage will be conveniently considered for the most 
 part under the headings of (a) Deliberative Subjunctive, (/? — e) idv 
 (or av), (£ — 17) tva, (6) or™ — with which conjunctions the subjunctive 
 most often occurs. 
 
 (a) In Deliberative Subjunctive 
 
 [2512] The deliberative subjunctive in vi. 28 ri ttoiS>\),s.v, "what 
 must we habitually dot" (with v.r. Troi-qo-w/xev, -770-0/xev, -ov/xev) differs 
 from tl Troit](ru>fx€v in Luke 2 , in that the former indicates a course of 
 action, the latter a special action at a certain crisis. In vi. 5, John 
 agrees with Mark vi. 37 dyopuo-Mfxtv "are we to buy [in this 
 emergency]?" — where Matthew and Luke differ from Mark, and 
 John, though agreeing in the deliberative, differs as to the speaker 3 . 
 John's use (though rare) of the deliberative subjunctive bears on 
 xi. 47 ti TTOLov/jav ; shewing that it must not be rendered "what must 
 we do?" since this would have been expressed by him in the usual 
 way, by the subjunctive 4 . 
 
 1 [2511 a] Comp. i Cor. xiii. 12 "For the moment (apri) I am [merely] 
 recognising (yivwiTKU)) in part, but then I shall further recognise (£^^.yvu)o■onai). ,, 
 Applied to spiritual truth, 7icun7kw = " I recognise," £yvwv = "I recognised at 
 a certain point of time," £yvuiKa = "I have recognised and possess the recognition," 
 iiriyLvwiTKU = " I have a further recognition," i.e. an advanced spiritual knowledge. 
 The Johannine and the Pauline aspects differ. In 1 Cor. xiii. 12 "recognition" 
 is regarded as present and partial when contrasted with the future. In Jn x. 38 
 it is present and progressive, as contrasted with the past when the believer first 
 recognised (yvwre). 
 
 2 [2512 a] Lk. iii. 10, 12, 14 asked by candidates for baptism. 
 
 3 Mk vi. 37 Xiyovcrtv avrqi 'AireXdSvres ayopa<Tu>/uLev... ; Jn vi. 5 6 'I...\eyeL wpbs 
 ^LXlttttov TLodev dyopdato/xev...; 
 
 4 [2512^] See 2493 — 4. In xii. 27, rl eiVw; if it means "what should I say?" 
 is deliberative subjunctive. If it meant (933 foil., a view now retracted) "Why 
 should I say?" i.e "Surely I ought not to say," it would not be what is commonly 
 
 A. VI. 369 24 
 
[2513] TENSE 
 
 (£) With can (or an), " if" 
 
 [2513] In the Synoptists, eaV, " if," apart from /at/, very rarely 
 occurs — if we except clauses with e^w or 6e\w — without the aorist 
 subjunctive or some equivalent. There are only two passages of 
 Mark that contain exceptions to this rule 1 . In the two instances 
 
 called deliberative subjunctive, but a negative interrogative. I cannot, however, 
 find an instance of rl elVw; "why should I say?" Ps. lxxix. io " Wherefore should 
 the heathen say?" is in LXX pvqiroTe etirutriv ; (al. eis t'i X£yei, or ipei;). IIws etirv; 
 '■'■how could I say?" might be illustrated by Ps. cxxxvii. 4 wGis aau>p.ev "how could 
 we sing?" But rl eiwu (like rl cpw; comp. Aristoph. Nub. 137S rl a' eiirco;) seems to 
 require the rendering "what ought I to say?" It is quite true that (939) "what 
 ought I to say?" savours rather of Greek tragedy than of Hebrew literature, and 
 does not at first seem appropriate to the Johannine conception of Christ. But it 
 may be explained by xii. 49 evroXrjv 5e8wKev ti eiVw, "the Father hath given me 
 commandment what I should say." The Son, listening for the Father's voice, 
 says, "what should 1 say? [Should I say] Save me?" — and then recognises at 
 once that this should not be said and utters the prayer that should be said. 
 
 [2512c] Irenaeus i. 8. 1 says that the Valentinians, along with "My soul 
 is exceeding sorrowful," and "If it be possible let this cup pass from me," quoted 
 the words /ecu tL e'lirw ovk oloa, "and what ought I to say? I know not" — as 
 a manifestation of airopia. This at all events proves that in very early times 
 rl was rendered "whatV Chrys. paraphrases thus, 'AM' ovk ^xv t ' etirw, <pT)aiv, 
 dnaWayriv alrovp.evos, dia yap tovto y\0ov eis rr\v wpav ravr-qv, " I do not know what 
 I should say petitioning for release." For contextual variations, see 2768 — 70. 
 
 1 [2513 a] One of these is Mk xiv. 31 eav 5^7, "if it be necessary [i.e. the 
 present decree of God]." The other is Mk ix. 43 — 7 "And if thy hand offend 
 thee. ..(45) and if thy foot offend thee. ..(47) and if thine eye offend thee," in which 
 the following variations deserve note: 
 
 IX. 
 
 43 
 
 IX. 
 
 45 
 
 B k. lav. 
 
 ..-lo~yi 
 
 k. eav 
 
 -t-tv 
 
 K „ 
 
 -l0"Q 
 
 )> 
 
 -tf« 
 
 A, C ,, 
 
 -H'v 
 
 )j 
 
 -'f>7 
 
 D „ 
 
 -tft? 
 
 kSlv 
 
 -i-iV 
 
 L „ 
 
 -lay 
 
 k. eav 
 
 -Laet 
 
 a et si 
 
 -izaverit 
 
 et si 
 
 -izat 
 
 l>, d et si 
 
 -izat 
 
 et si 
 
 -izat 
 
 /et si 
 
 -izaverit 
 
 et si 
 
 -izat 
 
 k et sic 
 
 -iziaverit 
 
 et si...et 
 
 -iziat 
 
 IX. 
 
 + 7 
 
 k. eav.. 
 
 •-<$?? 
 
 >> 
 
 ») 
 
 ? ) 
 
 ) » 
 
 6 
 
 K. 1 
 
 -tf« 
 
 K. eav 
 
 -l&D 
 
 et si 
 
 •izat 
 
 quod si 
 
 -izat 
 
 quod si 
 
 -izat 
 
 et >i 
 
 -iziaverit 
 
 [2513/'] These three sayings about "hand," "foot," and "eye" are given 
 in full by Mk alone. Mt. condenses two of them ("hand or foot") into one. 
 I.k. omits them all. Mk places before them a saying about "a mill-stone" and 
 "whosoever {6s av) shall cause to stumble (aKavSaXicnj),'' Mt. agrees, l.k. varies 
 (17 Iva o-KavoaXlarj) but retains "the mill-Stone." There, 1> has. in Mk ix. 4-: 
 ffKavoaXii'y, in Mt. wiii. 6 (TKavdaXelay, in l.k. xvii. 2 aKavdaXicry. The hypothesis 
 suggests itself that Mk reflects the influence of oral tradition, and of sayings 
 addressed to converts or to possible converts in different forms on different 
 
 3/0 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2514] 
 
 where it occurs with the present subjunctive in Matthew, the clause 
 means "If so-and-so be just happening," or, " If so-and-so be going 
 on, [what will be the immediate consequence] 1 ?" In Luke there are 
 two instances of idv with present subjunctive, and there the force of 
 the present is not so clear-. 
 
 [2514] In John, idv with the present subjunctive is much more 
 frequent than in the Synoptists, and it is not always easy to perceive 
 the difference of meaning. For example, the aorist is used in 
 viii. 31 " If ye abide in my word," viii. 51 — 2 (bis) " If any one keep 
 my word," xv. 7 "If ye abide in me," xv. 10 "If ye keep my 
 commandments." In viii. 31 the apodosis is present, "ye are 
 my disciples" : does not this seem to shew that "if ye abide" means 
 "if ye are abiding' '? In xv. 7 the apodosis is an imperative "ask": 
 and this, too, seems to imply the condition of a. present "abiding" on 
 the strength of which the disciples are encouraged to " ask " at once 3 . 
 The fact is that, owing to the disuse of some of the old classical 
 Greek conditional forms, a great burden is thrown on this particular 
 form, lav with aorist, just as, in English, a great burden is thrown on 
 such a form as "if he comes," which, in spoken English, often does 
 
 occasions: — at one time, "If thy right hand should offend thee {aKavhaXiar))" ; 
 at another, "If thy right hand be \now\ offending thee, cut it off [and come fo the 
 Lord Jesus Christ]." I believe it would be found that the misspellings of uncial 
 mss. are more numerous and striking in Mk than in Mt. and Lk., and that these 
 misspellings — though in part attributable to other causes — may be partially 
 explained by the fact that the author of Mk was comparatively illiterate, and 
 that it was largely based on oral tradition. The same statement would apply, 
 in the Double Tradition, to Mt. as compared with the better spelt version 
 of Lk. 
 
 1 [2513c] Mt. v. 23 "if therefore thou be in the act of offering (wpoacpepris) thy 
 gift and there [on the spot] shouldst [suddenly] recollect (/cd/cei ^J.v^^a^f|s), , ' xv. 14 
 "But if a blind man be leading (odriyfi) a blind man" — the parall. Lk. vi. 39 has 
 "Can a blind man lead..?."— "shall they not both fall into the ditch?" 
 
 2 [2513^] Lk. vi. 33 Kal Pyap] eav ayadowoiriTe does not greatly differ (as 
 regards hypothetical force) from Lk. vi. 34 Kal eav oavia-qre, and from the aorists 
 in parall. Mt. v. 46 — 7, ayaTr^arjre and dcnrdariade. Lk. xix. 31 eav tis v/ut,as 
 epwra is parall. to Mk-Mt. eiirr). Perhaps Lk. vi. 33 d-yatioTroirjTe implies 
 continuous action as compared with daviarjTe, and Lk. xix. 31 may mean "If 
 any one venture to ask," or "begin to ask." 
 
 :i [2514 a] In xv. 7, 6 eav 8e\r)Te alriiaacrde Kal ytvqaeTai., X has alrqaeade, 
 a and / have taken ah^ffaade as inf. and omit kcu— " whatsoever ye desire to ask, 
 [this] shall be done." The imperative is spelt with -at in A and U. But d transl. 
 currio-aadai correctly as "petite." Nonnus must have read deXrjTe Kal alrr\a-r]aQe. 
 He also has'TVuV dv evl (? corruption of final syll. of vpuv and the following eV) 
 iravra reXetercu. 
 
 37I 24—2 
 
[2514 (i)] TENSE 
 
 duty for " if he come " (which may now be regarded as pedantical), 
 " if he should come,'" " if he is coming," and " if he is about to come*." 
 John accepts, with the Synoptists, the loose aorist with idv, which, 
 though mostly referring to the future, may include the present : but 
 he differs from the Synoptists in that he uses the present with idv, 
 much more frequently than they do, to express something that may 
 be at the present time going on, and to introduce the consequence 
 that must be (conditionally) going on at the same time, e.g. xi. 9 "If 
 any one be walking in the day, he is not stumbling." 
 
 [2514 (i)] John's free use of Idv with present subjunctive allows 
 him to make distinctions not so clearly recognisable in the Synoptists 
 between such phrases as (1) el ravra ttouZtz'-, " if, as ye say, or if, as 
 I assume, ye are doing this 3 ," ( 2 ) ^" tout™ iroirjre, "on the supposition 
 that ye are doing this " or "put the case that ye are doing this," (3) iav 
 Tain-a 7roirj(Tr)Te, " should ye do this 4 ." In xiii. 17 ei ravra olSare, 
 
 1 [2514 0] As for such English phrases as "If he shall come" and "If he shall 
 have come," they are not really English at all, but may perhaps be tolerated 
 occasionally in a treatise like this, which sometimes aims at expressing for readers 
 unacquainted with Greek the different shades of meaning in Greek conditional 
 sentences. il If then we shall shake off our slavish yoke" Rich. II. ii. 1. 291 
 means "if we are to, or ought to, shake off"; and even that is quite excep- 
 tional. 
 
 2 [2514 (i)rt] El conditional with the fut. is non-existent in Jn. In N.T. it is 
 very rare except in Hebraic interrog., e.g. Mk viii. 12 el 8odr)o-eTai; and indirect 
 interrog. The fut. occurs (1) after el kcli in Mk xiv. 29 (D nal edv and subjunct., 
 and par. Mt. xxvi. 33 om. Kai) and Lk xi. 8 (D om. el kclL): — where the meaning 
 is "I grant that." Elsewhere el and fut. are perh. restricted to phrases about an 
 appointed time of harvest, trial, judgment etc. (1 Cor. ix. n /ue^a el 6epiaop.ev, 
 iii. 14 ei' tlvos to 'ipyov txevei, iii. 15 ei' twos to Hpyov /cara/ca^creTai). In 2 Tim. 
 ii. 12 el dpvqo-6/j.eda, 1 Pet. ii. 20 {fit's) el vTro/xevetTe the futures are prepared for by 
 present verbs, and the fut. means "if [in the hour of trial]." 
 
 [2514 (i)l>] Ei with the optative (exc. in the phrase el tv\ol and a few passages 
 in the Acts) does not occur in N.T. except in 1 Pet. iii. 14 — 17 in connexion with 
 suffering persecution, el koI irdo-x oiT€ - K P € " lTTO "- e L 0Aot to 6e\rj/xa tov OeoP, 
 wdaxei-i' ... Emphasis seems to be laid on the hypothesis of a mystery "If ye 
 should indeed suffer. ..if the will of God should [so mysteriously] will." 
 
 :i [2514 (i)r] EZ, with indie, means "if, as is the fact" in iii. 12. vii. 23, 
 viii. 46, x. 35, 38 etc. It means "if, as you say" in vii. 4, viii. 39, x. 24, xi. 12 etc. 
 Ei' ris, for 6'0-m, occurs more or less freq. in almost every hook of N.T., but not 
 in Jn and 1 Jn. 
 
 4 1 2514 (\)d] In r Jn i. 6, 8, 10 eav etiru/xev "if we should saj'" introduces 
 three statements of false doctrine, while i. 7 (b.>> 5i ...irepnraTQp.eu and i. 9 tdi> 
 6/xo\oywp.tv introduce the hypothesis of presenl and continuous Christian life, 
 "o>i the supposition that we are walking or confessing"] and this is the general 
 (though not invariable) use in the Epistle. 
 
 372 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2515] 
 
 ixanapioi co-re iav irovfJT* aura, the meaning is, perhaps, " If ye know 
 this [as ye suppose ye do, though one of you, Judas, knoweth it not] 
 blessed are ye— on the supposition that ye are giving effect to your 
 knoivledge by action.' 1 '' In v. 31 iav eyw p.aprvp(Z irepl ifiavrov rj 
 fiaprvpia p.ov qvk iamv d\y]8y]<;, " put the case that I (emph.) am bearing 
 witness about myself; [then] my witness is not true," the meaning 
 seems to be that the Son is not really bearing witness about Himself 
 because, though His lips may utter the words of testimony, the 
 Father is speaking through the Son. This must be compared with 
 viii. 14 "Even though I (emph.) be bearing witness (kqv iyw piapTvp<2) 
 about myself, my witness is true 1 ." 
 
 [2515] Where the protasis contains idv with present subjunctive 
 the apodosis generally contains an indicative present, or imperative 2 . 
 
 1 [2514 (i) e] Comp. Eurip. Ion 532 fxaprvpus aavru. Chrys. ad loc. maintains 
 that the meaning is, "If I bear witness about myself, my witness — according to 
 what you say, yon Jews — is not true." The Jews have said nothing of the kind as 
 yet. But they say it afterwards (viii. 13) and Chrys. maintains that Jesus was here 
 " anticipating {-n po\a/3u>j>) " the charge that the Jews are going to make. But the 
 context (v. 30 "I am not able to do anything from myself") indicates that Jn has 
 in view the unity of the Son with the Father (as suggested in Is. xi. 3) and that 
 "I" means "I apart from the Father." Subsequently the statement is verbally 
 and superficially contradicted in viii. 14 "Even though I [the Son] be bearing 
 witness about myself, my witness is true" — because the Father is bearing witness 
 through the Son. 
 
 - [2515 a\ See v. 31, vii. 37, xi. 9, 10, xii. 26 a, xiii. 17, xv. 14. In viii. 16 iav 
 Kpivu 5e iyib, the verb is prob. present — the apodosis being "is." Qi^v (owing to 
 the rarity of the aorist subjunctive of 0e\u) peril, represents the aorist subjunctive 
 in vii. 17 "If any man's will shall be [de\ri) to do... he shall know" (to be con- 
 trasted with xxi. 22 — 3 (bis) "If I will (0e\w)...what [is] that to thee?"). So in the 
 Epistle, 1 Jn i. 7, 9, ii. 3, 15, iv. 12, v. 14 the verb in the apodosis is present and 
 both protasis and apodosis refer to the present : " If we be walking, &■ confessing, be 
 keeping his commandments etc... so-and-so follows." 
 
 [2515/'] The future is exceptionally found in the apodosis in xii. 26b "If any 
 one be ministering (diaKovrj) to me, him will my Father honour,'''' xiii. 35 "Hereby 
 shall men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have {£xV Te ) l° ve one to another " 
 (where, however, not much stress can be laid on the pres. 'ix r l Te i as the aorist 
 subjunctive is rare and does not occur in the Gospel, though found in the Epistle). 
 As to xii. 26 b comp. Lk. xii. 37 on the honour that will be paid by the Master to 
 those servants whom "he shall find watching": perhaps the meaning is "If any 
 one be [found in the day of visitation] mi7iisteringio me." This suggests a similar 
 rendering in xiii. 35 " If ye be [found] having love." But, as to this and xiv. 15 
 iav ayaware fj.e...TT]prjffeTe, xiv. 23 iav tls dyairg. fie., .rriprjaei..., it must be noted 
 that the aorist of ci7a7rdw sometimes means (1744 (iv) foil.) "manifest love by 
 action," and might be unsuitable where the writer desires to say "if ye be really 
 loving me in your heart ye will keep my commandments." 
 
 373 
 
[2515 (i)] TENSE 
 
 In vi. 62 iav ovv 8ewpr}re... Chrysostom reads the aorist iS^re while 
 Nonnus paraphrases as d6prja-r)T€ — and an aorist in the protasis would 
 of course affect the character of the implied apodosis 1 . The difference 
 between viii. 51 — 2 iav tis rqprjcrr} (comp. xv r . 10 iav TrjprfarjTe) and 
 i Jn ii. 3 iav...T7]pwixev, is that the Gospel declares a future con- 
 sequence of a future act or state while the Epistle declares the 
 present consequence of a present act or state : " And herein we 
 recognise that we \_have recognised and\ know him if we be keeping his 
 commandments 2 ." In xii. 26, what is the difference intended by the 
 variation of order, iav epi ns $iaKovf}...idv T19 ip.ol SiaKovfj? In the 
 former, ip.ol seems (2553) more emphatic than in the latter : " If a 
 man be servant of mine let him follow me on the path of the cross : 
 if a man be [found in the act of] serving me, him will my Father 
 honour." The context shews that 8iaKoifj in the first clause means 
 "be servant in name and in profession," which may be compared 
 with the tradition in Mark and Matthew " If any one (lit.) willeth (et 
 rt? OtXei) to come after me... let him take up his cross and follow me," 
 where Luke has " If any one willeth to be \daily\ coming (epx^o-dai) . . . 
 let him take up his cross daily (ko.8' rjp\ipav) and follow me 3 ." 
 
 [2515 (i)] 'EdV with indicative does not occur in John ; but it 
 occurs once in the Epistle (1 Jn v. 15) koi iav o"8ap.ei>, and it is 
 supported by Blass (p. 214) from t Thess. iii. 7 eav vpaU rrrTfjceTe 
 (-rjTe X*DE) — also Job xxii. 3 iav av rjo-Ba — and he says " the only 
 irregularity is that this present indicative is occasionally preceded 
 by idv instead of el." The facts alleged hardly justify the phrase 
 " occasionally preceded." For ot'Sa/xei' is not exactly a present, 
 
 1 [2515 r] The Latin versions, including </, have "videritis" (D dewprJTe). In 
 order to give the usual Johannine force to the [ires, subjunct., it would be necessary 
 to suppose that the preceding verbal enunciation of the doctrine of sacrifice by 
 Christ was accompanied by a spiritual act on I lis part, of the nature of an Ascension 
 12489) at which the Jews were unconsciously present, "hearing but not understand- 
 ing, seeing yet not seeing," and that this "seeing yet not seeing'' was denoted by 
 dewpelv (2210 — 2). For Nonnus' version and further details see 2739 />. 
 
 - [2515 d\ i Jn ii. 3 Kai if tovt^ yivuxiKOfxev on iyvuiKa/xeu avrdv. See 2491 
 and 2760 — 6 on yivuaKio and ZyvuKa. Here yivuiKO^ev appears to mean, not, " we 
 
 fnise for the first time" or "begin to recognise," but "we spiritually recognise 
 
 that we have a complete spiritual recognition." 
 
 :i [2515< ] Ml< viii. .'4, Mt. \vi. 24, Lk. i\. :.'. In Jn xii. 16, Chrys. twice 
 reads, in the first clause, 6 i/xoi dtaKovLov, and illustrates it by the Synoptic 
 tradition about "taking up the cross.'' Cramer has Ov rts i/iol diaxovel, but this 
 is in the second clause, " // any on,- be \/t'it>i,i\ ministering to me, him will my 
 Father honour." 
 
 374 
 
v 
 
 AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2515] 
 
 so that the inference is drawn from a single instance in N.T. More- 
 over in the LXX, so far as concerns several books at all events, there 
 appear to be no instances of idv with pres. indie, except as various 
 readings 1 . 'Ear with r/aOa may be explained by peculiarities 
 connected with fjcrOa, not with idv 2 . So, too, in all probability, may 
 idv with <tt7]K€T€ s . In i Jn v. 15 and in the preceding words, there 
 are several variations ; NA omit the words in question (prob. 
 through homoeotel.); in 1 Jn ii. 29, iav d8rJT€ is corrupted by several 
 
 1 [2515 (\) a] The Oxf. Cone, gives hardly any instances of idv indie, without 
 t indicating v. r. In Gen., Ex., Lev., Numb., Josh., Job, Psalms and Isaiah, 
 I have not found idv with pres. indie, anywhere except as v.r. and then very rarely, 
 e.g. Lev. xxvi. 21 (A) ko1 idv. ..it opeuecrde (comp. xxvi. 23 -rjade, A -eijcrrjide, 
 F -eueade), Is. i. 19 ko.1 idv OiX-qre (A diXire) foil, by idv oe /xr) diXr/re which 
 A keeps. In N.T., kcli idv is occasionally foil, by indie, v. r. in such a way as to 
 suggest that a scribe regarded kclI idv as meaning "even if," "grant that," and 
 thought that it might be foil, by indie, as representing an assumed fact. 
 
 2 [2515 (i) b~\ Phrynichus says, "'Hs iv dyopp," ct6Xoikov. Xiye ovv " rjcrda." 
 Opdorepov 8e XP<? T0 (?) av ° ~Xiyuv, idv 77s iv dyopa. This apparent "uncertainty 
 about 77s and ^ada' 1 is justly called by Dr Rutherford (p. 240 — 1) "surprising." 
 But prob. Phrynichus wrote xpw|rw|t i.e. "use the iota subscript" (2772 — 5). In 
 LXX, 17s occurs (Oxf. Cone.) 5 times (only 2 without v.r.). Comparing Job xxxviii. 
 4 77? (A r)<Tda) with Job xxii. 3 idv <ru r}<r9a (A 77s) we may infer that LXX here 
 confused 77s and -qada together — not a difficult matter in view of the general con- 
 fusion of the forms of the imperfect of eifil. Comp. Ex. xxi. 23 idv U r)v (3rd 
 pers.) AF 77, Lev. xxi. 17 idv 77 (A r)v). In Numb, xxvii. 8 dvdp. idv diroddvy]... 
 Kal vlbs /XT] r)v (AF 77) ai/ru the distance of 77? from idv may have caused the rjv 
 clause to be taken parenthetically. As regards 77^ and 77 or 77, the insertion or 
 omission of v may be explained in the usual way (360 a). The Editor of certain 
 Berlin Papyri (27 B.C. — 250 A.D.) would read idv 77 for idv r)v in some cases where 
 Deissmann (p. 201) would retain the latter; and Deissmann states that "idv with 
 the subjunctive is found three times in the same papyrus " that contains the 
 indicative. See 2771. 
 
 [2515 (i) r] As regards 1 Thess. iii. 7 iav vp.eis aTrjKere (-777-e X*DE), comp. 
 Mk xi. 25 W.H. otclv (TT-qKere (but B and Orig. aTr]Ki]Te, al. crrr/KeLTe, ecrTrjKrjTat., 
 CTT-qre, tcxT-qnere, a, d, f stabitis, k steteritis), and Josh. x. 19 /xtj ecrT^/care, 
 Aq. Theod. llt] arrjKeTe, Symm. /j.77 d7ro<777}re, and note Ex. xiv. 13 <ttt)t€ 
 (A ffTf)KeTe), 1 K. viii. 11 aTTjKeiv (A <TTr)vai). To these add the var. in Jn viii. 44 
 and Rev. xii. 4, ea-rr/Kev I v.r. iar-qKev). The facts indicate that forms of (tttjko} 
 were liable to be confused with forms of earr/Ka. The perfect subjunctive is rare 
 in Gk. The Iliad i. 524 has 6<ppa TreTroLdgs but Odyss. x. 335 oippa wewoidoixev 
 (which Eustath., says Steph. 664 B, derived from ireiroidu, like irewXr)yu) and 
 weq^vKU}). Isaiah has ireTroidibs with tJs and waiv in Is. viii. 13, x. 20, xvii. 8. 
 
 [2515 (i) </] The conclusion is that particular phrases with dl8a, el/xi. and 
 (TTfJKW, do not form a solid basis for inferences about the general usage of idv and 
 orav. Very often tvord-usage might override grammatical usage. In London, 
 "We have drank" was (at all events between 1865 and 1889) frequently used for 
 
 375 
 
[2516] TENSE 
 
 authorities to euv iS^tc 1 , and if i Jn v. 15 originally had eiSofxcv, a 
 spelling of eiSw/xcv, the former might easily be taken as an error for 
 oi8a/xev. On the whole, however, olSa/xev is probably correct. But, 
 if so, it seems used, not to emphasize the indicative, but because 
 the writer avoids the subjunctive eiow, familiar indeed (2729 a) in the 
 phrase Iv eio^s, -rjre, but (perhaps on that very account) almost 
 restricted to that phrase — as "hanged," in English, has come to be 
 almost restricted to judicial executions. 
 
 (y) With an and Relative 
 
 [2516] Whereas the Gospel has (xiv. 13, xv. 16. xvi. 23) o n av 
 (or av tl) alrrja-qTe referring to the future, the Epistle has (1 Jn iii. 22) 
 o av alrdifxev (and i Jn ii. 5) os 8' av r-qpfj referring to the present 2 . 
 In Jn v. 19 "The Son can do nothing of himself but (R.V.) what he 
 seeth the Father doing (av firj tl (iXiiry tov iraTtpa ttolovvto)" a closer 
 rendering would be " The Son can do nothing of himself — [nothing] 
 unless he be [at the moment] seeing the Father doing something," and 
 the reference is to the preceding words, " The Father loveth the Son 
 and is [always] shewing him all things that he himself is doing." 
 The exact rendering is of little importance provided that the reader 
 understands that the whole passage (including the statement that 
 " the Son quickeneth whom he will ") is not in a prophetic present 
 referring to the future. It regards the incarnate Son as continually 
 " seeing " on earth what the Father is doing in heaven, and as 
 Himself doing the same thing (1607) 3 . 
 
 "we have drunk" for seemliness. So (1) the familiar imperative o-r^ere might 
 replace the rare eoTij/op-e or CTrjKTjTe, (2) ei5u>/j.ei>, being ambiguous as well as rare, 
 might be replaced by oida/xev, and (3) the two indicative forms y\<jQa. and r\% might 
 be confused with the subjunctive 77s. 
 
 1 [2515 (i)e] Similar confusions are very frequent in LXX, see Oxf. Cone. 
 eiodv. Also in Epictet. Index Schweig. has a long note on the confusion between 
 'iva ti5G>ixev and i'ca i'Saj/iev referring to i. 6. 23, 29. 24, 29. 42 (comp. iii. y. 14, 21. 
 6). 
 
 - [2516</] 1 Jn iii. 17 S? 5' av #xy T - ^ ov T - k6<t/j.ov k. dewpfj...K. KKeicrrj, may 
 be compared with Mt. v. 23 quoted above (2513c); the man "is staring" stolidly at 
 his distressed brother and then, by a definite act, suddenly shuts up his heart 
 against him. Bruder (1888) prints xv. 7 as the only instance in the Fourth Gospel 
 of idv used for dv with relative and subjunct., on which see 2660 b. Bruder 
 (Moulton) prints also wi. 25, perh. by misprint, see 2414—6. 
 
 : * [2516/'] Another instance of at> with pres. subjunct. is ii. 5 o ti av V72? iifxiv 
 woirjiTaTe, not important, but interesting in view of the freq. use of drrw and 
 dirwfxfv in the Gospel and Epistle, and of the non-occurrence of the subjunctive 
 A<?7U>, in either, elsewhere. (1) A.4yu is not so formal as elirw. (2) Mary probably 
 
 376 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2517] 
 (8) 'An tinoon KpATHTe (xx. 23) 
 
 [2517] In XX. 23 av tivwv (marg. tivos) u<£r/re tus d/xa/ma? 
 a'^e'coi'Tat (marg. d<pL0VTai) auTots, ai' tivwv (marg. rti'o?) KparrjTf. 
 (D Kpa-njarjTe) KeKparrji'Tai, the aorist (a^re) may imply a definite act 
 " if ye let go," the present (KparrJTe) a keeping of things as they are, 
 "if ye go on retaining." But the use of Kpareu) creates difficulty. 
 It may mean "I hold," "take [hold of]," or, "retain." But does it 
 ever mean "I retain a burden in its position on someone else 1 "} There 
 
 anticipated some immediate action or utterance from her Son ; and hence the 
 meaning seems to be " Whatever he may be shortly saying to you, obey it [at 
 once]," suggesting that the attendants are to catch up any word that may fall in the 
 next few moments from Jesus. In v. 19 av /xrj ri, the separation of tl from 
 av seems to differentiate it from idv tls, i.e. oaris av. 
 
 1 [2517 a] In the Gospels elsewhere, Kpariio (active) (apart from x el pf> s ) is 
 always used with the accusative. When applied to living things, it means "take, 
 hold of," " seize," " attest." When applied otherwise, it means il hold fast," 
 " keep" see Mk vii. 3, 4, 8, ix. 10 " holdfast tradition " etc. In Lk. the active is 
 never used apart (viii. 54) from x €l P 0S - ^ n trie Acts, when the active is applied to 
 persons, it means (iii. n) "hold fast (in a friendly manner)," (xxiv. 6) "seize" or 
 "arrest." In Rev., it means "hold fast" applied to teaching, but "take" 
 or " lay hold of" applied to (Rev. xx. 2) "the dragon." In Col. ii. 19, 2 Thess. 
 ii. 15, it means "holding fast the head," "traditions," with accus. ; but in 
 Heb. iv. 14, vi. 18, "holding fast the confession," "the hope," with genit. ; 
 comp. Acts xxvii. 13 do^avres tt}s tt podia ews KeKparrjKevai. 
 
 [2517 l>] Kpareu with genit., which (without x«P 6s ) ' s verv rare m N.T., is 
 much more freq. in LXX, where Kparico sometimes means "conquer" and 
 "control" as well as "hold." In Sir. xxviii. 22 oil fxrj Kparrjcrri evo-e(3Qv means 
 " [Death, or the tongue] shall not rule over the pious " (comp. Prov. xvii. 2). In 
 Judg. vii. 8 (A) twv 5e rpiaKoaicov avdpiov iKparrjcrev means "retained the three 
 hundred men." In classical Gk, the genit. is more freq. than the accus., and 
 xparelv eavrov, i]5ovicv etc. are frequently used for "controlling oneself, 
 pleasures " etc. 
 
 [2517c] Kpariofiai (passive), in N.T., occurs elsewhere only in Lk. xxiv. 16 
 "but their eyes were holden (iKparovvro)," i.e. supernaturally bandaged or bound, 
 and Acts ii. 24 ovk 7}v dvvarbv KpareiaSai avrbv inr' avrov, which, coming after the 
 expression "loosed (Xi/cras) the pangs of death," indicates that Kparuadai. means 
 "to be held fast," "to remain in bonds," or "to remain shut up in Hades." 
 
 [2517(f) SS (Burk.) has, in Jn xx. 23, "and whom ye shall shut [your door] 
 against — it is shut," as in Ps. lxix. 15 (quoted by Mr Burkitt ad loc.) "Let not the 
 pit shut its mouth upon (or, against) me," which suggests that the translator took 
 rivwv as governed by KparrjTe, and understood the meaning to be " whomsoever ye 
 shut up in prison." Mark and Matthew never use xpareiv tivos thus. But they 
 use Kpareiv riva as follows : 
 
 Mk vi. 17 Mt. xiv. 3 Lk. iii. 20 
 
 eKparr/crev tov 'I. k. Kparrjaas tov'I. 'ibr\(jtv KariKXeicrev tov 'I. iv 
 
 iOTjcrev avrov iv (pvXaKrj. k. iv <pv\aKrj airidero. <pv\aKr}. 
 
 377 
 
[2518] TENSE 
 
 is some reason for believing that John is restating, in a new form, 
 a tradition like those peculiar to Matthew (xvi. 19, xviii. 18) about 
 " binding and loosing." Matthew's traditions have in both clauses an 
 aorist subjunctive in the protasis followed by a perfect participle of 
 permanence in the apodosis, "Whatsoever ye bind (Srjo-rjTe)... shall 
 be once for all bound (eo-Tcu ScSe/Ae'iw) . . . whatsoever ye loose (Xva-qre) 
 ...shall be once for all loosed (ecrrai XeXv/xevov) 1 ." 
 
 [2518] If John was writing with allusion to Matthew's tradition, 
 he might naturally wish to differentiate the Christian "loosing" and 
 "binding" from the Jewish "binding and loosing" of which, savs 
 Horae Hebraicae (on Mt. xvi. 19), "one might produce thousands of 
 examples," and in which "bind" meant " pronounce sinful, or unclean" 
 (and hence "forbid," e.g. of actions on the sabbath) in allusion 
 to which our Lord said that the Pharisees bound heavy burdens on 
 their brethren. Hence, whereas the usual Jewish order (and the 
 order in Matthew) is "bind and loose," John might give prominence 
 to the "loosing" by putting it first, and he describes the "loosing" 
 as a forgiveness of sins. 
 
 [2519] The inference is fairly probable that John is writing with 
 some allusion to Matthew's tradition about "binding" and " loosing." 
 Beyond this, it is difficult to advance. The exact meaning is 
 doubtful. The antithesis favours the supposition that (as in R.V.) 
 "sins" must be supplied as the object of KparfJTz and as the subject 
 of KzxpdTrjvTai. Yet Kpardv, in the sense of " hold fast," though most 
 appropriate to "holding fast hope, tradition, teaching" etc., seems 
 quite inappropriate to " sins." The interpretation suggested by SS of 
 "keeping in prison," cannot be paralleled from N.T., nor from Greek 
 
 Here Luke substitutes " shut up " for the Synoptic " arrested and bound." And it 
 should be noted that Luke never follows Mark in any of the numerous passages 
 where Mark uses Kpardv to mean "take," "arrest." Also, in a metaphorical 
 passage, dealing with remission of sins, where Mark describes the "strong [man]" 
 as being " bound " (Mk iii. 27, Mt. xii. 29 " unless he first bind (fyey) the strong 
 [man]') Luke (xi. 22) has "congtier (i'iktjcttj)." 
 
 [2517, ■] There are two passages about "binding" and "loosing" (both in the 
 aorist) peculiar to Matthew. One is addressed to Peter, one to the disciples, 
 Mt. xvi. jy 6 iav 0770-775 iirl ttJs 777s tarai 5e5e/j.ivov iv tois ovpavois, K. 6 iav Xt'cr^y 
 iwl t^s 7^! (arai \t\v(i£vov iv tois ovpavoh, Mt. xviii. 1S sim. with ocra iav SijtrTjre 
 and iv oi'pavy. In the latter, the context is connected with forgiveness of sins. 
 
 1 |2517/| In Jn xx. 23, where there is notffrai, the perf. implies also "atonee." 
 
 lor xpariw in connexion with "binding" or "casting into prison," comp. M k vi. 
 17, Ml. \iv. .5 (2517 d). Mt. xviii. 18- -30, Rev. xx. 2. 
 
 5/ 
 
 78 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2521] 
 
 literature generally except so far as /cpa-reiV with the genitive means 
 "keep in control." Moreover, it interferes with the antithesis. 
 
 [2520] But it is worth noting that the author of Horae Hebraicae 
 sees in the passage some allusion to the phrase "delivering over to 
 Satan" and that this sort of "delivering over''' in Deuteronomy 
 (xxxii. 30) is rendered by Aquila " shutting up [in prison]" o-W/cAeio-ee. 
 Moreover the Double Tradition has a passage describing how 
 a persistence in injuring one's brethren, followed by a refusal to 
 be reconciled, brings with it a "delivering over" and a " casting into 
 prison" where the offender is to remain till the last farthing is paid 1 . 
 Chrysostom also, in his brief comment on the Johannine passage, 
 illustrates it by a mention of "a king, who sends rulers with power 
 to cast into prison and to let loose from prison 2 ." Thus, a number of 
 early Christian and Jewish traditions point to the conclusion, 
 although it cannot be proved, that John may here be referring to 
 "binding" or "imprisoning," and that the tradition meant something 
 to the effect, metaphorically, that whomsoever the disciples from time 
 to time "arrested" — these were "at once and permanently arrested." 
 
 (e) With 6AN MH 
 
 [2521] 'Ecu/ fxij with present subjunctive is very rare in N.T. It 
 occurs however thrice in xv. 4 — 6 " As the branch cannot bear fruit 
 of itself except it be abiding in the vine, so neither can ye except ye be 
 abiding in me... Except a man be abiding in me he is [straightway] 
 cast (IfiXi'jdrj) (2445) out." The only other instance in the Gospels 
 is Lk. xiii. 3 " except ye be repenting {ekv 1x11 /xerai/o^Te) ye shall all 
 likewise perish," where there is a threat of retribution, as also in the 
 
 1 Mt. v. 25—6, Lk. xii. 58—9. 
 
 2 [2520 a~] Chrys. ad lac. Kaddwep yap tis fiao-iXevs dpxovras biroariWuv 
 
 i^ovalav eh heafj.WT-qpi.ou nai ep.(ia\elv nal a<piei>ai 8i8u>aiv It was the part 
 
 of a disciple of Christ (Is. lviii. 6) Xuaai iravra o-vi>5ecrp.ov adiKias, but Peter 
 is forced to say to Simon Magus (Acts viii. 23) els avvbecrp.ov d5t/das 6pu> ere 
 b'vra. The Apostle did not cast Simon Magus into the prison of sin, but was 
 forced to leave him there and to tell him he was there, at the same time warning 
 him to repent. The word seems to have been used by the disciples of Simon 
 Magus (as quoted by Hippol. vi. 19 ov yap p.rj Kpareiadai avrovs ewi tlvl i>op.i<;op.e'vu 
 KaKw, \e\vrpuivTai yap) to mean that "they were not under bondage for any 
 supposed evil [deed]," and it is opposed to being "ransomed.'" In Fayum Pap. 
 109 (1st cent.) "whenever you. ..want to borrow anything from me, (edd.) / at once 
 five in to you," evdvs ere ov Kparwi, might not the meaning be, " I do not restrict 
 you"? Comp. Arrian Ind. xvi. 12 of the bit, which Kpareei tov 'lwttov "pulls the 
 horse up." 
 
 379 
 
[2522] TENSE 
 
 last clause of the Johannine passage. It would make good sense, 
 in both, to supply "found " — with a reference to the Day of Retribu- 
 tion — "except a man be [found] abiding" "except ye be [found] 
 repenting." In Luke there follows the usual aorist, xiii. 5 (W.H. txt) 
 " except ye repent (iav fxr] fjLCTavo-rjarjTe) ye shall all likewise perish," 
 but W.H. marg., following B, repeats the present subjunctive 1 . 
 
 [2522] In Luke xiii. 3 it would have made good sense to render 
 " Except ye be beginning to repent" but that would not have suited 
 the Johannine passage well. Nor would it suit what is the only real 
 instance of iav fj.tj with present in the Epistles, Rom. xi. 23 " And 
 they also, except they be persisting (iav jxyj iiriixivoicrC) in their unbelief, 
 shall be grafted in 2 ." This agrees with the two passages from the 
 Gospels in expressing or implying a warning. The Gospels express 
 a warning of the evil that will follow unless a certain state of things 
 shall be found existing in the Day of Judgment. The Pauline 
 Epistle implies a warning that there will be no change for the better 
 ("grafting in") if a present state of things is persisted in. The only 
 point peculiar to the Johannine passage is that on the repetition of 
 the warning, the writer throws the consequence of the neglect of 
 that warning into the form of an aorist to express instantaneous 
 consequence "he was [then and there] cast out 3 ." 
 
 [2523] Comparing the Johannine iav /jltj fxivrjre with the Johannine 
 iav /xecvrjTe above discussed, we infer that the former means " If ye 
 be not [found] abiding when the crisis comes there follows instan- 
 taneous judgment," while the latter means, simply, " If ye abide, 
 
 1 [2521 a] In Lk. xiii. 3 — 5, a, e, f make no distinction between the two 
 subjunctives (having, in both, " i\isi poenitentiam egeritis ") but b has "nisi 
 poenitentiam habeatis...si non credideritis oranes homines peribitis." In Mk xi. 
 23 5s dv e'iwri...Kai p.r) diaKpi0fi...d\\a iricTTevr), the present, following two parallel 
 aorists, perhaps means " be [steadfastly] believing" whereas p.y\ StaKpitirj means "not 
 entertain a momentary don/>t." 
 
 '-' [2522 a] Comp. also passages in which iav p.7] is followed by ?x w '• l Cor. xiii. 1 
 iav XaXu)...d. 5e p.rj £x w ) J as "• '4 £ '<*" tt'mttiv Xi-yr] rts ^x eLU tp~f a ^e M ?XV' J as '•• 
 17 eav fj.T) ixV Zpya- These three passages are all of the nature of warnings. In 
 1 Jn iii. 21 iav 77 Kapoia /ut) KarayivucrKT], the verb is repeated from what precedes 
 and p.i) = alpha privative. For Jn v. 19 av /u.7) tl fiXi-try, see 2516. 
 
 :; |2522/'| This is certainly more probable than that it is ethical aorist, i.e. the 
 aorist that implies a present custom from past actions. The context and the style 
 of the author are against this. It implies instantaneousness, but, as has been 
 shewn (2445, 2443. |, with a different shade of meaning from that of the classical 
 Greek aorist of instantaneousness; nor is it very similai to Jn xiii. 31 vvv i5o^d<xdr), 
 where the meaning is helped by vdv "now at last." See also 2754—5. 
 
 5 So 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2525] 
 
 there will be blessing," without any reference to impending retri- 
 bution 1 . 
 
 {£) With In a 
 
 [2524] Most Greek writers observe the distinction between the 
 aorist and present subjunctive, as Englishmen observe that between 
 " shall " and " will," unconsciously and without any appearance of 
 deliberately emphasizing the difference. But we have seen above 
 (2511) that John employs the two forms with an unusual deliberate- 
 ness, even in the same sentence, to distinguish between the beginning 
 of " knowing " and the development of it. A similarly deliberate 
 discrimination is apparent in his references to the beginning and the 
 permanent developments of " believing (■n-ia-Tevu))," as to which it 
 should be noted that in every case D alters the presctit into the 
 aorist 2 . 
 
 [2525] "Iva with aorist of 7n.crrevw : i. 7 (The evangelist, con- 
 cerning the Baptist) " [John]... came for witness... that all might [or, 
 may] believe...," vi. 30 (The multitude, after the Feeding of the Five 
 Thousand) " What, then, doest thou for a sign, that we may see and 
 believe thee?" ix. 36 (The blind man, after being healed) "And who 
 is he, Lord, that I may believe on him?" xi. 15 (Jesus to the 
 disciples, before the raising of Lazarus) " I am glad for your sakes 
 that I was not there, to the intent ye may believe," xi. 42 (Jesus to 
 the Father, before the raising of Lazarus) " Because of the multitude 
 I said it. ..that they may believe that thou didst send me," xiv. 27 — 9 
 (Jesus, to the disciples, when their heart is troubled) " Let not your 
 
 1 [2523 a] The hypothesis that eav fxr/ with pres. subjunct. means "if one be not 
 found in a certain state when the hour of trial arrives'''' is favoured by the 
 frequency of this notion of "finding" in N.T., in connexion with a crisis or day 
 of trial, even when not expressed with these conjunctions. Comp. 1 Cor. v. 3 " if 
 at least. ..we shall be found not naked (« ye...oi yvp.vol evpedTjao/xeda)," ix. 4 eaw... 
 ei'puffiv V/J.8.S dwapaaKevdffTovs etc., Rev. ii. 1 eCpes clutovs \pev5els, iii. 2 ov yap 
 evpTjKa aou tpya TreTrXripufMeva. This last passage suggests that Jas ii. 14 eai> iriariv 
 \eyri tis 2x eLV ^P"t a 5e p.rj &XV lr >»i)\ in the mind of a Jewish writer, suggest the 
 thought of one who, in the midst of his talking about faith, "is found," — when 
 the Judgment arrives — "having no works to shew." And perhaps this may be 
 also latent in 1 Jn iii. 21 eav ij Kapdia p.ri KarayivtbaKri, " if our heart be not found 
 condemning its" (although there a special preceding context may influence the 
 meaning of the words). 
 
 2 Except in xix. 35 where D is missing. 
 
 381 
 
[2526] TENSE 
 
 heart be troubled... I have told you before it come to pass, that, when 
 it is come to pass, ye may believe." 
 
 [2526] "Ira with present of Tna-Tevw : vi. 29 (Jesus to the mul- 
 titude, after the Feeding of the Five Thousand) "This is the work 
 of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent," xiii. 19 (Jesus 
 to the disciples, on the night before the Passion) "I tell you before 
 it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that 
 I AM," xvii. 21 (Jesus to the Father, in the Last Prayer) "That they 
 also may be in us, that the world may believe that thou didst send 
 me," xix. 35 (The evangelist) "And he knoweth that he saith true, 
 that ye also may believe," xx. 31 (The evangelist) "These [things] 
 are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son 
 of God." 
 
 [2527] From a comparison of these passages it appears that on 
 the first occasion when our Lord uses the phrase, the present (vi. 29) 
 is employed ; it is " the work of God that ye believe on him whom 
 he hath sent." But the multitude, in their reply, speak of an inferior 
 kind of belief, " believing" not " believing on " and in the aorist (y\. 30), 
 "that we may see and believe thee." Again Jesus, when speaking 
 of what takes place for the sake of the disciples or for the sake of 
 the multitude that their faith may be strengthened (xi. 15, 42, xiv. 29) 
 uses the aorist, but when He speaks similarly to His disciples with 
 the addition of the words "that I AM" (xiii. 19), apparently 
 indicating a higher faith, He uses the present, which is also used in 
 the only instance (xvii. 21) where the phrase occurs in Christ's Last 
 Prayer. Moreover the evangelist himself, though he uses the aorist 
 in mentioning belief as the object of the labours of John the Baptist, 
 resorts to the present when he attests (xix. 35) the mysterious blood 
 and water from Christ's side, and when he closes what appears to 
 have been the first draught of his Gospel (2431 — 2) with the declara- 
 tion that it is written "that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ 
 the Son of God." 
 
 [2528] The conclusion is that the author prefers the present 
 subjunctive of 7r<.o-T€u'w to denote a continuous faith — that kind of faith 
 lot which the Son of God prays and His evangelists labour. The 
 aorist may of course represent a genuine belief, but it is belief in its 
 entrance or first formation, as when the man born blind says, '"And 
 who is he, Lord, that I may [at once] believe on him?" This con- 
 clusion may throw light en the disputed reading in the Lpistle, 
 •• Ami this is his commandment that we should believe (fvo TriaTevo-uifxev) 
 
 382 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2529] 
 
 the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love (aya7rw/uev) one another 1 ." 
 If the aorist is genuine, as it probably is, it seems intended to denote 
 initial faith, the faith that is connected with baptism and with 
 entrance into the Church 2 , and the meaning is, " that we should [first] 
 believe the name 8 ... and [then habitually] love one another." 
 
 [2529] The meaning attached by John to the present subjunctive 
 (not only of Trio-reu'w but of other verbs such as " know," " love," 
 "remember") and the emphasis that he lays on this grammatical 
 distinction, are illustrated by the fact that it occurs (in connexion 
 with iVa) in the Discourse and Prayer on the night before the Passion 
 more often than in all the words of Christ up to that time. That is 
 because the Saviour is represented as so frequently expressing His 
 care for the permanent future of the Church — that they " may be doing" 
 as He has done, that they " may be remembering" " may be growing 
 in knowledge" " may be beholding" the glory of the Son with the 
 Father, and, above all, " may be loving one another*." 
 
 1 [2528 a] i Jn iii. 23. Here XAC read Tn.aTevuip.zv. But the authority of B 
 is deservedly great on the use of this particular word. Moreover the naturalness 
 of a tendency to conform the mood of iriffrevu to that of the following dyarrui/xev 
 lessens the weight of the evidence of XAC. 
 
 - [2528 b~\ Similarly, in the Epistle, the aorist subjunctive is connected with 
 purification, taking away sins, and being called the children of God (1 Jn i. 9, 
 iii. 1, 5), but the present with the duty of loving, keeping commandments and 
 walking therein (1 Jn iii. 1 r, iv. 21, v. 3, also 2 Jn 5 and 6 [bis)). In 1 Jn ii. 28 
 'iva edv <pavepudrj cx^ee irapprjaiav k. /X17 ai<Tx w Q£>p.':V & 7r ' o.vtov ev rrj wapovcria 
 avTov, there is reference to a definite moment and to a definite action — "coming 
 forward boldly" as distinct from "shrinking back ashamed": 1 Jn iv. 17 iva 
 Trapprjaiav ^x w /" €,/ & T V ¥W T V S Kplcrews implies a state of mind (not a definite 
 action) "that we may be found possessing boldness." 1 
 
 3 [2528 c] As TTwrevw tlv'l is weaker (1480 foil.) than tt. eis nvd, so "believe the 
 name " would seem to be intended to denote something more rudimentary than 
 "believe on the name." 
 
 4 [2529a] It may be urged that in xv. 12, 17, the words "that ye may be 
 loving one another" occur as a precept, not as a prayer. But they recur, in 
 effect, as a prayer in xvii. 26 iva y\ dydirr] -r\v riydwrjcrds ,ue ev avrocs 7) Kayib iv 
 aiiTuis. The greater part of the requests of Jesus for the disciples are expressed 
 with the phrase iva uxrtv which occurs in xvii. 11, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, seven 
 times, perhaps meaning that the Church, becoming one with the I AM, may BE, 
 i.e. may be essentially and eternally existent. Other requests, for them or for the 
 world, are expressed by xvii. 3 yivwaKcoai, 13 £x w<JI - v > 2l Turretr), 23 yivwcxKrj, 
 24 dtwpuoiv. On the other hand the action requested from the Father is expressed 
 by iva with the aorist subjunct. xvii. 15 rr}py]<rrjs. 
 
 3*3 
 
[2530] TENSE 
 
 (77) "Ina mh atto6nh'ckh (vi. 50, in Codex B) 
 
 [2530] In vi. 50 (W.H. txt) "This is the bread that is coming 
 down from heaven that a man may eat thereof and not die (/*•>? 
 diroOdvi)),'' W.H. marg. has dTrodvrjo-Kr]. Codex B is the only ms. that 
 has this reading. But d-jroOavrj is suspiciously easy, dtroOvrja- /07 labours 
 under no such suspicion. There is nothing on the surface of the 
 context, and nothing in Greek usage generally, that would cause 
 a scribe to correct the aorist to the present. Moreover, B is almost 
 the sole authority for some of the present subjunctives that are 
 undoubtedly a genuine characteristic of John 1 . If B is right, the 
 meaning is " may eat thereof and may not be [any longer] under 
 sentence of death." Later on, Christ quotes a Psalm that contains 
 a similar expression, "I said, Ye are gods and all sons of the Highest: 
 but ye are tinder sentence of death as [mortal] men (v/xeis 8k Srj ws 
 dv6p<DTroi d7ro0v7]a-K€Te)- " — where the meaning might be "destined to 
 death," but the notion of a "sentence" is favoured by Deuteronomy 
 xvii. 6 " He that is under sentence of death (o diroOvrfo-Kwv) shall be 
 put to death (diroQavelTai) on the evidence of two or three witnesses." 
 A " sentence " seems also implied by Ben Sira, " From a woman is 
 the beginning of sin, and on account of her we are all under sentence 
 of death (dirodvri(TKoix.ev) " and perhaps by St Paul, " As in Adam all 
 are under sentence of death (airodrnjo-Kovo-i) so in Christ shall all be 
 made alive 3 ." These facts indicate that W.H. were justified in giving 
 to d-rroOvrja-Kr) a place (at least) in their margin : and but little more 
 evidence would be needed to entitle it to a place in the text 4 . 
 
 1 [2530/7] Great importance must be attached to this fact, and to the untrust- 
 worthiness of D, for example, which regularly (2524) corrects the pres. subjunct. 
 of Triffrevio with 'iva, in Jn, to the aorist. 
 
 2 Comp. x. 34 «>w ei7ra deoi iffre quoting Ps. lxxxii. 7. 
 
 a [2530/'] Sir. xxv. 24, 1 Cor. xv. 22. ' ' kirodvqvKw, in Gk, would often mean, not 
 what we should express in English by " I am on the point of dying," but " I am 
 on the point of being put to death" or "on the point of being executed" as in 
 1 S. xx. 32 "wherefore should he be put to death ('iva tI airodv-qcrKei)}" and 
 Susann. (Theod.) 43 airot/vrjcrKW fxr) iroirjcracra fxridti> wv ovtol iwovripevaavTo k<xt 
 
 4 [2530f] It is true that li cannot always be trusted as regards aorist and 
 present subjunctives where the c of the aorist comes next to c or e, but this is not 
 the case here, and the difference between -Ov-qoKri and -davy could not be the result 
 of scribal error. 
 
 [2530r/] In accordance with the use of awo6vr)VKu above-mentioned, "he is 
 under sentence of death," the phrase might be applied to an apostle on the point 
 of martyrdom (comp. 2 Cor. i. 9 "we have had the answer (marg. sentence) 
 
 3*4 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2531] 
 
 (6) With otan 
 
 [2531] It is somewhat misleading to say that in N.T. orav with 
 present subjunctive — which is very rare as compared with the aorist 
 — " usually indicates an action of frequent recurrence not limited to 
 any particular time 1 ." No doubt, this construction is used sometimes 
 with actions of frequent recurrence, such as "eating," "praying" etc. : 
 but orav with the present does not lay stress on, or imply, frequency. 
 It refers to coincidence of time ("during the time when this or that is 
 going on," or " at the moment when this is beginning"). This is seen 
 clearly in cases where the action is not of frequent recurrence, as in 
 Rev. xviii. 9, "they shall weep and mourn... when they are watching 
 (otolv /SAeVwcriv) the smoke of her burning, standing afar off," 
 1 Thess. v. 2 — 3 "The day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the 
 night. For [in the momeni\ when they are saying (otcu' keywaiv) 
 ' Peace and safety,' then sudden destruction cometh upon them," 
 1 Cor. xv. 24 "Then [cometh] the end [the hour 0/ consummation] 
 when he [Christ] is delivering up (Irav irapaBiSuj) the kingdom 2 ." 
 This applies to one of the three 3 Johannine instances of otuv with 
 present subjunctive, vii. 27 (lit.) "The Christ — when he is in the act 
 of coming (orav epx^rai) — no one is [to be found, in that crisis] 
 understanding (ovSeis yivoj'o-Kei) whence he is coming 4 ." 
 
 {airoKpi.ua) of death in ourselves," and i Cor. iv. 9 "the apostles last, as men 
 appointed to death"). On the other hand oik d-rrodurjo-Kei. might be said of a 
 martyr "not appointed to death" or of one whose sentence was remitted. Thus the 
 saying about the beloved disciple of whom it was reported among the brethren 
 (Jn xxi. 23) " he is not to die (ovk airodv7)<TKei)" (in apparent antithesis to Peter, ■ 
 who was to be crucified) might be connected in some way with various traditions 
 relating how the disciple was actually subjected to punishment that would have 
 been naturally fatal, and how he was miraculously delivered from it. 
 
 1 [2531 a] Winer, p. 387. He adds "or else represents something which in 
 itself is future simply as an event (1 C. xv. 24 where it stands by the side of the 
 aorist conjunctive)." See next note. 
 
 2 [2531/'] 1 Cor. xv. 24 orav Trapa5idy...bTai> KaTapyrjo-rj "when he is delivering 
 up., when he has brought to naughty "Orav fxeWri is connected with the Day of 
 Consummation in Mk xiii. 4, Lk. xxi. 7, and with the sounding of the seventh 
 trumpet in Rev. x. 7 ; but not much stress can be laid on these instances of the 
 pres. subjunct. as the aorist e/j.e\\-r]ira is not used in N.T. 
 
 :; [2531 c~] "Three," excluding ix. 5 orav iv t<2 koo-/jlu> cS, because w may be 
 regarded as either pres. or aorist subjunctive. In any case the meaning there is 
 not " Whenever I am in the world," but "during the time when." 
 
 4 [2531 </] The four instances above quoted all refer to what will take place in 
 a future day of retribution. The last three refer to what is commonly called the 
 
 a. vi. 385 2 5 
 
[2532] TENSE 
 
 [2532] "Orav ayuio-iv vfj.as 7rapaSiSdi'T€s in Mk xiii. 1 1 is parallel 
 to orav 8c flacf>ep(D(Tiv v/xas in Lk. xii. ii (where the parallel Mt. x. 19 
 •n-apaSwcru' has the aorist) and is better interpreted "7>z the hour of 
 trial when men are leading you," than "whenever, as may often 
 happen." Elsewhere orav, in connexion with other verbs, may 
 mean " in the moment when " ye are beginning to " pray," " fast " 
 etc., and so in Mt. xv. 2 "They do not wash their hands just when 
 they are beginning to eat (orav aprov iaOiwcriv) 1 ." 
 
 Day of the Lord, as to which the prophetic present indicative might naturally be 
 used in the principal verb, and this would favour the sympathetic use of the 
 present subjunctive in subordinate verbs. 
 
 1 [2532a] See Lk. xiv. 12, 13 " At the time when you are making (orav iroiys) 
 a dinner or feast" etc., comp. Mt. vi. 2, 5, 6, 16. This is perh. the meaning of 
 Mk xi. 25 (pres. indie.) orav or-qucre wpoaeuxofievoi. "at the moment when ye stand 
 up in the act of prayer" and of Lk. xi. 2 orav Trpocevx^aOe "at the moment when 
 ye are praying, say as follows." This runs into the meaning of "whenever ye 
 pray": but " at the moment when" is better in some respects, because it suggests 
 a precept to remember to do this or that at the moment 'when one is beginning to 
 do something else. In Mt. x. 23 orav 5e SiuKuaiv, better sense is made by "as 
 soon as they begin to persecute" than "as often as they persecute," or "whenever 
 they persecute" — though the latter is of course a possible rendering. 
 
 [2532/'] In Mk xiv. 25 (Mt. xxvi. 29) "until that day when I am drinking (orav 
 ttLvw) it new with you," D reads wiw in Mt. but not in Mk. It seems to be of the 
 nature of a prophetic present after orav, used in connexion with the Day of the 
 Lord, as in 1 Cor. xv. 24 quoted above. The only possible instance of orav with 
 indicative in Lk. is Lk. xiii. 28 marg. orav otparde, in connexion with the Day of 
 Judgment. 
 
 [2532 c] Lk. xi. 36 el ovv to awfxa crov o\ov cpwrivov, p.rj £x ov r ' M^pos tl 1 gkotlvov, 
 &ttcu (puiTivbv o\ov dos orav 6 \^%vos (marg. +£v) rrj aaTpcurrj (purify <re is so difficult 
 •that (Burk. vol. ii. p. 295) " the best western mss. (Dade ff ' ir) simply substitute 
 Mt. vi. 23 15 for Lk. xi. 35 — 6," and SS has "Thy body also, therefore, what time 
 there is in it no lamp that shineth, becometh darkened; so what time thy lamp 
 becometh bright, it shineth for thee." The difficulty may be removed by 
 recognising (1) that <purifa almost always means "begin to light up" "bring to 
 light" "dawn on" (not "shine on" or "steadily enlighten") and that it is 
 especially applied to the light that dawned on Christians in baptism. The present 
 passage warns those who have been 1 1 leb. vi. 4) "once illuminated (4>wTi<TdivTa.s)" 
 against quenching their light. (2) Wo-Tpair-q does not mean "the steady light of 
 a lamp" in any alleged Gk passage, and certainly not in Aesch. fragm. 372 
 \ap.irpaiot.v acrTpairatai. \ap.wdSui> crd4i>ei where it is applied to the blazing or 
 flashing torches in the Eleusinian mysteries. In Lk. it is applied to a lamp newly 
 brought into a dark room. (3) In Lk. the content speaks of '•kindling (o^oj)," 
 in Mk of a lamp "coming (£px £Ta 0" mto a room ; and darpairi) refers to the first 
 "flash" of the light on those who are in the dark room. (4) "Ora* with pres. 
 subjunct. may mean "just at the moment when." Then the sense will be that, if 
 the believer, after receiving the light, keeps it unquenched, he will be ••entirely 
 
 386 
 
AORIST AND PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE [2534] 
 
 [2533] "Orai/ dik-qre ill Mk xiv. 7 may mean " whenever ye will " 
 i.e. as often as you like. But it would also make good sense to 
 understand the passage as meaning, in effect, "The poor ye have 
 always with you and ye need not wait long to do them kindnesses, 
 ye are able to do them good in the very moment in which ye form the 
 wish to do it: but me ye have not always." In Lk. xi. 21 orav... 
 (f>v\da-ay, the meaning is not, " Whenever the strong man guards," 
 but '■'■During the time when the strong man is guarding his court his 
 possessions are in peace," and this is contrasted with the aorist ("but 
 when (e-frar 8e) the stronger man comes and conquers (vlkiJo-tj) him ") 
 which describes a single act 1 . 
 
 [2534] In the Pauline Epistles, it makes very good sense to 
 suppose that the Apostle meant to say to the Corinthians " \_In the 
 very hour] when 1 am weak (oVav yap do-0eva>) then am I strong," and 
 "we rejoice [in the very hour] when we are weak 2 ." So, too, 
 1 Cor. iii. 4 orav yap Xiyrj tis does not mean "As often as a man 
 says," but "In the very moment of saying" and the meaning is that 
 a man stamps himself as "carnal" in the very moment when he says 
 "I am of Paul" or "I am of Apollos 3 ." In Rom. ii. 14, the 
 
 light, even as at the moment when the lamp enlightens him with the flash [of its 
 first coming]." W.H. marg. eV, the reading of B, is probably correct, being a 
 literal rendering of the Semitic original, as in Job xxxiii. 30 "to be enlightened 
 •with the light of the living," A and Theod. rod (pwriaai avrcij iv (puiri favrwv 
 (LXX diff. but ip (purl). 
 
 [2532 </] Comp. Epict. iii. 17. I orav ti rrj Wpovoiq. eyKaXys, iwiUTpacpyjdi...., 
 i.e., not, " Whenever you accuse," but " When, at any moment, you are in the act 
 of accusiiig Providence, turn and reflect and you will recognise that things have 
 happened according to Reason." 
 
 1 [2533 n] In Dan. iii. 5 "at what time," LXX has orav where Theod. has 17 
 av dipq., but aKoicr-qre follows, because the meaning is, " At the instant when ye 
 have heard the trumpet you must obediently pay worship." 
 
 [2533/;] In Ex. xxi. 7, Lev. v. 15, where the Heb. has "when," LXX has edv 
 (with aorist subjunct.), but Aq. orav. There is sometimes little difference, in a 
 legal enactment, between (lit.) "When a soul shall have sinned" and "if a soul 
 shall have sinned." 
 
 - [2534 a} 2 Cor. xii. 10, xiii. 9. It is the simultaneousness, not the frequency, 
 that is insisted on — the perfection of "strength," or the "rejoicing," along with 
 weakness (2 Cor. xii. 9 "made perfect in weakness," i.e. in the midst of physical 
 weakness, not by driving it away). 
 
 3 [2534/'] Comp. 1 Thess. v. 3 orav \4ywmv quoted above (2531). So 1 Cor. 
 xiv. 26 ll [fnst] when ye are assembling [for sacred worship] (orav ffvvepxwde) — 
 and ought to be thinking of Christ and of Christ's Body, the congregation — each 
 one is perhaps thinking of himself 'I have a Psalm,' 'I have a Doctrine,' 'I have 
 a Revelation.' [Have done with this !] Let all be done to edification." This 
 appears to be the meaning of the passage. 
 
 387 25—2 
 
[2535] TENSE 
 
 meaning is "At the moment when (orav) Gentiles... are doing {ttolwctlv) 
 by force of nature the works of the Law, these though nominally 
 without Law are really Law to themselves." The foregoing remarks 
 include all the non-Johannine instances of orav with present sub- 
 junctive in N.T. ; and they indicate that (having quite a different 
 meaning from 60-a.Kis idv, "as often as," or "whenever 1 ") it em- 
 phasizes, not frequency, but simultaneousness. 
 
 [2535] Of the Johannine instances, vii. 27 6 <5e XP'O"™? orav 
 Ipxqrai has been explained above (2531) as meaning " [in the Day 
 of Deliverance] when the Christ is in the act of coming." In xvi. 21 
 rj yvvrj orav tikttj . . . orav 81 yei'vrjo~i], the contrast between the two 
 tenses indicates that the meaning is " [in the critical hour] when 
 she is giving birth to a child she hath sorrow — -but when she hath 
 given birth to the child she remembereth no more the sorrow." The 
 only other instance in the Fourth Gospel is viii. 44 orav Xa\y to 
 if/cvBos Ik Twr iS/wv XaAei. This is exactly parallel to the Pauline 
 warning to the Corinthians quoted above (2534) "In the very act of 
 saying so and so, do ye not prove yourselves to be carnal?" So 
 here, the meaning is " in the very act of speaking that which is false 
 he speaketh out of his own (2728)," proving himself a liar. There is 
 one instance in the Epistle, 1 Jn v. 2 "Herein do we understand 
 that we are loving the children of God — [/ mean, in the moment] 
 when (oTav) we are loving God and [when we] are doing his com- 
 mandments," where the writer is insisting on the necessary 
 simultaneousness of the fulfilment of the First Commandment and 
 of the Second 2 . 
 
 1 [2534c] '0<t&kis idv occurs in 1 Cor. xi. 25, 26, Rev. xi. 6. 'Edi> with pres. 
 subjunct. might almost be translated " whenever" in Mk ix. 45—7 "whenever thy 
 foot causes thee to stumble... whenever thine eye causes thee to stumble...," 
 Mt. v. 23 "whenever thou art offering thy gift," Mt. xv. [4 "whenever the blind 
 lead the blind" etc. But in orav time is expressly included, and the emphasis on 
 time differentiates orav from idv where both are used with the present. 
 
 2 [2535a] 15ruder gives 17 as the total number of instances of orav in |n. Of 
 these, 1/, an- followed by the aorist subjunctive, 3 (as above) by the present. One 
 is (ix. 5) orav iv rqi k6<t/xijj ui. There is only one in the Epistle (as above). The 
 suggestion of a Day of Judgment or hour of crisis, apparently conveyed by orav 
 w ith pus. subjunct., accords with the similar association of the pres. subjunct., with 
 idv fj.rj (2521 — 3). In Philo i. 96 A16 Kai 'Aapi)v orav reXfurqi (rovriffTiv tirav 
 rtXeiw Orj) eh "Up, 6 iart. 0tDs, dvip^erai, if the bracketed words are not a gl"^. 
 the meaning may be " when he is /';/ the act of attaining the end through death 
 {that is, has been perfected)!'' 
 
 388 
 
MIDDLE [2536] 
 
 Voice 
 
 (i) Middle 
 
 (a) Aitoymai 
 
 [2536] AtroC/Ltat in N.T. generally means "ask for myself," "ask 
 a favour," and can almost always be thus rendered in the Synoptists 1 . 
 In LXX, the usage varies in different books 2 , and also in different 
 mss. 3 On the whole, the active is used colloquially and for ordinary 
 asking of "food," "money" etc. 4 , but the middle in petitions for 
 blessings from God, or for favours from a king, or in elevated style 5 . 
 Variations can generally be explained as in Isaiah, when the prophet 
 says "Ask as a favotir for thyself {alr-qaai creauTw) a sign," and Ahaz 
 replies " I will surely not ask (ov /xyj air^'aw)." The prophet em- 
 phasizes "as a favour for thyself" the king emphasizes the negative, 
 "I will not ask," i.e. not ask in any way 6 . From meaning "ask 
 a favour," the middle came to mean "ask specially," "ask earnestly," 
 as in Ps. xxvii. 4 " One thing have I earnestly asked {f\Tf]<ra.^.y}v) from 
 the Lord," and Prov. xxx. 7 "Two things do I earnestly ask {alrov\xa.i) 
 from thee." The Epistle of St James implies that Christians 
 
 1 [2536a] Mk vi. 24, 25, x. 38, xv. S, 43, Mt. xiv. 7, xviii. 19, xx. 22, 
 xxvii. 20, 58, Lk. xxiii. 23, 25, 52. In Mk xi. 24 Trpocreuxeade /cat alrelvde, the 
 parall. Mt. xxi. 22 (which somewhat differs) has air-qa^re ev tt\ -rrpocrevxy. Alrovixai 
 in Acts is often in a bad sense " asking a favour" that ought not to be granted as 
 also in Mk vi. 25 (the asking for the head of John the Baptist). Airou/j-ai does not 
 occur in the Pauline Epistles, exc. Eph. iii. 13, 20, Col. i. 9 (and caY^w only in 
 1 Cor. i. 22). 
 
 2 [2536$] Comp. 1 K. iii. 11 rjTrj<TU}...ovK yrrjcro} (3 times). ..d\\' yrrja-co with the 
 parall. 2 Chr. i. 1 1 ovk rjT-qau (twice). ..nal iJTTjaas aeavrtZ. 
 
 3 [2536 c] In Judg. viii. 26, LXX has active, but A middle. In Dan. (Theod.) 
 vi. 7, 12, 13, txt. has active, but A middle. 
 
 4 [2536 </] Ex. iii. 22, xi. 2, xii. 35, xxii. 14, Judg. i. 14 aypbv (but contrast 
 Josh. xv. 18), v. 25 vfiwp, viii. 26 ivwria, 2 K. iv. 3 aKevtj etc. So Ps. lxxviii. 18, 
 cv. 40 of asking food, 2 S. xii. 20, Lam. iv. 4 aprov (but, in the elevated style, 
 Wisd. xix. ir yrrjcraPTO eSea/naTa TpiKpr/s). 
 
 5 [2536 6'] Airoufxai (not aired)) is always used in 1 K. e.g. 1 K. ii. 15, 20 (bis), 
 22 (bis), iii. 5, 10, 1 1 (freq.) etc. and always (4 times) in Joshua. 
 
 6 [2536/] Is. vii. 11 — 12. In Mk vi. 22 — 4, dramatically, Herod Antipasdoes 
 not dwell upon the fact that he is giving Herodias a gift for herself, but simply 
 says — with royal munificence — aiTqabv p.e 8 eav ^Atjs and otl edv /j.e alrricrrjs. But 
 Herodias, with her mind full of the favour she may ask for, says to her mother 
 " What favour am 1 to ask (H aiT-^crw^at) ? " Mt. xiv. 7 dovvai S eav airriarjTai 
 expresses it historically, "to give her ivhatever favour she might ask (8 eav 
 airrj(T7)Tai)." 
 
 389 
 
[2536 (i)] VOICE 
 
 fulfilled formally the Lord's command "Ask (aiYeiTc) and ye shall 
 receive," but that they did not obtain because they did not " ask 
 earnestly" (ovk €X €T€ ^"* T ° f"7 ahelcrOat v/jlcis) or rather they "asked 
 earnestly but wickedly " (kolkws aWdcrde) 1 . It was natural that 
 distinctions between the middle and the active should be made 
 by Christians in the first century. For, whereas Mark and Matthew 
 contain a precept about " asking earnestly,'''' airovficu, the result being 
 conditional on "believing 2 ," Luke omits this precept altogether and 
 merely agrees with Matthew in the unconditional precept "Ask 
 (an-en-e), and it shall be given to you 3 ." 
 
 [2536 (i)] In the Last Discourse and in the Epistle, John, as will 
 appear below 4 , adheres (thrice) to Matthew's and Luke's active, 
 
 1 [2536^] Jas iv. 2 — 3 "Ye have not because ye ask not earnestly (did to ^77 
 aheladai vp.as) : ye ask (atretre) and ye receive not, because ye ask earnestly in an 
 evil spirit (5i6n /ca/cois aire'iade) that ye may spend [money] on your pleasures." 
 See Mayor ad toe. and his collection of passages from Justin and Hennas 
 containing airiu) and afrovixai in juxtaposition, e.g. Herm. Vis. III. x. 7 — 8 H av... 
 carets aTroKaXvxf/eis... ; (3\4we pd] wore ttoWol aiTovfX€vos...Kvpie, touto /xbvov airovfxai. 
 Herm. Aland, ix. 1 — 8 insists on the need of "praying earnestly without dis- 
 traction" (airov . . .dbiaraKrw;) and uses the middle about nine times, only twice 
 falling into the active. Mayor suggests alrr/ar} in ix. 4 eai> dSto-Td/crws alr-qaris. 
 But if that is to be altered, must not we also alter ix. 7 to. airrjLiaTd aov a airels 
 \rf^V ? I s it lnot natural that in a string of exhortations using the middle airovp.ai, 
 "ask earnestly,'" the active, atrew — simply "ask" — should be sometimes used 
 in clauses describing the spirit in which one is to "ask," or promising a reward 
 to petitions "asked" in that spirit? 
 
 2 [2536//] Mk xi. 24 irdvra baa wpoaeijxecrde tcai aire'iade, Tnarevere on e\d/3ere, 
 /cat 'iarai v/xiv, Mt. xxi. 22 iravTa baa av alr-qa-qre iv 7-77 wpoaevxv iriareiiovTes 
 \r)p.\peade, after the withering of the fig-tree. Lk. omits both the miracle and this 
 comment. 
 
 3 Mt. vii. 7 (in the Sermon on the Mount), Lk. xi. 9 alrelre /cat doOriaerai vp.iv. 
 
 4 [2536 (i) a] Apart from xi. 22 baa dV aiTrjarj rbv debv addressed by Martha to 
 Jesus, and from the Samaritan dialogue (iv. 9 — 10 Trap' i/xov ireiv airels... av av 
 7?r7?o-as avrbv) the two voices occur as follows in Jn and 1 Jn : 
 
 Active Middle 
 
 xiv. 12 — 14 6 Triarevojv ...Troir/aei... 
 k. Sn av alrrjarjre (niai'g. alrfjre) iv rip 
 
 dvb/xari fiov rovro woir/ov Iva. bo^aadrj xv. 7 (av /xelvr)re iv e/xol K. ra pr)fxard 
 
 6 waTrip iv tu vltfi. idv ri alr-qaytri [/xe] fxov iv vp.lv fxelvrj, 5 idv OiX-qre alr-qaaade 
 
 iv tu> ovbuarl fxov r rovro (marg. iyw) *• yevrjaerat vfx.iv. 
 
 woirjao). 
 
 xv. 16 k. HdrjKa i'/xas 'lva...K. 6 Kapirbs 
 vllwv pivy, 'iva on av alrria-qre (marg. 
 alrrjre) rbv waripa iv rip 6vbp.arl fxov 
 
 8(p Vp.1v. 
 
 390 
 
MIDDLE [2537] 
 
 "ask" when he connects "asking" with "receiving" or with 
 "having." But whenever (five times) Christ is represented as 
 using the active, " in my name " is added in the context, thus 
 excluding selfish or arbitrary asking. When John for the first 
 time uses the middle, he seems, for the moment, to countenance 
 the most reckless asking of favours — " ask for yourselves whatsoever 
 ye will (a lav diXrjTt aiT^]o■ao■6e) ,, : but this is preceded by " if ye abide 
 in me and my words abide in you." And how can the words of the 
 disciples ask recklessly or selfishly "if" Christ's own "words" abide 
 in their hearts and on their lips? This is John's way of saying " If 
 ye steadfastly believe." Only it is not subjective ("believe") but 
 objective : " If ye stand fast in me and I stand fast in you." As 
 regards this "asking of favours " or "asking what ye will," he does 
 not say "ye shall receive" but u it shall be done for you" resembling 
 Mark's tradition (2536 h) as distinct from Matthew's. In the Epistle, 
 this "asking of favours" is to be "according to the will of God," 
 and the result is, not, " it shall be done" but " He heareth us." 
 
 (/3) 'AnOKpiNACBAI 
 
 [2537] 'A-n-oKpLvofxat is twice used by John in the first aorist 
 middle (instead of the much more frequent aorist passive) in the 
 passage that describes the first attempt of the Jews to " persecute " 
 
 xvi. 23 — 4 dv n alrr\ar\re rbv iraripa xvi. 26 ev ixelvg rrj rjp.e'pa ev ru> 
 
 dwati v/juv ev ry ovo/mari fiov ecos dpn ovb/uari llov airrjaeade, Kal ov \eyoo 
 
 ovk yrrjaare ovSev ev rui 6vbfj.arl fiov i'/uiv on eyu) epiorriaw rbv irarepa irepl 
 
 alTeire Kal \rjfitpeade. vfi&v ' avrbsyap 6 irarrip <pi\ei vfia.% on... 
 
 [2536 (i) 0] 1 Jn iii. 21 — 22 edv 77 1 Jn v. 14 k. avrrj early 77 Trappr/ala 
 
 Kapdia fxrj KaraytVibaKr] ira.pp-qalav ^x o / JL€V V v exofiev irpbs avrov, on edv n ainifieda 
 
 npbs rbv 8e6v, k. 8 dv airQ/xev \ap.[3dvo- Kara rb deXrjfia avrov aKovei rffiGiv. 
 fiev <x7r' avrov. 
 
 1 Jn v. 15 {{>) [after oiba/xev on] exo/J-ev 1 Jn v. 15(a) K. edv oioafiev on 
 
 r& alrrjixara a 7]rr)Ka/j.ev air avrov. aKOvei r]ini2>v 6 edv airwfieda, otda/xev 
 
 on... 
 
 I Jn v. 16 edv ris l5t]... alrr;aei, k. 
 duiaei avru) farjv. 
 
 [2536 (i) c] In xi. 22 oaa dv alrrjari rbv debv 8<i>aei aoi 0e6s, Martha is 
 probably described as applying to Christ, from her own point of view, a word 
 never applied to Him by the evangelist; and the middle "ask for thyself," or "ask 
 earnestly" or "ask as a favour" emphasizes her error. Similarly (1728/) she uses 
 the word (pi\ew to describe Christ's love of Lazarus, whereas John uses ayairdw. 
 Whenever Jn connects "ask" and "give" elsewhere in his own language or in 
 that of Christ, he uses the active, iv. 10, xv. 16, xvi. 23, 1 Jn v. 16, and this 
 accords with the Matthew-Luke Tradition (Mt. vii. 7, Lk. xi. 9). 
 
 391 
 
[2537] VOICE 
 
 (v. 1 6 Slo. tovto iSiwKov) Jesus. It was for an act of healing on the 
 Sabbath. Jesus (v. 17) " made a.7iswer (a7re/<pu aro) to them...." It 
 is then said, " On this account therefore did the Jews seek rather 
 to kill him," and again (v. 19) "Jesus therefore made answer (a.Tre- 
 KpiVa-ro)." 'A-H-expiOr) occurs in John more than 50 times, but aVeKpiVon-o 
 only here. It must be rendered according to its frequent use in 
 Greek, " made answer to the charge" " made his defence." 'O Blwkwv, 
 as a legal term, regularly means " the pursuer," in the Scotch sense, 
 i.e. the prosecutor ; and the verb often means " prosecute." No 
 doubt, John means "persecute" here; yet he means persecuting 
 with charges of blasphemy implying threats of " prosecution," so that 
 " made his defence " is particularly appropriate to the context, where 
 a charge is being brought against Jesus for the first time in this 
 Gospel. 'AireKpaaTo is used only once in the Acts (iii. 12), and 
 there it introduces a speech of Peter " to all the people," not directly 
 of the nature of a defence, but rather an attack upon the Jews for 
 killing Christ. Yet indirectly it is of the nature of a defence or 
 apologia. In Mark and Matthew it is used only negatively, describing 
 the refusal of Christ to " make a formal defence " on the day of His 
 trial. Luke has a parallel use of it in somewhat similar circum- 
 stances 1 . But Luke also uses the aorist middle once more con- 
 cerning the public answer given by John the Baptist "to all [men] 2 ." 
 
 1 [2537 a] Mk xiv. 61 ouk aweKpivaro ovoiv (of the silence before the Sanhe- 
 drin) (Mt.-Lk. diff.) ; Mt. xxvii. 12 ovdev aweKpivaro (of the silence before Pilate) 
 (Mk-Lk. different) ; Lk. xxiii. 9 (of the silence before Herod). These facts 
 must be contrasted with the frequency of the aorist passive form awoKpideis in all 
 the Synoptists. 
 
 [2537/'] In LXX, awoKplvacrf>ai is extremely rare. It occurs in Ex. xix. 19 
 " Muses spake and God answeredhim by a voice," 1 K. ii. 1 " He [David] charged 
 Solomon his son," aweKpivaro, Aq. etc. iverelXaro, I Chr. x. 13 k. aweKpivaro 
 avrw 1". 6 wpo<prjrrjs (not in Heb., " Samuel made answer to Saul " when the latter 
 inquired of a soothsayer), Ezek. ix. 11 " reported the mattery In Judy. v. 29, of 
 Sisera's mother "making answer" to her own question, LXX has dwio-rpe\f/ev 
 X670LU, but A aweKpivaro ev p-fi/jLacriv. Mic. iii. 11 "the priests teach for hire," has 
 the imperf. middle dweKplvovro, Aq. Theod. {(pwrifrv, where LXX perh. took it 
 (as in 1 Chr. x. 13) to mean oracular response. In none of these instances does 
 the middle mean " make answer to a charge" ; but in each of them there is some 
 notion 11I publicity, or oracular response, or solemnity, so that the meaning is 
 different from lh.it of awoKpidyvai. 
 
 - [2537 c] Lk. iii. 10 aweKpivaro \eywv waciv. In the account of the trial, Jn 
 
 nol use aweKpivaro. but he represents JeSUS as freely conversing (iirt K r iih] etc.) 
 
 with Pilate up to the moment wlu-n I 'date asked Him " Whence art thou?" Then 
 
 392 
 
MIDDLE [2537 (i)] 
 
 [2537 (i)] Under this head it is convenient to consider the middle 
 or intransitive sense of the active form KaOi(to in xix. 13 o ovv 
 IleiAaTos. . .^yaycv e£w tov 'lrjfrovv, /cat ii<a6io-£v inl (irjjxaTO 1 ?, concerning 
 
 which it has been suggested in modern times that the verb may be 
 transitive, as in 1 Cor. vi. 4 toutovs KaOl^n, Eph. i. 20 (W.H.) 
 cyei'/jas avrov €K va<pwv /cat KaOicra<; iv St^ia (ivtov. Add Hernias Vis. 
 
 iii. 2. 4 eyetptt fxe kolI Kadifci, " makes me sit on the bench to the left," 
 followed by "and she herself, too, sat (inade&To) on the right." But 
 in all these the transitive meaning of the verb is made clear by the 
 context (although in Eph. i. 20 some scribes make it clearer by 
 adding avrov). In xix. 13, avrov might certainly be supplied after 
 iicddurev 1 if the sense demanded it; but the transitive use of Kadt^u) 
 would be unique in John 2 ; and the phrase nadta-as em tov /3^aro5, 
 which occurs thrice in the Acts about a judge "taking his seat on the 
 tribunal 3 ," would here be employed to describe the judge as causing 
 the accused to sit on the tribunal ! It is needless to dwell on the 
 antecedent improbability that a Roman Governor — even such a one 
 as Pilate — would place an alleged criminal upon the Governor's own 
 seat. No ancient authority is alleged for the interpretation " caused 
 to sit." The Acta Pilati (A and B) takes the word intransitively; 
 so do the Latin translators, the Syriac, and Nonnus ; and Chry- 
 
 it is said (xix. 9) "Jesus gave him no answer (aTrhnpicnv) " — a word meaning 
 an answer to a definite question or questions (as in i. 22). It is clear that there 
 were different traditions about Christ's "not making answer " at the trial. By 
 avoiding the traditional phrase ovk aireKpivaro, Jn avoids committing himself to, or 
 against, any one of the three Synoptic accounts. 
 
 [2537 </] Some MSS. and versions read direKpivaro in xii. 23 (W.H.) 6 de'lrjaovs 
 aTroKpLverai. avro7s \eywv, preceding the solemn words, *' The hour hath come that 
 the Son of man should be glorified." It is the occasion of the arrival of the 
 Greeks and an oracular solemnity is appropriate to the verb of speech. This 
 might be suggested by the unusual present middle, though not so clearly as by the 
 aorist middle. The present is probably the correct reading. ' AwoKpiverai (pies.) is 
 also used to introduce Christ's indication (xiii. 26) of Judas Iscariot as the traitor, 
 and (xiii. 38) His prediction of Peter's denial. 
 
 1 [2537 (i) a] Comp. iv. 47 awrjXdev rrpos avrov teal ripuira [v.r. + avrov^..., 
 vi. [5 apTrd^'eiv avrov 'iva. woi-qawaiv [v.r. + avrov] (BaaiXea, xviii. 12 — 1 3 avviXafiov 
 tov 'lrjcrovv Kal edijcrav avrov Kai ijyayov [v.r. airrjyayov avrov].... Conversely 
 in xi. 44 Xvaare avrov k. a<p(re avrov vwayeiv, some auth. om. 2nd. avrov. 
 
 - [2537 (i) /'] Apart from the spurious viii. 2 Kadiaas, Jn has xii. [4 eKadiaev, on 
 which see 2537 (ii). He also has (4) Kadrjadai and (3) Ka6i'Ceo-9ai. 
 
 3 Acts xii. 21, xxv. 6, 17. Comp. Epict. iv. 10. 21 "And what is the net 
 result [of being a consul]? Twelve bundles of rods, and three or four times sitting' 
 on a bona (eni j3rjp.a Ka6iaai)l 
 
 393 
 
[2537 (ii)] VOICE 
 
 sostom expressly says that " KaOLaai makes it dear" that Pilate pro- 
 fessed an intention to "investigate the matter" as a judge'. 
 
 [2537 (ii)] The suggestion of a transitive meaning in xix. 13 would 
 not have been worth discussing except for its possible bearing on Mk 
 
 xi. 7 eKaOiaev (D Ka(9a£ei, ^sedebat), Mt. xxi. 7 eVcicaflicrev (D €Ka6rjTo), 
 Lk. xix. 35 Zircf3[{3a(rav. Here Lk. has a transitive meaning, but 
 John not only supports Mt.-Mk in xii. 14 evpwv 8e d 'I. ovdpiov 
 tKaQurev ew avro, but also alters the prophecy of Zech. ix. 9 "riding 
 on an ass," LXX eVi^T^'s, to (xii. 15) "seated (ftaflj/'/ievos) " which 
 accords more exactly with eKaiOicrev. There was nothing arbitrary in 
 John's action, for the Hebrew word meaning " ride " in Zechariah is 
 also rendered " sit " three or four times in LXX, and indeed the 
 Syriac — in which the Hebrew word exists and is used in the Syriac 
 version of Mk-Mt. here — is rendered by Mr Burkitt "ride" in Mk 
 xi. 7, Mt. xxi. 7. There can be little doubt that John, in the Entry 
 into Jerusalem, is writing with allusion to two traditions, possibly 
 arising from variations of €Ka$Laav (trans.) and e/<a0icrev (intr.): and, 
 while Lk. adopted the former, " made to sit" John supported Mk and 
 Mt. in adopting the latter, "sat." Perhaps some tradition followed 
 by Lk. made the same mistake as the LXX made in 2 K. xi. 19 
 " and he sat," LXX koL UdBKrav avrov, A (.KaOtaiv. The spurious 
 Gospel of Peter and Justin Martyr have wild traditions telling how 
 the Jews place Christ on a tribunal or place of judgment 2 . Perhaps 
 
 1 [2537 (i) c\ Acta P. (A) 9 tots £ic4\ev<rep 6 U. rbv (3r)\ov eXKvadfjpaiTov (3r)p.a.Tos 
 ov eKadifcro, (15) rbre eKadiaev 6 II. eis tov dpbvov avrov 'iva iroir)ari drrb(pa<nv 
 (Evang. Nicod. merely "tunc jussit Pilalus velum solvi"). The Lat. vss have 
 "sedit," SS is missing, but Walton gives all versions (including Syriac) as having 
 "sedit" or"insedit." Nonnus has apribbpip 5' eKa6r)To XidocrTpuiTip wapa x^PV, 
 Chrys. e&PX €Ta <- ^ v ^ s t&r&fav to irpdypa (to 7<xp koMool tovto ibfjXov) • 
 ovbep.iai> 5e iroir)cra.p.evos i^iraffiv irapablbuxTtv avrov vofxiiyov bvawvnaeiv avrovs. 
 
 2 [2537 (ii) «] Justin Martyr, after ([noting from Is. lviii. 2 (LXX) " They ask 
 me now for judgment," adds (Apol. 35) " For indeed, as the prophet said, dragging 
 Him along they made Him sit upon a seat of judgment (diaffvpovTes avrov eKaOiaav 
 iirl mp-aros) and said Judge for us." The Gospel of Peter has (§3) "Let 
 us (?) drag (evpwp.cv corrected into o-vpu/xev) the Son of God. ..and they made Him 
 sit on a chair of judgment (eK&dicrav avrov iirl xaOibpav KpLosws), saying Judge 
 justly, O king of Israel." 
 
 [2537 (i\)l>] At the same time Jn may also he correcting (1745) a misunder- 
 standing arising from Mt. xwii. 19 KaQr)p.4vov be eirl rov p-qnaros. According to 
 |n, the Pwa was not "the tribunal" but "a tribunal," sel up specially in 
 Gabbatha (comp. Joseph. Bell. ii. 14. 8) outside the Praetorium. If the sentence 
 was to be pronounced publicly, it could not be done from "the tribunal" inside 
 the Praetorium, a^ the Jews (xviii. 2S) would not enter it. 
 
 394 
 
PASSIVE [2540] 
 
 some of these were already in the air at the time of the publication 
 of the Fourth Gospel, and the author may have desired, while tacitly 
 refuting them, to use the very phrase that originated them — thus 
 destroying the error by explaining it. 
 
 (ii) Passive 
 
 (a) 'EnpyBH 
 
 [2538] In viii. 59 "They therefore took up stones to cast at him, 
 but Jesus was hidden and went out of the temple," xii. 36 " As ye 
 have the light believe in the light that ye may become sons of light. 
 These things spake Jesus and went away and was hidden from them," 
 the second aorist passive kKpvfii] is twice rendered as a middle in 
 R.V. txt and A.V., but as a passive in R.V. marg. In favour of 
 "hid himself" may be alleged the usage of LXX. But in LXX 
 ii<pv(3r) means "hide oneself in fear," "crouch," "cower," like Adam 
 and Eve in Paradise 1 . Such usage appears inapplicable here. 
 
 [2539] In N.T. the 2nd aorist passive of Kpvirra) is applied to 
 persons in Heb. xi. 23 " Moses was hidden three months," and to 
 things in Mt. v. 14 "a city on a hill cannot be hid (Kpvf3i}vai)" Lk. 
 xix. 42 "but now are they hid (tupy/St)) from thine eyes," 1 Tim. v. 25 
 " cannot be hid (Kpvfiyjvai.)." Almost all the instances of middle 
 meaning alleged by L. S. may be explained passively, or else they 
 do not affect the usage of the 2nd aorist 2 . 
 
 [2540] On the side of the middle interpretation, however, we 
 must place Chrysostom, who, though he does not quote e.Kpvj3r] in the 
 first passage, says "Then He flees back again after the manner of 
 
 1 [2538a] Comp. Gen. iii. 8, 10, Judg. ix. 5, 1 S. xiii. 6, xiv. 11, Job xxiv. 4, 
 xxix. 8 etc. Aq. uses it in Gen. xxxi. 27 " why didst thou flee secretly (eKpv^rji tov 
 airoSpavai) " LXX om. When Kptiirrw is applied to God hiding His face, Aq. has 
 Kpinrruj sometimes where LXX has airoaTptyu (? for seemliness) e.g. Ps. xiii. r, 
 Is. lxiv. 7. In Is. lvii. 17, " face " is omitted by Heb. but ins. by LXX airearpexpa 
 to irpbcrumbv p.ov. 
 
 - [2539a] KiKpiKparai. Hes. Op. 384 of stars, means "they remain hidden," as 
 Stepli. " absconditae sunt, Ionice pro KeKpvp.p.£vat. elcri." Eurip. Hel. 606 ovpavw 
 5e KpvTTTeraL is much more probably passive as is shewn by the context, apOela 
 acpavTos, ovpavip 8e KpinrTerai " lifted out of sight and hid in heaven [by the will of 
 Zeus]": Cycl. 615 Kpinrrerai is awodiav Spvos &cnreTOi> Zpvos, however punctuated, 
 almost certainly means that the stake is " being hidden " in the embers. The only 
 remaining instance is an imperfect middle Babr. 5. 4 expinrTer o'ckov yuiuiiju, 
 rendered by L.S. " ran to hide himself in a corner." 
 
 395 
 
[2541] VOICE 
 
 man and (?) hides Himself (KpyVreTai) 1 ," where the parallel "flees" 
 makes it probable that he uses KpvVreTai as a middle. Theodoras 
 expressly explains iKpvfirj thus, " How eKpvfirj ? Not by coiling 
 himself up in a corner of the Temple in a cupboard... nor yet by 
 twisting round behind a wall or pillar, but making Himself invisible 
 by divine authority (i^ovaia Oe'iKrj) to those that were plotting against 
 Him 2 ." In the second passage, Chrysostom twice quotes iKpvfSrj and 
 twice explains it as KpvTrrerat. Possibly vernacular Greek usage, as 
 well as that of LXX, may have caused Chrysostom to prefer a form 
 less associated with "slinking away 3 ": but in any case both these 
 interpreters take iKpv(3r) as middle. 
 
 [2541] Some light may be shed on these two passages by another 
 in which Jesus is described as retiring: v. 13 "For Jesus conveyed 
 himself away (i&evo-ev, nD evcwev), a multitude being in the 
 place." Here Chrysostom, in quoting, substitutes i£eK\ivev, and 
 explains it as tKpv{f/ev eavrov and ava^wpTycra?. Now invevai is thrice 
 substituted by A for LXX e*c»cA.u'w in Judges iv. 18. And (2538 c?) 
 the LXX has been shewn to use d-n-oo-Tptcpu) for Kpv-n-Tw concerning 
 the "hiding" of God's "face." Thus it appears that "hiding" and 
 " turning aside " are expressions that might be interchanged in this 
 sense. And, practically, this passage (v. 13) describes a " hiding," or 
 "retiring," as Chrysostom calls it. 
 
 [2542] In viii. 59 several mss. add that Jesus "passed through 
 the midst of them (SuX6ojv $ia p.eaov ottwi-)" and that He "passed away 
 just as he was (Trapyjyev oijtojs)." The first of these clauses is identical 
 with one in Lk. iv. 30 describing Christ's " passing through " the multi- 
 tude of Nazareth, when they were attempting to cast Him down a 
 precipice. That escape is generally regarded as miraculous, and the 
 addition of such a clause in Jn viii. 59 indicates that the scribes 
 
 1 [2540 (?] Eira (pevyei wa\iv avBpwTrlvws nai KpvTTTeraL iKavyjv 8i8affKa\iav ai'rotj 
 wapa.6ip.tvos.... Chrys. does not quote the text with eKpvj3rj. Cramer prints T6 5£ 
 " iKpvj3r] Kal e^rjXdeu €K tov iepoD " audpcoTrivus tt&\ii> woiel, iKai>i)v di5a<TKa\lat> 
 irapaOip.euos.... Nonnus has the middle twice, viii. 59 virb irrvxa Kevdero vrfov, 
 xii. 36 Ktvder 'loidaltov x o P ov --^ <7as - 
 
 2 [2540/'] Cramer ad loc. Origen (on Lk. Horn. 19, Lomm. v. 156) "...sed 
 quomodo in Joannis evangelio scriptum est quoniam insidiabantur ei [udaei et 
 elapsus esl de medio eorum et non apparuit," where the context indicates that he 
 regarded the event as supernatural. 
 
 3 [2540* I Phrynichus warns people against spelling Kpvperai with a p, and 
 Hesychius gives hpvji6p.tfos and vttottItttwv "clinging," as paraphrases of irTrjo-o-uv, 
 "cowering down." 
 
 396 
 
PASSIVE [2543] 
 
 adding it regarded Christ's escape from stoning as miraculous. If 
 so, they must have taken €Kpv/3rj as " miraculously concealed himself" 
 or "was miraculously concealed." In any case, this scribal addition 
 indicates a desire to explain the meaning of iKpvfirj. 
 
 [2543] Summing up the evidence, we find the usage of LXX and 
 three Greek commentators favouring the middle "hid himself" but 
 the usage of N.T. favouring the passive, "was hidden." The latter 
 ought to count for more than the former 1 . And the passive is also 
 favoured by the context in the last of the three Johannine passages ; 
 for it says that the Jews "did not believe" because God had (xii. 40) 
 " blinded their eyes." But some explanation is needed of the motives 
 that induced John to use so ambiguous a phrase. We know from 
 Origen's treatise against Celsus that charges of cowardice were 
 brought by unbelievers against our Lord's character : and if some of 
 these were based on variously expressed traditions that He on certain 
 occasions " hid himself" one way of meeting these charges would be 
 to report the tradition in such a way as to shew how it might be 
 misunderstood. Luke had described Christ as " passing through " 
 the Nazarenes, but had not explained how this was effected 2 . John 
 suggests that it was literal and miraculous, but also that it was typical 
 of a spiritual blinding whereby Christ " was hidden " from those who 
 rejected Him 3 . 
 
 1 [2543 a] Of special importance is Heb. xi. 23, because that Epistle is written 
 by someone familiar with Alexandrian thought, and, to that extent, similar to the 
 author of the Fourth Gospel. The Greek commentators are all late. 
 
 2 [2543 b~\ Cyril (Cramer, on Lk. iv. 29 — 30) says of the Nazarenes " Fie on 
 their folly \...they have eyes and do not .sw...and then goes on to say, ' He passed 
 through the midst of them.'' ' He does not state that they were literally " blinded," 
 or that Jesus was thus miraculously "hidden" from the Nazarenes. But the 
 juxtaposition of the two traditions shews how the former might originate the 
 latter. 
 
 3 [2543 c] If Chrysostom is right in calling Christ's "conveying himself away" 
 (from the pool of Bethzatha) an act of "hiding," then there are three such acts in 
 John, each followed by an expression of unbelief or hostility on the part of the 
 Jews, or by some evangelistic statement about unbelief (1) "He conveyed himself 
 away" (2) " He was hidden and went out of the Temple," (3) " He ith-nt away 
 and was hidden from them." The last seems intended as a climax, implying the 
 final departure of the Light so that it was " hidden from " the Jews. 
 
 397 
 
BOOK II 
 
 ARRANGEMENT, VARIATION, AND 
 REPETITION OF WORDS 
 
 399 
 
CHAPTER I 
 
 ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 § i. Variation in repetition or quotation 
 
 [2544] It has been shewn in Johannine Vocabulary that John uses 
 words with extraordinary discrimination and with subtle shades of 
 meaning. The First Book of Johannine Grammar has shewn that 
 the same subtle discrimination pervades his use of grammatical forms 
 and constructions. We have now to consider whether the same 
 characteristics may be traced in his arrangement and variation of 
 words and expressions. Finally we must consider his habit of 
 repetition — a subject that would find no place in a Shakespearian or 
 Euripidean Grammar, but one that will claim a good deal of comment 
 in the following pages. As regards arrangement, John will sometimes 
 be found to combine with parallelism what is commonly called 
 Chiasmus, i.e. an order in which the extremes and means of a 
 sentence are alike 1 : and this is so frequent that it will receive a 
 separate section. But the first place must be given to Johannine 
 variation — that is, the habit of repeating the same thing (or repre- 
 senting his various characters as repeating the same thing) in slightly 
 dissimilar words and with slight dissimilarities of order. 
 
 1 [2544 a] E.g. Ps. xxvii. 8 " Seek ye my face : thy face, Lord, will I seek," 
 Ps. cv. 15 — 16 "Touch not mine anointed and my prophets harm not," "And 
 he called for a famine on the land ; every support of bread he brake." In these 
 three sentences, the verbs come at the extremes, and the nouns in the middle. In 
 parallelism, the sequence in the first clause would be reproduced in the second, e.g. 
 (Ps. cv. 29 — 33) "He turned their waters into blood, and slew their fish. ..he 
 smote their vines also and their fig-trees, and brake the trees of their borders." 
 In the first of the three instances of chiasmus given above, the two means and the 
 two extremes are identical (" face " " face," " seek " "seek ") ; in the others, they 
 differ. 
 
 A. VI. 4OI 26 
 
[2545] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 [2545] In the list of variations given below, the reader's particular 
 attention is called to the passages, marked t, where an utterance of 
 our Lord is repeated after " I said," " He said " etc. but not with 
 exact accuracy. It is impossible to believe that the evangelist 
 misquoted Jesus or represented Him as misquoting Himself. Our 
 conclusion must therefore be that he wished to compel his readers to 
 perceive that they have not before them Christ's exact words, and 
 that they must think of their spirit rather than of the letter. On at 
 least one occasion Christ is represented as* appealing to words that 
 had been previously uttered by Him, but have not been recorded in 
 this Gospel, xi. 40 "Said I not unto thee that, if thou believedst, 
 thou shouldst see the glory of God?" This cannot be identified with 
 any previous utterance of Christ's to Martha 1 . On other occasions (e.g. 
 vi. 26 — 36, and 44 — 65), the reference is doubtful. Even where Christ 
 is certainly repeating His own words they are never repeated exactly 
 except once (2190 ^7). In that single instance, Jesus says to His 
 disciples xiii. 33 "Even as I said to the Jews, ' Where. I go ye cannot 
 come] so to you also I say it for the present." He had uttered these 
 exact words (viii. 21) to the Jews. But is it not clear that they are 
 now uttered to the disciples in a meaning made widely different by 
 different circumstances? Probably it is something more than a 
 coincidence that this is the only saying of Jesus quoted by Jesus 
 Himself ("I said"), with exact accuracy 2 . It seems as though the 
 writer wished to bring home to us the truth of Christ's warning, " The 
 spirit it is that giveth life; the flesh profiteth nothing. The words 
 that I have spoken to you are [truly] spirit and are [truly] life 3 ." 
 
 1 [2545/7] Here, Alford describes Jesus as "referring her [i.e. Martha] to the 
 plain duty of simple faith insisted on by Him before (vv. 25, 26? or in some other 
 teaching?)." Westcott says, "The Lord directs Martha to the deeper meaning of 
 His words. ...The general description of the victory of faith (v. 26) contained 
 necessarily a special promise. The fulfilment of that promise was a revelation of 
 the glory of God (v. 4) for which Christ had from the first encouraged the sisters to 
 look." The meaning of this is not clear to me. The words in xi. 4 " this sickness 
 is not unto death but for the glory of God," were not uttered to Martha and Mary, 
 but at a distance from them. Perhaps, however, Westcott assumes that they were 
 reported to the sisters by their messenger, who had informed Jesus of their 
 brother's sickness. 
 
 - [2545/'] This is all the more extraordinary because tin- Jews on at least two 
 occasions (vii. 36, viii. 22) quote the words of Jesus at some length and with exact 
 accuracy (2190 a). 
 
 :l 1 2545 <J vi. 63. Comp. Orig. 1 1 net ii. 405 D e(wep 5e d (\d\11 pijfxaTa 6 
 \t]<tovs Tn>evfj.& iiTTL Kal ov ypd/x/xu, where as elsewhere he indicates that it is 
 
 402 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2546] 
 
 The " letter " of words may be described as their " flesh," and the 
 spirit of the words of Christ passes away from us unless we are one 
 with the Person that uttered them, placing ourselves, as far as we 
 can, in His circumstances and receiving from Him His thoughts. 
 
 Instances of Variation 1 
 
 [2546] i. 20 Eyqj ovk elfii 6 xptp-Tog, COllip. iii. 28 avTol vpceh 
 
 fjLOl /J.apTvpa.T( otl elirov [eyw Ovk elpl eya> 6 XpiO"T09, dAA' on. . .(2553 tfj). 
 
 I. 26 — 7,2) Eyw ficLTrTL^io iv v8art... (31) 81a. tovto t)\0ov eyw iv v8nri 
 
 /3a77-Tl£uJl' . . . (3?,) O 7T€/Xl//US fX€ fJaTTTl^iU' Iv vScLTl. 
 
 t i. 48 50 OVTd VTTO TrjV (TVK7JV eT86v (TC... (50) eLTTOV (TOL OTL £iS6v 
 
 <J€ VTTOKOLTU) Trjs 0~VK7]<; (2545). 
 
 i. 49 av el 6 vlos tov Oeov, o~v /3ao-iAei>s el tov 'Io-pa^'A (1966). 
 
 ii. 12 Kal ckci €jxeuav ov 7roAAd? 77/xepas, but iv. 40 Kal e/xeLvev £k£l 
 Svo 7]/ULepa<;, and X. 40 Kai epievev (marg. ep^eLvev) iKel. 
 
 ii. 13 Kct< avefSi] eh 'Iep. 6 'I., but V. I Kal aveBr] 'I. eh 'Iep., and 
 vii. 14 17817 8e Trj'i e. fieo-uvo-qs, aveBr] 'I. eh to lepov Kal e8i'8acrK€i/. 
 
 ii. 14 — 16 rots ttwXovvtok; /jnas Kai irpoBaTa Kai 7repio-Tepd<;. . . (16) 
 tois ras 7rep(.crTepa9 ttoAovctU"'. 
 
 ii. 18 tl ar/pelov SciKiveis yjp.lv, otl ravYa 7roieis ; but vi. 30 tl ovv 
 iroLeh o~v o~rjp,elov, Lva lbu>p.ev 
 
 iii. 3 — 5 lav p.r] tis yevvrjBrj avwOev... (5) eai' /xt; tis yevvrjOrj 
 e£ vSaro? Kai 7ri'evp.aTo<; (2573). 
 
 iii. 3 — 5 ov SuvaTui loetv 7-77V /3acr(Aetav tov #eov... (5) ov 8vVaTai 
 elaeXOelv eh tyjv /3acnAeiW tov #eov (2573). 
 
 iii. 12 el to. €7uyeia £i7roi' vp.lv... lav ei'rrw v/xu' to. lirovpavLa. 
 
 iii. 31 6 araj^ev ep^op-ei'os. . .0 a»v ck ttJs y^s.-.o €K tov ovpavov 
 lp>(op.evo<; 
 
 iv. IO crv av Tjrrjo-a? avTov Kal e'8ojK£i' av o~ol vbwp tfiv. 
 
 iv. 17 aireKp. rj ywr). . .Ovk e^w aropa. Aeyei avTij I^crovs KaAcos 
 
 ct-n-e? 6Vt"Av8pa ovk €^w (2552 and 2553 a^. 
 
 through being in the position of the beloved disciple that a believer understands 
 the thoughts of the Son (1744 (x)). Origen elsewhere connects the Feeding of the 
 Five Thousand with the epithet "fleshly" or "carnal" as referring to the literal 
 interpretation of Scripture (Huet i. 236 n) ; and he quotes— in connexion with the 
 error of disciples taking "leaven" and "loaves" literally — Gal. iii. 3 "Having 
 begun in the spirit," and warns us against "running back to fleshly things" 
 (Huet i. 269 d). 
 
 1 Instances marked f are sayings of Christ varied as indicated in 2545. 
 
 403 26 — 2 
 
[2547] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 iv. 37 iv yap tovtco 6 Aoyos ecrrlv oAti^ivos otl..., but IX. 30 
 ev tovtco (2553) yap to 8avp.ao~Tov icrTLV oti 
 
 [2547] V. 26 wcrrrep yap 6 TraTrjp e\eL £0)771' iv eavTto, ovtws Kal ™ 
 viw eSwKev £,io7]v e\eLV iv eavTco. 
 
 V. 31 — 2 eav iyco p.apTvpu~> irepl ip.avTov 77 papTupia /ulov ovk eo~TLv 
 a\r)8r]<;'. .. (32) otSa otl a\r)6rj<i eo-riv 77 papTvpia rjv p.apTvpel Trepl ipov, 
 comp. viii. 13 — 14 eiTrov ovv avrto oi <!>. 2v 7rept aeavTOv p.apTvpels' 
 
 77 p.apTvpia crov ovk ecrTLv 6Xrjdrj<i' direKp. 'Iijo- Kav eyw p.apTvpiZ Trepl 
 
 ipavrov, dXr]6rj<; Icttiv 77 puprupia pov (marg. 77' p.. p.ov aXrjOrjs icrriv). 
 
 V. 43 eycu iXrjXvOa...Kal ov \apf3dvere pe- iav aXXos eXdrj. ..c/ceivov 
 Xripxi/ecrue. 
 
 vi. 146 7rpocprJTr]<; 6 ipxopevos ei? tov Koo-p.ov, but XI. 270 ^pio-TO? 
 o' iito? tot) 0eoij ets tov Kocrpov ep^opevos. 
 
 f vi. 26 — -9 ci'ScTe crrjpeia... (29) to{5to ccttu' to epyov tov Oeov Iva 
 7rio-T£vr)Te, comp. vi. 36 aAA' et7rov vplv otl /cat ecopaKare [pe] xal ov 
 TTio-TeveTe (2545, 2161 rt). 
 
 vi. 31 01 7raTe'pe? rjpcov to pdvva ecpayov iv T77 iprjpco, Kadcos io~TLv 
 yeypappe'vov. .., but vi. 49 oi tt. vpxov ecpayov iv T77 eprjp.u> to pdvva 
 kol airedavov, and vi. 58 ov Kadcos ecpayov oi iraTepes Kal dn-eOavov 
 
 (1949—50, 2553^—/). 
 
 [2548] f vi. 33 — 58 ° ydp apTos tou Oeov iaTlv o KaTafSaivcov Ik tov 
 ovpavov... (41) otl eiirev Eyw eipi o apTos o KaTa/3d<; ck tov ovpavov 
 ... (50) ovtos iaTLV o apTO? o €K toC ovpavov Karafiaivuiv... (51) eyw eip.i 
 o apTos 6 £ojv o ex tou ovpavov KaT<i/3as... (58) outo's ccttiv d apTos 
 o e£ ovpavoiJ /<aTa/3as 
 
 f vi. 38 — 42 KaTaftef3r)Ka aV6 tou oupavop... (42) 7rws vijv Xc'yet oti 
 'Ek tou oupavoS KaTafiefiypca ; 
 
 vi. 39 aAA.a dvao~Tr)crw aino Trj icr^aTrj r)p.epa... (40) Kai avaaryjcroy 
 auTov eyw T77 io-^aTTj r/pepa... (44) Kayw avao-Tryo-w avTov iv (2715 ^ — d) 
 Trj io-^d.T7j rjfiepa... (54) Kayo) avaaTrjcrut avTov ttj io-^aTtj rjp.epa. 
 
 f vi. 44 ov8el<; SuraTai ikOelv r 7rpos pe n (marg. 7rpo5 «p € ) * a,/ /"•'V 
 d TraTrjp 6 7r€pi^as pc e\KVO-y avTov, com p. vi. 65 elprjKa vp.lv otl ouSets 
 8i»vaTat iXdelv 7rpd? pe edv p?^ 77 8eSopevov auTw t/< tov 7raTpds (2545) . 
 
 vi. 46 ov^ oti tov TraTepa etopaKev tis et p.77 o' (iv napd [toD] ^coij 
 OUT05 IwpaKev toi' 7raT£/>a. 
 
 1 [2548(/] Cornp. also vi. 45 7ras 6 aKoiVas napa tov Trarpds Kal fxaOtcv ip\erai 
 irpds ipt : vi. 65 seems Id combine the positive and the negative statements 
 in vi. 44 — 5 into a negative, including " draw," " hear," and " learn " in the single 
 term "give." Sec 2470 and 2636. 
 
 404 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2549] 
 
 Vll. 1 8 o a<£ iavrov XaXwv ttjv 8o£av tyjv iSiav £r)T€i- o 8e ^twv Tr/v 
 oo^av tov Trifj-xpavros avrov ovtos dXrtdyjs 1(ttlv. 
 
 vii. 2 2 Kot ft'] o-aj3/3a.TO) TrepLTe/xveTe dvOpwirov. el TvepiTOfxy/v 
 
 Aappavet [o] a vOpwTro<; iv cra/3/3aVoj 
 
 vil. 34 ottov elfxl iyw upeis ov SvvacrOe eXOetv, but viii. 2 1 oVou 
 eyoj vVayto vpeis ov Svi'acrOe IXOnlv (rep. xiii. $3). 
 
 vii. 41 Mr; yap €K rrj% Y. o ypio-TOs ep^eTat ; ou^ 17 ypcMpy) eurev oti ck 
 ...ep^erat o XP to " ro ? ; 
 
 [2549] Vlii. 14 010a iroBiv rjXOov Kai 7roi) vTrayw vpeis Se ovk 
 otoaTe TroOty ep^opat 77 7roi) VTrayw 1 . vpets Kara t^v rrap/ca KpiVere. 
 
 1" viii. 21 Kai ev ttj dpaprta upwv d.Tro$aveicr0e, comp. viii. 24 €i7rov 
 ovv Vjxiv oti a.7rouava.crue ev Tais apapTiai? v/xwv eav yap p>; TriOTeixr^Te 
 . . .aTrouaveirrae ev Tat? apapnats vuaov. 
 
 Vlll. 23 Yp.€t? €K tuSv kcltuj icrre, eyco eK twv avu eipi - vpeis ck tovtov 
 
 TOD KO(TfXOV €<TTe, £yW OVK eipi CK TOl! KOCTpOV TOi'tOU (2553^). 
 
 VIII. 47 O U)V CK TOU 0eOV...OTL €K TO? #€Ol) OVK €CTT£, bllt X. 26 OTI 
 
 ovk eVre €K Twi' 7rpo/3aT(op rtuv ifxuiv. 
 
 t Vlii. 51 — 2 eav tis tov epov Ao'yov Trjpr/o-r], Odvmov ov p.7] Oewprjcrr) 
 
 eis Tor ataiva (5 2 ) * a t o~v Aeyeis 'Eav Tts tov Aoyov fxov TTjprjay, 
 
 ov p.7) yevar)Tai Oavdrov ei? tov atcova (2576). 
 
 IX. 28 2v p.a6r]Trj<; el eKeivov, 77'peis Se tov M. errp.ev p.a6r)Ta.L. 
 
 X. 15 — 17 Kai T77V i//v\ijv pov TL0q/xi vtrep t<Uv 7rpo/3aTO)V. . . (17) OTt 
 Iyw tiOtj/jll rrjv \pv\rjv p.ov. 
 
 € 
 
 1 [2549 «] The txt is doubtful. Origen omits vfiete 5e...virdyo}. So do (Alf.) 
 Cyr., Aug., and several mss. Alf. explains the om. by homoeotel. — a hypothesis 
 well illustrated by S where y, in the first and in the second yM6lC, twice ends 
 a line so that the eye might glance from the first y to the second M6IC. This 
 however would not explain Chrys. i/fiels de ovk oidare, which omits only -rrodev e. 77 
 tt. v. SS has "ye know not neither from whence. ..nor whither...," which would 
 be excellent Gk : a, b, e have "et,"/has "aut." On the whole, W.H. is 
 probably correct, and the omission and variations have proceeded from two causes, 
 1st, very early omission through homoeotel., 2nd, a tendency to regard ij as corrupt 
 (the H in D is of an unusual shape and d has " et "). If the text is correct, why 
 does Jn use ov...r) instead of his usual ov...ov5e (i. 13, 25, vi. 24, xi. 50, xiii. 16, 
 xiv. 17, xvi. 3)? "H is intelligible after negation in iv. 27 "No one however said 
 'What seekest thou?' or 'Why speakest thou with her?'" — where oi>8e would 
 have differentiated the two clauses too strongly. Is ij used here for the same 
 reason? That Jn could have used oi>...Kai in a quotation is shewn by Gal. iii. 28 
 ovk ivt 'loubcuos ovdi "EWrjv, ovk eVt SoOXos ovde eXevdepos, ovk (vi dpcrev Kai OrfKv 
 (where a. k. 6t}\v is a phrase from Gen. i. 27). Perhaps v[xeh...inrayi l } means 
 "ye know not whence I come or {which is the same thing] whither I go," sug- 
 gesting that Christ is really speaking of one and the same region — "the bosom of 
 the Father (2759 a—/)." "H, " or," is veiy much rarer in Jn than in any Synoptist. 
 
 405 
 
[2550] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 [2550] xi. 29 — 31 rjyep6r) Ta\v kol rjp^eTO 7rpos avrov. . .iSorres rrjv 
 M. otl Tayeois drecrTr) koL i$rj\B(v. 
 
 xi. 4 1 €V)^apL(TT<j} croL otl rjKovo-d<; fiov, iyw Se j]8ew otl -rravTOTe 
 fxov aKoveis. 
 
 xii. 26 «'ai' e/xoi tis oia/covij . . . eav tis etiol SiaKOvfj. 
 
 f xiii. IO — II Kai vfJ.el<; KaOapoi iare, dAA' ou^t 7ravT€S... (il) 81a 
 
 TOVTO €l7r€J/ OTl Ov^l TTaVTC? KdOapOL €(TT£ (2545). 
 
 t xiv. 4 — 1 8 07rou eya> vVdya) oiScrrc rip oSoi'... (18) ep\op.aL Trpbs 
 vfids. Comp. XIV. 28 rjKOvaare otl iyio earov vp.lv Ywayut ko.1 ip\op.aL 
 7Tpo? d/aSs 1 . 
 
 xiv. 190 Kocr/xo? p.e ovkcti Oeiopel, Uriels Se Oewpeire /<.€. 
 
 xiv. 26 — 8 . . .virofivvjaet ijttas irdvra d evirov vp.lv iyw ( 2 8) 
 
 rjK0vcraT€. otl iya> €i7rov vp.lv 'Yirdyuy 
 
 XV. 4 — 7 l*-*wa.T€ iv ip-OL, Kayw iv vp.lv. Ka8d>s to K\r)p.a. . .iav p.r) 
 p.evrj eV T?y d/x7reA.w, outwj ouoe uyueis eav lit) cv c/fO( p.ivrjTC... (5) 6 
 fievtov iv i/xol Kayo) iv crura).. . (6) cai' /xti tis /iacvti er ip.ol... (7) eai> 
 fxeu-qre iv i/xol Kai to. prj/xaTa /jlov iv vp.lv fieivy. 
 
 XV. 15 ovk4tl Ae'yoo vpas SoijAous 2 , ort o SouAos. . .i»/xas 8c elprjKa 
 
 Cpl'AoUS. 
 
 XV. 19 et ck ToO xoo-pov rjT€, 6 Kocrp.os dv to lolov icpiket- otl $e 
 tK tov Kocrpov ovk io~Te, dAA' eya) i£e\etdp.r]v vpus iK tov Koapov, Sia. 
 Touro pLLcrel vp.ds o Koo~p.os. 
 
 [2551] xvi. 9 — II 7repi djaapnas fxiv, otl... (10) irepl SifcaiocriVris oV, 
 otl..., (11) 7repi <5e Kpicreu)?, on — 
 
 f xvi. 14 « tov e/xoS X-rfpupeTUL Kai dvayyeXd v/xlv, COllip. xvi. 1 5 
 €i7rov ort €K ToB ep.oij Xauftdvei kou avayyeXel i/uv (2488 and 2583). 
 
 t xvi. 16 MiKpoc Kai ovkctl OeaypeiTe lie Kai 7raA.1v p.L«pbv ko.1 bif/zcrOe 
 
 fl€, COllip. Xvi. I9 OTL €LTTOV MlKpOl' Kttt OV $ewp€LT€ /JL€, Kai 7rdAtV flLKpOV 
 
 K a\ o>£cr#£ p. € ; (2583 and 2613). 
 
 XVli. 2 — 5 B6£ao~6v crou tot vioV, iVa 6 utos oo^do-f] fre, . . -Swcret avrot? 
 £a>Tii/ aiwftov aijTTi 8e coriv 77 uiwnos ^wri . . . cyai ere ibo£ao~a. . .Kai vvv 
 Soijaaov fK cm. 
 
 t xvii. 12 iTqpovv avrov 1 ; iv tw ovofiart, aov <1> Sc^cokcis p.0L...Kal 
 
 1 [2550 n] Jesus has also previously said xiii. 33 #7roi' tyw iVdyw and xiii. 36 
 #7toi' t/7rd>to, but never irrrdyu) without Sirov in the Last Discourse hitherto. 
 Earlier in the Gospel, Jesus says to the Jews vii. 33 tVi xP^ V0V IMKpbv....Kal v-rrayio 
 Trpbi tov Tr^p\f/avTd pe and viii. 21 e'yo; vwayw Kai ^TTjirere pe. But xiv. 28 appears 
 to be a free summary of xiv. 4 — 18. 
 
 - [2550 /'J ? Referring to xiii. 16 ovk Zo-tiv SoOXos pelfav tov Kvplov avrov ou5e 
 dwoffToXos pelfwv tov irip\l/avToi avrbv. 
 
 406 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2552] 
 
 oi>8ets ci; avT(uv aVw'AeTO, COinp. xviii. g 6 Aoyos 6V ctTrei' on Ous 
 oe'ScoK-a? fxoi ovk aVaiAecra e£ avrwv ouSei/u (2740 — 4). 
 
 xvii. 14 — 16 koI o KOO-/AOS ifxia-rjcrev olvtovs, on ovk eitriv Ik tou 
 
 Koa/xov KaO<x><; e'yto ovk elfju ck tov koo-jxov ( J 6) (K tov koo-/jlov ovk 
 
 €io"ir /cactus iyto ovk etp,t €K tov Koa/xov. 
 
 Xvii. 18 Ka^ws ep.e aVe'o-TetAa? el? Toi/ Koafiov Kayw aVeVrTetAa OLVTOVS 
 et? TOV koct/xov, COinp. xvii. 23 /cat 7)yaTrr)0-a<; aijTOus KaOws «V* ^y^r^o-a?. 
 
 xvii. 2 1 — 3 tVa 6 /C00-/AOS 7ricrTevrj ort 0"u p.e aVeVTetAas. . . (23) tW 
 yLvajo-Ki) o Kocrpos otl o~v p.e aweo-reiXas, ko.i i]yaTrr]aa<; airovs Ku^to? 
 fpe r)ya.7rr)cra<;. 
 
 xvili. 29 i£rj\uev ovv 6 II. ?tio 7rpo9 airov 1 ; Kai (prjcrtv... (38) /cat 
 tov'To €i7roji' 7raAti/ i£r}\6ev 7rp6s tov? Iouo. «ai Aeyet auTOts. . .xix. 4 Kai 
 i£r}\0ev irdXiv e£<o o' II. (marg. i$r}X8ev 7raA.1i' o' IT. e&o) /cat Ae'yet 
 avTols 
 
 xviii. 33 elo-rjXOev ovv iraXiv eis to TrpaiTwpiov o II feat el-rrev 
 
 aura). . .Xix. 9 Kat elrrf/XOev eis to -KpaiTwpiov irdXiv Kai Aeyet tw I^croi) 
 
 Win. 38 Aeyet ai/rots Eyto 0voe.fx.1av evpio~Kio kv aiiTcu aiTtaf. ..XIX. 4 
 ti'a yvaiTe oti ovbe/juav arriuv evpicrKO) iv auT<3... (6) eyw yap ou^ €vdlo~k<x> 
 ev avruj atrial'. 
 
 XX. 19 ovo~rj<s ovv oi//tas...Kai tojv Ovpwv KeKAetcrpei'wv. . .rjXdev o Ir/o~. 
 Kai ko-rrj eis to peVov Kai Aeyet auVots YJlprjvr] up.ii'... (26) ep\erai. o I770-. 
 Tior Ovpwv /ce/<Aei(rpe'i'Oji', Kai eo-T77 eis to /xerrov /cat et7rei' Etprp'r^ i5p,tV. 
 
 XXI. 19 AkoAoi'#€1 pot... (22) eai' auTov OeXw peVeiv...Ti 7rpos 0"e; o"v 
 p.01 aKoAm'rVet 1 . 
 
 [2552] Several of the foregoing instances indicate a tendency to 
 place the /#.$•/ word or clause of a saying first, when the saying is 
 repeated: — "I baptize in water... in ivater baptizing"'' (followed by 
 " baptize in water")* j "under the fig tree I saw thee... I saiv thee 
 under the fig tree 3 "; "I have not a husband.. Well saidst thou 
 ' A husband I have not 4, ' " ; " 'Our fathers — the manna they ate in the 
 wilderness'... 1 'your fathers — they ate in the wilderness the manna'' 
 (where the clause " ate in the wilderness" was last and is now first) 5 ; 
 " I have come down from the heaven... how now saith he, 'From the 
 heaven I have come do7vn 6 '?" ; "not that the Father some one hath seen — 
 
 1 Only a few of these passages are commented on below, but the textual Index 
 will indicate that many of them are explained elsewhere in comments that include 
 order and emphasis as well as mere grammatical syntax. 
 
 - i. 26 — S3- s i. 48, 50. 4 iv. 17. 5 vi. 31, 49. 
 
 6 [2552 rt] vi. 38, 42. But perhaps we ought to take vi. 41 — 2, the whole 
 saying of the Jews, together, "The Jews... murmured because he said, I am the 
 
 4O7 
 
[2553] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 except he that is from God, this [man] hath seen the Father 1 " ; " and 
 on the sabbath ye circumcise a man : if circumcision is received by (Xajx- 
 fidvei) a man on the sabbath 2 " ; " Can it be that from Galilee the Christ 
 cometh ?.. .Did not the Scripture say that from... co7ncth the Christ*}" 
 11 in your sin ye shall die... I said therefore [that] Ye shall die in your 
 sins 4 " ; "my life I lay down for the sheep... because / lay down ?ny 
 life 5 " ; " I thank thee that thou heardest me, but I (emph.) knew that 
 at all times me thou hearest " ; "he will give him life eternal, and 
 this is the eternal life 1 " ; "they are not from the world... from the 
 world they are not 8 " ; "folloiv me... do thou me follow 9 ." 
 
 [2553] It is very natural that what has been last said should 
 sometimes be uppermost in our minds and foremost on our lips 
 when we repeat the substance of a saying. In Greek this alteration 
 of order is far more often possible than in idiomatic English, as the 
 last paragraph shews ; but where the Greek order can be followed in 
 English, something is gained in the appreciation of emphasis. Still 
 more is gained by realising that Johannine variations, where they are 
 not deliberately introduced to serve some mystical purpose, spring 
 from the instinct of a dramatist in sympathy with life and living 
 speech. Wherever a word is placed out of its usual order, or out of 
 the order in which it has previously occurred, then — unless a change 
 
 bread that came down from the heaven, and they kept saying.... How now saitli he 
 From the heaven I have come down" so that the Jews repeat the phrase at first in 
 Christ's order " come down from the heaven" and then reverse the order, "from 
 the heaven come down." Subsequently Christ takes up the words as the Jews have 
 left them, placing "from the heaven" first, and emphasizing it as indicating the 
 source of the living bread (vi. 50, 51, 58). 
 
 1 vi. 46. - vii. 22 — 3. 
 
 :l [2552/;] vii. 41 — 2. In viii. 51 — 2, Christ says "Death shall he surely not 
 behold for ever," and the Jews repeat it as "He shall surely not taste death for 
 ever" (2576). 
 
 4 viii. 21, 24. 5 x. 15, 17. 
 
 ,; [2552 rj xi. 41. In xii. 26 "If me a man (eav e/j.ol xts) be serving, let him 
 follow me. ..if a man (eav tis) me be serving, my Father will honour him," the 
 position of "me" in "if me" makes the pronoun extremely emphatic, and the 
 unusual separation of tls from eav (eav and tls being usually in juxtaposition 
 vi. 51, vii. 17, 37 etc.) suggests "a certain one" (whereas eav tls would be in 
 effect, " whoever") so that the meaning may be paraphrased as " If an individual 
 here and there is singular enough to wish to serve me, let him follow me." In the 
 following clause (eav tls e/xol) "me" is still emphatic, but not so emphatic as 
 at first. 
 
 8 xvii. 14, 10. s xxi. 19, 22. 
 
 40.S 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2553] 
 
 is made for clearness 1 — some difference of emphasis may be expected'. 
 
 1 [2553 (cj If (i. 20) eyu ovk elfil had been repeated in iii. 28 after elirov, readers 
 might have taken elirov eydi together. In iv. 1 7, KaXCos elves otl ovk e"xw o-vdpa 
 would have been liable to a momentary misunderstanding; but emphasis, there, 
 seems to me the main cause of the change. 
 
 2 [2553a] To take one of the most insignificant instances, relating to "the 
 sellers of doves" in ii. 14 — 16 tovs ttioKovvtcls (3bas k. irpbfi. k. vepLar — tols tcls 
 irepio-repas TrwXovaiv, the author first speaks of those selling oxen and sheep and 
 doves," laying a slight emphasis on the "selling" as being a defilement of the 
 temple, and then, owing to our Lord's special mention of the "doves," he lays 
 a slight emphasis on "the doves" by varying the order. In iv. 10 <rv b\v rjTiqaas, 
 the unusual position of &v calls strong attention to the hypothesis. "Thou, in 
 that case [hadst thou but known] wouldst have asked him [instead of waiting for 
 him to ask thee] and he would have given thee (k. ZowKev av trot)." In ii. 18 
 " What sign shewest-thou?" the order is usual, but vi. 30 "What then doest thou 
 (emph.) [as a] sign (ri ovv iroiets av crrjpi.e'iov)?" the intention is to imply an 
 antithesis between "thou" and "Moses" (previously implied) and also between 
 "sign" and the sign of the "manna" previously mentioned. On the difference 
 between viii. 23 6k tovtov tov Kbap-ov and etc tov Koo-fxov totjtov, see 2553 c. 
 
 [2553/'] In viii. 47 e'/c tov Oeov ovk eure", both the beginning and the end (but 
 especially the end) are emphatic ("Front God ye are essentially not") as compared 
 with the ordinary and unemphatic order in x. 26 "ye are not from my sheep." In 
 ii. 13 /cat dve(3i] eis'lep. o'lrjaovs the order is to be contrasted with that in v. 1 /cat 
 avifirj '\-qaovs els \ep. and in vii. 14 17077 8e...aveflT] T. els to iepbv k. edldaaKev. 
 In ii. 13, the position of 'lr)aovs at the end of the sentence, as well as its separation 
 from avepr], and a previous mention of (ii. 12) "his mother and brethren," seem 
 intended to emphasize "Jesus," as going up to Jerusalem, apart from His family, 
 no longer as a common pilgrim, but by Himself, for the first time, in His character 
 of Saviour (Jesus). This emphasis would be out of place in v. 1, vii. 14. 
 
 [2553 <] TavTa to. prifiara etc., at the beginning of a sentence, in viii. 20, x. 21, 
 means "these words just mentioned" (comp. x. 6, 18, xi. 4, xix. 20). If it 
 is desired to emphasize "these" "this" etc. in contrast with something else, it 
 is usual to write to. p^/xara raOra. Consequently, in N.T., "this [present] age" 
 is always 6 aluiv ovtos — except where Mt. xii. 32 inserts the antithetical clause otire 
 iv TOVT03 roj aluivi otVe ev to} fxeWovri (but several authorities correct the unusual 
 phrase). So "this [present] world" in N.T. is always d Koa/j-os ovtos except in 
 Jn viii. 23 vfiets e/c tovtov tov KocrpLov eari, eyco ovk elp.1 e/c tov Kha/aov tovtov. 
 Here again so many authorities have substituted the usual e/c r. Koa/j.. tovt. that 
 Tisch. has adopted it ; but the evangelist may use the unemphatic form in the 
 first clause in order to prepare for the emphatic form in the second. In the 
 Samaritan Dialogue, the influence of such phrases as 6 aithv ovtos and b Kbap.os 
 ovtos is apparent in iv. 13 7ras d irivwv e/c r. vScltos tovtov, which means literally 
 the water of this well, but suggests spiritually "the water of this world." The 
 woman replies, without any sense of emphasis, 86s p.01 tovto to vSwp "give me this 
 water [you speak of]." The emphatic form comes naturally from the Jews at the 
 end of the sentence in vi. 34 wavTOTe b~bs ripuv t. dpTov tovtov. Christ uses the 
 unemphatic form in the middle of sentences in vi. 51, 58, but there antithesis is 
 implied in the context so that the emphatic form is not necessary. 
 
 [2553 d] What is the difference between the participial clause in vi. 14 
 
 4O9 
 
[2553] 
 
 ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 7r/)o0^Tijs 6 epxop.evos els rbv k6<tv.ov and in xi. 27 d xp- ° l '<°s r - 0£°'' «'s tA*' 
 Kocfj-ov epx6/j.evos? In the former, the multitude emphasize the popular phrase about 
 the Deliverer (1632 foil.) "He that is to come," and subordinate "the world"; 
 but Martha, having already used the phrases "Christ" and "Son of God," non- 
 subordinates the "coming" to the thought of "the world," which the Son is 
 to deliver. In xviii. 38 eyili ov5e/niav evpiaKos iv avrcp alriav, xix. 4 ovde/j-iav air. 
 eup. ev avrui, xix. 6 iytb yap ovx tvp. iv avri2 alriav, Pilate begins and ends 
 by emphasizing his own personal opinion instead of merging it in the official 
 decision of a judge : (1 ) "Ifor my part find nothing 'whatever in him of guilt [but 
 still instead of acquitting him I ask you whether you would like me to release him 
 as a favour to you]"; (2) "I bring him forth to you outside the palace that ye 
 may recognise that I find nothing whatever of guilt in him" followed by an appeal 
 to pity or contempt, "Behold, the man!" ; (3) "Take him yourselves and crucify 
 him. for I for my part do not find in him guilt." On the third occasion, the 
 phrase "not. .. guilt " is a little weaker than "no guilt whatever" (ovStpLiav alriav) 
 on the first and second, the emphasis being reserved for the earlier part of 
 the sentence, which is, in effect, "Kill him, for I, the judge, pronounce him 
 guiltless." 
 
 [2553 c-] In discussing (1949) vi. 58, ou Kadibs £<payov oi iraWpes no mention 
 was made of the fact that SS, D, and other authorities, add i/jwv, and some add 
 to fxdwa. These additions would be naturally suggested (1) by vi. 49, oi iraripes 
 iifiuv e<payov...ro fxavva, (2) by the fact that oi rraripes in N.T. almost always means 
 the Patriarchs, represented by Abraham, as being receivers of the promises 
 on the basis of which they became fathers of the Chosen People. Fritzsche, 
 on Rom. ix. 5 ai iirayye\iaL...oi iraripes, censures Theodoret for supposing that oi 
 iraripes includes those who received promises "through the prophets." Heb. i. 1, 
 however, appears exceptionally to use it thus, when contrasting rots Trarpdaiv 
 and rifuv. But Jn vi. 58 — where there is no such contrast — " the fathers ate. ..and 
 died,''' if applied to the rebellious fathers of Israel in the wilderness, is unique in 
 its application. It has been suggested above (1949) that what Christ taught to 
 Jews in the second person John is summarising for Creeks in the third person. 
 In the former shape, it was: " Your fa/hers ate in the wilderness the manna and 
 died." In the latter it is. " The fathers ate and died." By omitting "the manna." 
 and "in the wilderness," John perhaps sugge-ts an application that extends beyond 
 the period of forty years: "From the time of Abraham onwards the fathers 
 of Israel ate [of 'every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of Cod'] and 
 yet died." 
 
 [2553/] Origen, discussing God's revelations to man before the Incarnation, 
 repeatedly protests against the view that the Apostles were superior in knowledge 
 to "the Fathers and the Prophets." In "the Fathers" he appears to give the 
 most prominent place to Abraham, then (Huet ii. 96 n) he mentions Moses and 
 Joshua, before passing ti> [saiah and Ezekiel. Afterwards he says [ib. 98c) 
 "Consequently, not even the Apostles are to be deemed wiser than ///,- Fathers, 
 «r Moses, and the Prophets." He complains that "many" vainly imagine that 
 ■ "the Apo M. are wiser than the Fathers and the Prophets" and says that "they 
 
 1 incel the gift bestowed Oil the Fathers and the Prophets by Cod through Christ 
 (through whom all things were made-)." These expressions suggest that Origen — 
 
 whom I have 11..! been able to find quoting Heb. i. 1 "spake to the Fathers in the 
 Prophets"- would have preferred to say that "Cod spake in times past in the 
 
 Pal hers and the Prophets." 
 
 4IO 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2554] 
 
 S 2. Chiasmus 
 
 [2554] Many of the instances in 2546 — 51 are of the nature of 
 chiasmus (2544 a). This is a natural arrangement when the writer 
 wishes to combine parallelism with climax, or with the argument 
 a fortiori. For the change of order in the second clause (sometimes 
 taking the reader by surprise) emphasizes both the terms in that 
 clause : " If the things of earth I said unto you and ye believe not, how 
 [is it possible that] if / say unto you the things of heaven, ye will 
 believe 1 ?"; "Ye do not receive me. ..him ye will receive"" ; "Thou 
 art disciple to him, but we to Moses are disciples 3 ." In viii. 13 — 14, 
 the two halves of an accusation correspond to the two halves of the 
 reply, in chiasmus, thus, (1) "Thou about thyself lestifiest" to "Even 
 if / testify about myself" and (2) "Thy testimony is not true" to 
 " True is my testimony." In " Thou lovedst them, even as me thou 
 lovedst" emphasis is laid upon the infinity of the Father's love 4 . So, 
 
 2 v. 43. 3 ix. 28. 
 
 4 [2554a] xvii. 23 KaX rjydTnjcFas avrovs naffm e/jce rjydTrricras. Here the verb is 
 at the extremes. Compare xvii. 18 Kadws e/xe air^o-reiXas els rbv K.bap.ov, Kayu 
 dwecTTfiXa avroiis eis rbv k6(tij,ov, where there is neither exact parallelism (k<x0ws ctu 
 e/j.e...Kayio avrovs) nor yet chiasmus. 
 
 [2554/'] In xi. 29 — 31 r\yipQr\ raxv ko.1 Tjpxero irpbs clvtov ...ISovres tt)v Mapta/x 
 on rax^us av^arr) ko.1 e'^rjXdev, the adverb raxeus — by the repetition of "quickly" 
 in a different form ("[thus] quickly [as I have said"]) — seems intended to 
 draw attention to the manner and haste of Mary's "arising." But raxv, by 
 its position between rjyepQr) and TJpxero (so that the reader has no time to dwell 
 on the adverb) is subordinated to its verb 177^^77, which is something more than 
 "rising up" and suggests "roused from torpor," "awakened from the lethargy of 
 sorrow." There is no emphasis on ra\6, for the emphasis is on the "starting up 
 ...and going to him [i.e. Jesus]." Similarly, in LXX, emphasis is laid, not on 
 the "quickness" but on the "falling away" of Israel in Ex. xxxii. 8, Dent. ix. 12, 
 16 (A), Judg. ii. 1 7, with raxv after various verbs. But the rapidity of the falling 
 away of the fickle Galatians is emphasized by rax^s before the verb in Gal. i. 6 
 Oav/j,a£w on ovtojs raxeus p-eTarideade. The Tews know nothing of the coming of 
 the Teacher, or of the consequent "rousing" of Mary. All they perceive is the 
 haste with which she "arose and went out." In N.T., as in LXX, some writers 
 use raxv not rax^ws, others ra^eajj not raxv. It is characteristic of Jn that he 
 uses both with slightly different shades of meaning. For these and other reasons, 
 the conclusion of Blass about raxews in xi. 31 (p. 308 "certainly an interpolation") 
 appears to me erroneous. 
 
 [2554 c] The Egyptian Papyri have Oxyr. 743 (B.C. 2) KaXQs Be yiyovev to raxv 
 avrbv eXdeiv (no great emphasis), 531 (2nd cent.) edv yap deoi diXwai. tolx^ov irpbs 
 ere t/£w p.era top Mex e 'P M-V va iirei ev x e P aLV ^X w ewe^ipLa k'pya, i.e. ["I cannot come 
 at once but] I will come sooner [than might be expected under the circumstances] 
 
 411 
 
[2555] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 at the conclusion of Christ's last prayer (xvii. 21 — 3) when He turns 
 for a while from praying for the disciples to pray for the world, the 
 words may be paraphrased, "in order that the world may grow in 
 belief (Tlv a. 6 koV/aos irurrevg)...in order that knowledge may dawn on 
 the world (<W ytvwo-Ky 6 Koafxos) " so as to indicate that, for the 
 moment, "the world" stands prominent in the thoughts of the 
 Saviour. 
 
 [2555] The following are instances of chiasmus in which there is 
 no repetition of a previous saying. Apart from the Prologue, only 
 one or two of them are from strict narrative 1 . The emphasis gained 
 by it for the final word is apparent in such instances as "No one 
 hath ascended into the heaven save he that from the heaven 
 descended 2 ," and still more in " He that is [essentially] from the earth 
 
 after Mecheir is over," Fayum 126 ave\de ovv raxeus on eirlyi (sic), where the 
 words "for it is pressing" indicate that rax^s is emphatic. 
 
 [2554 if] On Ileb. xiii. 23 ede rdx^ov ?pxVTat, Westcott says, "The com- 
 parative suggests the occurrence of hindrances which the apostle could not 
 distinctly foresee. Compare v. 19" — apparently rendering rdxeiof in both verses 
 "more quickly [than might be expected in view of the obstacles]." Tdx"»» is 
 read by X as well as other inferior MSS. in 1 Tim. iii. 14 (W.H.) iXirlfwv e\deii> 
 [trpbs <re] iv tclx^l, iav 8t (ipaSvvu. There Chrys. reads rax&rc : but he also 
 paraphrases thus Heb. xiii. 19 as ware pie raxew e\dtiv irpbs vp-ds (though he 
 quotes that text with rdxiov) and some scribes might avoid rdxiof owing to the 
 condemnation of it by Lucian (iii. 573) and by Phrynichus. Moreover, if the text 
 was npocceT&xe'oe&N, an erroneous interpretation of eT&xeioe as being €T&X e,e 
 might explain the dropping of ce and hence of irpoz txe in some MSS. 'Ei/ rdxei in 
 N.T. is always connected with divine retribution or angelic command except 
 in Acts xxv. 4. If iv rdxei is a corruption of rdxet-ov, 1 Tim. as well as Heb. 
 might accord with the Papyrus as above quoted (2554 c) in the meaning "sooner 
 than might be expected under the circumstances." Comp. Plut. Vit. Fab. § 12 
 rdxi-ov p-ev rj eyio irpoaefoKUv, fipdSiov 5' 77 ai'rds &rirev8e... which shews how rdx^ov 
 might be used of relative speed. 
 
 [2554tJ Against rendering rdxwv in xiii. 27 "at once" — like the imperious 
 Bdrrov in Aristoph.— it may be fairly urged (1) that Steph. gives abundant 
 instance., of ddrrov thus used but none of r&xiov, (2) that Ta%i is repeatedly thus 
 used in N.T. (Ml. v. 25, xxviii. 7, Lk. xv. 22), in LXX (2 S. xvii. 16, Ps. lxix. 17, 
 lxxix. S, cii. 2, cxliii. 7) and (Deissmann pp. 274—7) in magic adjurations, one of 
 which (3rd century) concludes with the words ijdrj ij8r] ra X v rafti. If this had been 
 the meaning we should have expected in xiii. 27 o -rroteis iroirjtrov rax*'- 
 
 1 ii. 15 " And of the money changers he poured out the copper coins and the 
 tables lie overturned," vii. 1 "And after these things walked Jesus in Galilee, for 
 he was not willing in Judaea to walk." The latter is not a very exact instance. 
 For vi. 46, vii. 22—3, see 2552. 
 
 - iii. 13. 
 
 412 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2556] 
 
 from the earth [essentially] is 1 ," i.e. such a one cannot rise above his 
 nature. Only one of the following is certainly a precept, "Judge not 
 according to appearance, but the judgment that is just judge ye' 1 " 
 but it has been maintained above (2236 — 40) that a precept and not 
 a statement is probably conveyed in " Believe (Trio-revere) in God, in 
 me also believe 3 ." In xiii. 36 — 7, emphasis is laid upon the adverbs 
 of time, " Thou art not able at present to be my follower, but follower 
 thou shalt be later on " — an emphasis repeated in Peter's reply " Why 
 am I not able to be thy follower at this moment}" In the opening sen- 
 tences of the Gospel there is true chiasmus in i. 3 "All things through 
 him came into being, and without him came into being not even one 
 thing." But the preceding words 6 Adyos qv 7r/3os tov 6e6v, kolL Oeos rjv 
 b Adyos do not contain true chiasmus or, at all events, not such strict 
 chiasmus as appears at first sight. For 9e6s without the article is 
 distinct from Oeos (in 7rpd? rbv 6e6v) with it. This passage must be 
 discussed later on (2594). 
 
 Instances of Chiasmus 
 
 [2556] i. I — 4 'Ev o-PXV W ° Adyos kcu o Aoyos r)v 7rpos rov Oeov, ko.1 
 #eds rjv 6 Adyos. Otjtos r)v ev dpxf? 77 7 30S rov veov. 7ravra 81 avrov 
 eyevero /cat x w P^ avTOV eyevero ovoe ev. 
 
 ii. 15 Kai twv KoWvfiicrrwv e^e^eev to. Kepfxara koli ras rpa.Tre£ > a<; 
 averpe^ev. 
 
 iil. 13 ouSeis avaf3el37)Kev eis rov ovpavov el //.?/ o €K tov ovpavov 
 Kara^Sas. 
 
 iii. 31 6 wv £k T7;s y»;s ex rrjs y7?s ecrriv. 
 
 V. 24 o rov Xoyov liov o-kovuiv Kai TTLorevwv tc3 Trefxij/avTL uc.ets 
 Kpicriv ovk epxerai dAA.a /xeraj3e/3yjKev e/c rov Qa.va.rov eh rrjv £uyqv. 
 
 vii. I TrepieTrdreL [d] 'I. ev rfj TaXiXaia, ov yap rjOeXev ev rrj 'IouSaia 
 7repL7rareTv. 
 
 vii. 7 ov Svvarat 6 koo-/u.os fxicrelv u/xas, ep,e Se [Xiaei. 
 
 vii. 24 /XT] Kpivere /cut' oif/tv dAAd ttjv SiKaiav Kpicnv Kpivere. 
 
 Vii. 28 KaiCe o'lSare /cat olSare rvoQev ei/xt. 
 
 1 [2555 a] iii. 31 6 uiv e/c ttjs 777s e/c rrjs 777s ecrriv. Here 6 wv — which is 
 frequently used for God, "He that essentially is" — is paradoxically connected 
 with e/c tt)s 777s. '0 e/c tt)s 777s would have been quite sufficient to express, 
 unemphatically, "he that is from the earth." At the end of the sentence, etrrlv 
 receives emphasis from its position and from its relation to the preceding &v. 
 
 2 vii. 24. 3 xiv. 1. 
 
 413 
 
[2557]. ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 vii. 35 urj €('5 -rrjv Biacnropav twv 'EAA^vwv fj.eX.XeL iropeveauai Kai 
 SiSdcTKeiv tovs "EAAr/i'as ; 
 
 12557] viii. 18 eyw eipi 6 /xapTupwv irepl eixavTOV Kai fxapTvpei irepi 
 ep.011 6 irepif/a<; p.e -rraTifp. 
 
 ix. 25 Ei djuaproj/Vo? ecrTiv ovk olBa, ev olda, on TV<pXbs mv apri 
 
 ftXeirot. 
 
 N'ii. 3I VVV KpUTUi eCTTLV TOV KOO-fXOV TOVTOV, VVV 6 dp\^V TOV KUO~(J.OV 
 
 tovtov Zi<(3\r]dr}(reTai e£w. 
 
 xiii. 20 6 Xap.f3a.viov av Tiva irefxxj/u) ep.e Xapftdvei, 6 Se. ifie Xa/xftavtov 
 Xapftdvei tov Trepuj/avTa p.e. 
 
 xiii. 36, 37 ov hvvaaai. p.01 vvv aKoXovOrjcrai, aKoXov6r'jO-ei<; Se varepov 
 ...8td Ti ov SvvufiaL o~oi dxoXovOelv aprt ; 
 
 xiv. I irwneveTf. els tov deov, Kai eh ep.e TnaTeveTe. 
 
 xiv. 7 ei eyvwKeire p.e, Kai tov ivarepa p.ov av rjSeLTe- air apTi 
 yLvtoo-Kere airbv Kai eupaKare, comp. viii. 19 ei ep.e ySeire, Kai tov 
 irarepa p.ov av flfoWc, where there is parallelism. 
 
 XV'i. 20 KXavo-ere Kai Oprfvijo-ere v/xeU, 6 8e Ko'oyios yupW*™- 
 
 xv j # 27 — 8 ...gti e'yw 7rapa rov naTpbs e$yjX6ov. e^ijXdov Ik tov 
 7raTpos Kai eXrfXvOa ek tov KOO-p.ov 7raA.1v dcpiyfpt tov Kocrp.ov ko.1 ■KOpevop.ai 
 7rp6s t6v TzaTepa. 
 
 xvii. 1 1 Kai ovKeTL elp.1 ev tw Koapno Kai avTOL ev tw koctluo elcnv. 
 
 XV'ii. 16 Ik tov Koo-p.ov ovk elalv ko,6<d<s eyd> ovk elp.i eK tov Koaftov. 
 
 xviii. 36 'H ftao-iXela 1} ep.rf ovk ecrTiv Ik tov Kocrp.ov tou'tov ei 
 
 eK tov k. tovtov rjv rj ft. rj ep.y), vvv 8e rj ft. r> ep.r) ovk eariv 
 
 evTevOev. 
 
 § 3. The Possessive Genitive 
 
 [2558] Among Johannine variations of order one of the most 
 frequent is that of the pronominal possessive genitive, which, for the 
 sake of brevity, may be conveniently illustrated by the use of the 
 genitive singular of avTo's used possessively. " He stretched out his 
 [own] hand" would be expressed (i) in Hebrew, briefly, by the 
 inflexional form " his-hand," (2) in LXX, lengthily, by ryv X"P a avrou, 
 (3) in classical (Ik, briefly (as in French) by the article without the 
 pronoun, tt)v x €l P a — if at ' east tne context made the meaning clear. 
 All the evangelists, John included, freely use (2). But in describing 
 how Peter wounded the High Priest's servant and "cut off his ear" 
 all but 1 Aike make avrov precede the article and noun (" he cut off 
 
 414 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2558] 
 
 of him the ear") expressed by John thus, drvkKo\\iev avrov to wrdpiov to 
 Sc^iov 1 . This avrov, /receding the article and the noun, must be 
 carefully distinguished from avrov intervening between the article 
 and the noun, as in to avrov aJrapiov. The intervening avrov would 
 be emphatic and the meaning would be " his and nobody e/se's ear," 
 but the precedent avrov is unemphatic and throws the emphasis on 
 "ear," so that it is almost equivalent to "cut off, not his hand, or 
 foot, but his ear." To avrov, emphasizing avrov, seldom or never 
 occurs in the Gospels 2 , but avrov unemphatically preceding the 
 
 1 [2558 a] Jn xviii. 10, comp. Mk xiv. 47, Mt. xxvi. 51, Lk. xxii. 50. In Mk 
 xv. 19 'irvwrov avrov rr\v K€(pa\r)v, the parall. Mt. xxvii. 30 has grvirrov els rrp> 
 Kt<paKr)v avrov, and Dreads, in Mk, trvwrov avrov... els ttjv k., " they smote him on 
 the head," which substantially represents the meaning. Such a genitive in John, 
 Rev., and Epictetus, for the most part immediately precedes the article. But this 
 is not always the case in N.T., e.g. in Mk vii. 19 ovk eiawopeverai avrov eis rr\v 
 tcapdiav d\\' eh rrjv tcotXlav. But there, too, the unemphatic precedent avrov 
 throws the emphasis on what follows. Its precedent position also enables avrov 
 to define both xapdiav and KoiXiav. See 2559 a and 2783. 
 
 2 [2558^] Outside the Gospels, Bruder (1888) indicates Rom. iii. 24 rrj avrov 
 Xaptrt, iii. 25 toj avrov a'ifiart, I Thess. ii. 19 iv ttj avrov wapovaia. But he omits 
 Tit. iii. 5 Kara to avrov ^Xeos, Heb. ii. 4 Kara rr\v avrov diX-qcriv and 1 Jn ii 27 to 
 avrov xp^p-a (2569 a). W.H. mark the txt as doubtful in Jas i. 18 ei's to eivai 
 rip-as dTrapxv" Tiva tCjv ''avrov 1 (marg. eavrov) Kn.o-p.arwv. In all these cases the 
 pronoun is emphatic as when we say "His will be done," meaning "God's, not 
 man's." In 2 Pet. iii. 7 W.H. have avrcp (not avrov). In such phrases as Rom. 
 i. 20 17 re didios avrov Svvapus, i. 21 r) acrvveros avrCiv Kapdia, 1 Pet. ii. 9 to 9avp.ao-rbv 
 avrov 0ws, part of the emphasis of the pronoun is intercepted by the preceding 
 adjective. Comp. Rom. viii. ii. 
 
 [2558 c] No satisfactory instances have been alleged where possessive avros 
 comes between the article and the noun without emphasis. Blass § 48. 8 (n. 1) 
 alleges Heb. vii. 18, Herm. Mand. vi. 2, and compares Clem. Horn. xiv. 7, 10. 
 But in Heb. vii. 18 the context has contrasted the Levitical priesthood and that of 
 Melchizedek ; and now the writer says "there is a disannulling of the preparatory 
 command because of the weakness of that {81a to avrrjs dadeves) [as compared with 
 the strength of this]." In Herm. Maud., the context has described Hennas 
 as desiring to know the (v. 1 — 2) evep-ymav of Wrath, and has spoken (vi. 1. 1) of 
 the 5vvap.Lv and ivepyaav belonging to Faith, Fear and Self-control. Now (vi. 2. 
 1) the Teacher says, " There are two angels with man, one of Righteousness and 
 one of Wickedness," and Hernias replies, ttQs ovv, Kvpie, yvdaopai rds avrQv 
 evepyelas " How shall I recognise the energies of those [as 0/ the rest] because both 
 the angels dwell with me?" The pronoun is therefore emphasized. Clem. Horn. 
 xiv. 7, Schwegler's text, has vrvep irdvras avrov /xe tovs <pi\ovs d7a7rdj*' (not tovs 
 avrov cpiXovs) so that it is not to the point. In Clem. Horn. xiv. 10 cv el <$>av<Tros, 
 6 ravTrjs dvi)p Kal tQv avrrjs waidcov irarrip, a husband and father, supposed dead, is 
 being identified in the presence of his wife : " Thou [it seems] art Faustus, 
 the husband of this woman and the father of her children ? " i.e. those whom she 
 
 415 
 
[2559] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 article occurs occasionally in the Synoptists and very frequently 
 indeed in John. It may be called the unemphatic precedent pos- 
 sessive avrov, or "the vernacular possessive" (2776—84)'. It occurs 
 in John about eighteen times ; but in the Synoptists, taken all 
 together, not much more than half that number. 
 
 [2559] The same difference, though not to the same extent, is 
 perceptible in the Johannine and the Synoptic use of pov, <tov, and 
 vfjuav 2 . Here, too, Luke appears to avoid the precedent unemphatic 
 
 calls children as mother you call children as father. Afa-ijs appears nearly 
 equivalent to Tavrrjs, which is perhaps not repeated because the repetition would be 
 monotonous. But the text of this book is so full of errors that rwfavrrjs may very 
 well be an error, to>tay th C being read as toon&YTHC. 
 
 1 [2558 a 1 ] The "vernacular" possessive — which is freq. in Epictetus and 
 Rev. — appears in i. 27 tva \vcroj avrov rbv ipLavra rov viroOrHiaros as contrasted 
 with the parall. Mk i. 7, Lk. iii. 16 \vaai top ifxavra ruv vwob-qp.arwv avrov (Mt. 
 cliff. ). Contrast also xi. 32 tireaev avrov irpbs roiis irbbas with Mk v. 22 iriirrei 71750s 
 toi)s ir65as avrov (and sim. Mk vii. 25, Lk. viii. 41 TrjcoO, xvii. 16). 
 
 [2558 1] Where Mk xi. 15, Mt. xxi. 12 have rets rpawefas rwv KoWv^iaruv, 
 Jn ii. 15 has tGiv KoXkvpiarQv e^ex €ev Ta ncpixara /ecu rds rpawi'^as dverpexf/ev. But 
 the precedent possessive noun stands on a different footing from the precedent 
 possessive pronoun, and is probably emphatic, placed first to define the two 
 following nouns (2559 a). The meaning is, " And as for the money-changers he 
 poured out their coins and overturned their tables." Similarly in viii. 17 Svo 
 avdpuirwv r) p.aprvpla dAr/c^s eanv the genitive is manifestly emphatic — "the 
 testimony of two men" being required by law to establish truth. So it is in the 
 second clause of x. 4—5 "they know his voice (r. <f>. avrov). .Ahey know not 
 of strangers the voice (rQv aWorpiwv rr\v (pojvrjv)," where dWorpiwv, though 
 precedent, is more emphatic than avrov. 'AWorpiwv is virtually a noun, and it is 
 emphasized by antithesis. In ix. 27 — 8 avrov and Mwwre'cjs are perhaps to be 
 regarded as objective genitives "disciples following him and Moses" and the 
 genitives are emphasized by antithesis. The separation of the genitive from the 
 noun in xx. 23 &v rtvuv acpijre rds afMaprlas makes the intervening a<prjre emphatic, 
 "Of whomsoever ye forgive sins," and "forgive" is also emphasized by 
 antithesis with "retain" (mentioned in the context). 
 
 - [2559 a] I have not found the precedent unemphatic possessive with rj/xwu in 
 the Gospels unless it occurs in Jn xi. 48 apovo-iv tj/xujv itetf rbv rbirov nai rb tdvos 
 which is almost equivalent to "they will lake away from us both Temple and 
 national existence." Phil. iii. 20 yixCiv yap to TroXirev/xa is differentiated by the 
 initial position of y/J-uv, and by the intervening yip : it means, in effect, " For us 
 [whatever it may be for others], our country is in heaven." Rom. xiii. 1 1 dyyvrepov 
 i)^.Civ is prob. (see Steph.) an instance of objective genitive. In 1 Thess. iii. 10 and 
 1 5 ibtlv vfxwf rb irp6<ri>nrov, and GTr)pl!-ai iifiCiv rds Kapbias, the unemphatic v/j.wv 
 throws the emphasis on what follows, "see yon face to face," "strengthen [yon not 
 outwardly but inwardly in~\ your hearts." The unemphatic precedent genitives, 
 vp-uv and aiiTWV occur severally in 1 Thess. v. 23 Avrbs 8i Otbs rrjs tipyPTjs 
 ayido-ai Ofxas bXortXeis, nal oXbuXypov ip&v rb irv(vp.a /ecu f) ypvxh Ka ' T0 o-Q/xa... 
 
 416 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2560] 
 
 genitive as in his account of the healing of the paralytic compared 
 with that in Mark and Matthew 1 . And in the healing of the 
 centurion's servant, where Matthew, using the unemphatic //.ou, 
 lays stress upon the condescension of coming all the way to the 
 centurion's "house," instead of healing at a distance ("come to 
 my /wuse"), Luke neglects or avoids this distinction 2 . John, since 
 he is continually representing the Saviour as using the words " I " 
 and "my," is bound to use "my" more frequently than the 
 Synoptists: and accordingly he uses p.ov and ip.ov more frequently 
 than any one of them. But if he wishes to emphasize " my " he 
 mostly uses 6 e/xo?, and, to increase the emphasis, he repeats the 
 article. 'E/xo? is used by John about forty times as against ten times 
 in the rest of the Gospels. Thus he can rise to a climax of pro- 
 nominal emphasis : — (i) fmv to. p/]p.a.Ta, (2) ra prj/xaTa. /xov, (3) to. ifxa 
 prjiLara, (4) to. prjp.ara to, ip,d 3 . See 2776 — 84. 
 
 Instances of the Possessive Genitive 
 
 [2560] i. 27 Iva \vtju> avrov tov l/xavTa tov vTroSr/fxaTOi;. 
 ii. 1 5 kcu Twi' KoWvfiuTTwv i$e^e€v To. Ke'p/taTa Kal Tas T/3a7re£as 
 averpeij/ev. 
 
 ii. 23 Oeiopovvres avrov ra trrjfjicia a Ittolcl. 
 
 TTjprjdeiri, Acts iv. 5 iyfrero 8£ avvaxdrfvai. avT&v tovs apxovras K. tovs irpecrfi. 
 k. tovs ypap.fJL. — in both cases before a group of governing nouns, as in Jn xi. 48 
 before tov totvov k. to tdvos. See 2783. 
 
 1 [2559 />] Mk ii. 5, Mt. ix. 2 aov at afiapriai, Lk. v. 20 trot at dtt. aov : rep. 
 Mk ii. 9, Mt. ix. 5, Lk. v. 23 (D has Mt. ix. 2 aot. at d/x., but Lk. v. 20 aov at d,u. 
 (correcting Mt. to Lk. and Lk. to Mt. as freq.). D also has Mk ii. 9 crot at d/n., 
 Lk. v. 23 aov ai ap.-). 
 
 2 [2559 <r] Mt. viii. 8 iva /xov virb tt]v ariyqv daeXdys, Lk. vii. 6 'iva viro ttjv 
 <sriyt\v /xov eiaeXdys. Mt., by using the unemphatic fiov, emphasizes aTiyyv. 
 
 3 [2559 d] Blass (p. 317) says that 6 e/i6s "often has so little emphasis that it 
 cannot easily be distinguished from fiov : R. x. 1 17 evSoida rrjs e/irjs Kapdias = tt)s k. 
 fiov G. i. 13, Ph. i. 26." But there is a fiiv in Rom. x. 1 77 p,ev evdoKia r. e. k. 
 This, and the context, indicate an antithesis between that which would be 
 well pleasing to the writer's ozun heart and that which may be the will of God for 
 the present. In Gal. i. 12 — 15, there is a contrast between tt\v ip.r]v avaar po<pr\v 
 Trore ev ti2 'lovoai'afiw i.e. "my own \iuiconverted\ manner of life" and the 
 previously mentioned change that had come (12) " through the revelation of Jesus 
 Christ"; moreover the sense implies tt\v fiev ifiijv avaarpo(pr)v to correspond to 
 (15) 6're he ev5oK7]aev. In Phil. i. 25 — 6 there may be antithesis between vfiQv 
 and 5td ttjs ifiTJs as freq. in the Pauline Epistles ("/ shall continue to live 
 that you may boast in me," Lightf. compares 2 Cor. i. 14 Kavxy/xa vfiwv iafiiv 
 Kaddirep k. vp.eis ijfiQv). 
 
 A. VI. 417 ^_ 27 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UN!VER5i 
 
[2561] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 iii. IQ — 21 tjv yap avT<Lv irovr/pd rd epya. ..ovk ep\eraL 77-pos to <poj?, 
 iVa p.77 eXey\6rj ra epya airov. . .ep^erai 7rpo? to <£w?, iva cpavepayOrj 
 avrov ra. epya on iv 6e<i> iariv cipyao-pera. 
 
 iii. 32 — 3 Kai ttjv paprvpiav avrov ovSeis Xap-fSdvei. 6 Xaf3u>v avrov 
 TTp' p-aprvptav i(T<f>pdyL(Tev — 
 
 iv. 16 cpcovrjo-ov crov rov dv8pa, (18) ovk earn' crov avrjp. 
 
 iv. 34 iva...Kai T€A.e<.ajo"oj avrov to epyov. 
 
 IV. 47 iva...Kai IdcrrjTaL avrov rov viov. 
 
 vi. 53, 55 car p.i] (pdyrjre rrjv rrdpKa rov v. rov a. Kai -irajre avrov ro 
 aipa...6 rpwywv p.ov tt)v rrdpKa Kai ttlvwv pov rb alp.a e^et £idt]v alioviov 
 ...rj yap crdp£ p.ov dXyjBijs iari /Spwou?, Kai to aipa ftov dXr]&r)<; iart 
 7roo-i?. 6 Tpojywv p.ov tijv o~dpxa kol ttiv<dv pov to aipa iv epoi fievei. 
 
 [2561] vii. 3 lva...6f.u)pr)0-ovo-iv [aov] rd epya (marg. to. epya Q-ov) 
 
 (i 7T0l€tS. 
 
 viii. I 7 OTi Svo av6pwTru)v 17 /xapTvpia dXrjOyjs io~nv. 
 
 ix. 6 eTreOr/Kev airov rov ttvXov eVi tov? 6<i>#aA.povs. 
 
 IX. IO foil. 7TWS [ow] r}vew^6rjo-av aov 01 6<f>6aXfjLOi ; (i i) eVeXptQ-ev pov 
 tov? o. (rep. 30) (14) dvew$ev airov tovs 6., (15) irrjXov eTreOrjKtv p.ov 
 inl tovs 6., (17) r]veu>£ev o-ov tovs 6. (rep. 26), (21) ti's rjvoi^ev airov 
 tovs o. 
 
 ix. 27, 28 pr; Kai vpei? OeXere airov fiaBrjral yeveo-Qai; . . . 2i> p.aOrjrrj'i 
 el eKeivov, ^peis 8e tov M. io-p.lv p.aOiqra[. 
 
 X. 4, 5 OTi oi8ao~iv tt/v cpwir/v airov. . .otl ovk oi'8ao~i tojf aAAoTpicov 
 
 T7J1' (fiCDVrjV. 
 
 xi. 32 €7reo"€V avTov 7rpos tovs 7ro8as Aeyovo~a avTw Kvpie, ei ?)s uioe 
 ovk av pov diteBavev 6 a8., contrast ib. 21, K., ei t)s wSe ovk av a7T. 
 ao. pov. 
 
 xi. 48 dpovaiv rjpwv kol tov tottov Kai to e#vos. 
 
 xii. 16 TavTa ovk kyvwaav airov 01 p.at)rjrai to irpu>Tov. 
 
 xii. 27 8o£ao-6V aov to ovopa, SO xvii. I 8d£acroV cov rov viov. 
 
 xii. 40 T€Tv<pA.o)Kei' avrtov tov? d<£#aAuovs Kai eVojpojaei' aiTwi' tj;v 
 
 naphiav, freely quoted from Is. vi. 10 where there is no precedent 
 genitive, but there is a non-precedent genitive toTs tocrlv airtov which 
 Jn omits. 
 
 xii. 47 — 8 idv ti's p.ov aKovo-77 tcov prj/xdrtDV koL /j.tj cpvXa$7]. . .0. . ./irj 
 Xafxftdvwv rd pr/p-ard fxov . 
 
 xiii. 1 oti rjX$ev avrov 77 copa, contrast ii. 4 i] <*>pa p-ov , vii. 30, 
 viii. 20, r) topa. avTov, xvi. 2 1 17 tupa avrrjs. 
 
 xiii. 6 foil, crv pov i/«tt«s tov? 7rd6us; (8) ov /xr] vi'i/a/? pov rov<; 7rooas, 
 (9) H-V TOV< > ""o8as pov /xovov, (T2) otc ovv evuf/ev tov? 7ro6a? avTwv, 
 
 41S 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2563] 
 
 (14) €t ovv iyo) evi\j/a v/xwv tous 7rooas, Kai vp€t9 oc/>eiAcT€ aXXrjXwv 
 
 vltttciv rovs 7ro8a?. See 2564. 
 
 xiii. 1 8 6 Tpwywi/ /xov tov aprov, quoted freely from Ps. xli. 9 6 
 
 4a6uoi' aprov; /xov. 
 
 [2562] xiv. I, 27 Mr) rapaaaeaOd) vpwv 7; KapSta, comp. xvi. 6, 22. 
 
 XV. 9, IO petVaTe ev ttJ d-ydTrri rrj €jifj. eav tcxs ivroXas /j.od rrjprjcrrjre, 
 fievelre iv rfj aydrnj pou, Kadws eyu> tod 7raTpos Tas evToAas TerrjprjKa kui 
 pevco auroG ev ttJ dya7TTi. 
 
 xv. 1 5 om oiSev ti 7roiet auToij o Kvpios. 
 
 Xvi. 6 7/ Au7TT7 TT€Tr\l']p<DKeV VpLWV T7]V KCLphiaV . 
 
 xvi. 2 2 /cat ^aprjaeraL v/xwv 77 KapSia, quoted from Is. lxvi. 1 4 
 yaprjaeTai 77 Kapoia upuiv . 
 
 xvii. 6 'Ec/jarepojcra crou t6 ovopa, contrast xvii. II, 12 €V ™ 
 ■ovofiari crov. 
 
 xviii. 10 ihraurev tov toij dp^iep€w<; SoSAov Kai a-rr€Koif/€v avrov to 
 loVapiov to Sefidv. 
 
 xviii. 37 7ras 6 cuv £K T77S a'AT/^eias aKoi'et pou T77S tptov^s. 
 
 XIX. 2 tTTccpai'ov. ..iTredrjKav avrov rfj KetpaXfj. 
 xix. 29 CT7royyov. . .irpoo-yjvcyKav avrov to aropari. 
 
 xix. 31 — 4 t'va KaTcaytucTiv auTtuv to. crKeXrj... (32) Kai tojj pev 
 7rpwTov Karia^av to. o-KeXrj koI tov dXXov... (33) ov Karea^av avrov 
 rd o-KeXrj, (34) Aoy^r/ avToS tt/v nXevpav eyvgev. 
 
 xix. 35 Kai aXy]$LV7] avrov io-rlv 77 papTupia. 
 
 XX. 23 av tivcov a(f>r/re to.? dp.apTias. 
 
 XX. 25, 27 eav pr).../ia'Aco tov Sa'/cTiAov /xou... Kai (3aXo) pou rrjv 
 >(eipa eis tijv 7rA.€upav auVou... (27) ^e'pe tov oaKTuAov crou cooc Kai ioc 
 Tas xeipas pou Kai cpepe ttjv \€ipa o~ou /cat /3aXe eis tt?v 7rAeupav pou. 
 
 xxi. 24 otSafxev on aXr/Bys avrov 77 paprupia Icrriv. 
 
 [2563] In some of the instances given above, the pronoun 
 (somewhat like the Latin " ei " in " projecit se ei ad pedes") occurs 
 in a phrase mentioning some part of the body where "his," "my" 
 etc. do not exactly mean, or at least do not emphasize, possession. 
 Thus Luke (W.H.) "thou gavest me no water for my feet" is 
 expressed in text by pot, but in margin by preceding /xov : and 
 Luke's following words twice use the unemphatic preceding pou to 
 throw emphasis on the homage paid to Jesus by moistening or 
 
 1 [2562 a] Note that in three instances, xii. 40, xiii. 18, xvi. 22, when quoting 
 LXX, Jn deviates from it by using a precedent genitive (sim. Rev., see 2781 b). 
 
 419 27 — 2 
 
[2563] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 kissing His "feet 1 "—perhaps taking the emphasis off the pronoun 
 and throwing it on the noun "feet," because another tradition 
 described an anointing of the "head." In John, the "vernacular" 
 possessive occurs repeatedly with "eyes 2 " (in the narrative of the 
 healing of the blind man), also with "heart 3 ," "head 4 ," "mouth 5 ," 
 " legs 6 ," " side 7 ," " hand 8 ." Once it occurs with " right ear "—a note- 
 worthy instance because it occurs in a portion of "the four-fold 
 Gospel," the smiting of the High Priest's servant by Peter : and here, 
 though John agrees with Luke in adding that it was the " right ear " 
 (a point omitted by Mark and Matthew) he follows Mark and 
 Matthew against Luke in the use of the "vernacular" possessive 9 . 
 
 1 [2563 <?] Lk. vii. 44—6 VSwp p.01 iirl 7r65as (without the article) but marg. v. 
 fiov iirl tovs TroSas : and then, Uppe&v pov rovs Tr65as... K ara(pi\ovad p.ov rovs rrodas. 
 In his version of the Anointing, Mk xiv. 3 has Kare X eei> avrov rijs Ke<pa\r)s. Lk.'s 
 use of the precedent possessive here is all the more remarkable in view of his 
 general deviation (2559) from the Synoptic use of it. It is one of many proofs 
 that Lk. contains several documents written in several styles and variously revised. 
 
 2 See ix. 7, 10, 11, 14, 15 etc. 3 xvi. 6, 22. 4 xix. 2. 
 5 xix - 2 9- 6 xix. 31. ' xix. 34. s xx . 25 _ 
 
 9 [2563 o] xviii. 10 dweKoxj/ev avrov to wrdpiov rb 8e£t.6v. Comp. 1 Cor. viii. 12 
 rvirrovres avrQv tj)v aweibrjo-iu dadevovcrau, which is equivalent to " smiting them 
 [in the cruellest way, not in the body but] in the conscience [and that too when it is] 
 in a state of weakness." So Mk xii. 15 dSCos avr&v tijp viroKpiaiv and parall. Lk. 
 xx. 23 Karavorjaas 8e avrwv rrjv ira.vovpyla.v- mean, in effect, "detecting them in 
 their hypocritical craft" (parall. Mt. xxii. 18 yvoiis 5e ttjv wovnpiav avrwv). Mk v. 
 30 tis p.ov t)\(/o,to tuov "ifiaTtuv is given in Lk. viii. 46 as r)\j/ar6 /xou ris and is 
 repeated in Mk v. 31 without tup ipariuv, the meaning being almost the same as 
 ' ' who touched me on, or, took hold of me by, the cloak ? " 
 
 [2563 c] In Acts xvi. 22 Trepiprj^avres avrCov to, l/xdna, one or two inferior 
 authorities read eavrCiv, perhaps because the scribes took the " rending" to be like 
 that of the High Priest in Mk xiv. 63 diaprjfas tovs x i ™i>as avrov (sim. Mt. xxvi. 65 
 dt£pr)£<;v ra. ipdna avrov). Rending one's own garments would properly be 
 expressed in classical Gk by the middle Trepipri^ao-dai tcl ipdna. " Rending off 
 (ireptprj^as) (act.) the {rd) garments" (without possess, genit.) regularly describes 
 the action of public or private scourgers in Demosth. 403. 3, Polyb. xv. 3. 4, l'lut. 
 Vil. Poplic. C). But Diod. Sic. xvii. 35 and others (see Steph.) use the active for 
 the middle, and perhaps Lk. here used the unemphatic avrwv as an additional 
 indication that the meaning was not " their own." 
 
 1 2563./] The reader must distinguish between (1) to. pripara avrov "the 
 ordinary possessive," (2) ra avrov p-qpara "the intervening emphatic possessive," 
 intervening between the article and the noun and emphasizing avrov, (3) avrov 
 rd (rf/xara "the precedent unemphatic possessive," preceding the article and the 
 noun and so unemphatic as to throw emphasis from itself— unless antithesis ex- 
 ceptionally (2564) compels it iu receive emphasis — on to the contiguous words. 
 last, being characteristic of colloquial style, will be often called, for brevity, 
 " vernacular." 
 
 420 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2565] 
 
 [2564] In xiii. 6 o-v fiov viVtcis tovs 7roSas, the genitive pronoun 
 is emphasized by coming next after another pronoun (2784 c) so that 
 the meaning is, " Thou ! for me ! washest the feet' ! " This then — 
 owing to special circumstances in the context — is not an instance of 
 the vernacular unemphatic possessive. But it is followed by the true 
 vernacular possessive, xiii. 8 ov /xrj viif/rjs fxov tovs 77-oSas, "thou shalt 
 assuredly never wash my feet" where there is no emphasis on "thou" 
 nor on "my," but on "assuredly" and "feet" Then comes the 
 ordinary construction in xiii. 9 fxr] t. it. jxov fiovov, where firj...fx6i'ov 
 throws some emphasis on "feet," and xiii. 12 ore ovv Zvuf/ev tous 7rd8as 
 avT<Zv, where there is no emphasis on any particular word. Lastly comes 
 the precept xiii. 14, where v/xwv tous 71-oSa.s is not an instance of the 
 true vernacular possessive, because " your " is exceptionally empha- 
 sized by the previous insertion of an emphatic " I " to which "your" 
 is obviously antithetical. "If therefore f (iyw) washed for you (v/xwv) 
 the feet .. .ye also (kcu u/xeis) are bound for one another to wash the feet 
 
 (aWr/Xwv viTVTt.lv t. 7rd8as) 2 ." 
 
 [2565] We are not, of course, to suppose that the evangelist 
 deliberately arranged these variations — which indeed might be to 
 some extent illustrated by an Englishman's unconscious variations of 
 "shall" and "will." But we certainly must suppose that the author 
 of this Gospel had an unusually keen sense of rhythm and dramatic 
 fitness. It may also well be that in the course — perhaps a very long 
 course — of oral teaching, his Gospel assumed a shape in which no 
 phrase or word has been set down except as the result of artistic as 
 well as spiritual evolution. Take, for example, the first utterances 
 of Martha and Mary, when they severally come to meet Jesus before 
 the raising of Lazarus : — 
 
 (1) xi. 20 — 1 -q ovv M.dpOa ws i)Kovo-ev otl 'I. cp^crai v7rr)VTi]o~sv 
 
 1 [2564a] Comp. xxi. 22 cv /jloi aKoXoudei (equiv. to "it is for thee to follow 
 me") where the two pronouns are emphasized by juxtaposition, and txoi is more 
 emphatic than in xxi. 19 axoXovdei fiot, "follow me," where there is no 
 antithetical ov. The meaning is, "That disciple may follow me in his way, which 
 is not the way to the Cross; but you must not follow in his way, but in my way." 
 
 2 [2564 <£] So avrQv in xix. 31—4 i-va Kartaywaiv avrQiv to. gk£\ti is vernacular 
 possessive and unemphatic, "that they might have their legs broken," but rod 
 l*h Trpwrov, though preceding Karea^av ra aKiXi], is not vernacular because fi£i> 
 introduces antithesis ; and, in ov Karea^av avrov ra GKe\-q, the effect of antithesis 
 emphasizes avrov, so that the meaning is "they brake not his legs." 
 
 421 
 
[2566] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 avrijj- Mapta/x Se iv to> oikw (KaOi^eTO. tT-rrev ovv rj Mdpda 7rpo? 
 'Iijaovv, TKvpic^ 1 , ei 17$ woe, ovk av d-rreOavev o aoeXcpos fJ.ov. 
 
 (2) xi. 29 — 32 eKeivrj 8e ws ^KoixTev [/>. that Jesus "called" her 
 4>wvei ere] r/yepdy] Ta^ii kcu rjp-^eTo 7rpos avTov...rj ovv Mapia/z 0)5 rjXuev 
 oirov rjv 'Irjcrous iSourra aurov eireo-ev ai/rov 7rpos toijs 7rooas Aeyovcra avrw, 
 Kvpie, €t r)s wSc, ovk av p.ou d7T£#avev 6 a^eX^os. 
 
 [2566] Everything in (1) — the deliberation implied in "going to 
 meet," the weighty word elirev (2456), the ordinary sequence of ovk 
 av dirWavev, and of 6 dSeAc^d? uov — points to deliberate utterance. 
 In (2), Mary's "rising up quickly" (contrasted with the previous 
 " sitting in the house ") and her " falling at the feet " of the Saviour 
 when she first catches sight of Him, prepare us for an utterance of 
 passionate emotion. And, as a fact, the ordinary sequence of ovk dv 
 and verb 2 is broken by the intervention of fxov, and the connexion 
 
 1 [2565 a] Kvpie is now known to be omitted by SS. It is also omitted by SS 
 in xiii. 37 where W.H. have r Kvpie,~ 1 as here. In both cases, scribes have 
 probably added it to assimilate the text to passages in the context inserting Kvpie. 
 Peter's omission of "Lord" in xiii. 6 might spring from Peter's haste to expostulate 
 with his Master. Here, Martha is perhaps represented as omitting it because her 
 mind is absorbed in the thought of what might have been ("If only it could have 
 been otherwise!") and an "if" is the first word that escapes from her lips. Mary, 
 though in greater haste than Martha, does not omit " Lord." 
 
 2 [2566 a] Comp. 1 Cor. ii. 8 "Never the Lord of glory would they have 
 crucified (ovk hv r. Kvpiov ttjs 56£t?s earavpwo'av)," Heb. iv. 8 "Not about another 
 day would he have spoken," ovk dv wepl dWr/s eXdXft /merd ravra -tj/xepas, ib. viii. 7 
 "not_/»r a second [covenant] would place be sought," ovk dv devrtpas efardTo 
 rdvos. 
 
 [2566(5] In view of these instances, and of the reasonableness of emphasizing 
 most pronouns in such a position, it is possible that o~oi must be emphasized in 
 Jn xviii. 30 where the evangelist with bitter irony describes the Jews (1885 (ii)) as 
 avoiding external defilement, yet as defiling themselves internally by that which 
 "cometh out of the mouth" in slander, accusing Christ of being an "evil-doer." 
 "If this man had not been an evil-doer we should not have delivered him up to 
 [a just judge like] t/iee," ovk dv croi irape5u)K<xp.ev clvt6v. Blass (p. 320) on ovk dv 
 001 TraptSuiKa/xev, says "better ovd' according to the Lewis Syriac." And ovSt 
 would certainly be preferable unless an emphasis on aoi could be justified. The 
 variations in the best MSS. as to the position of dv in viii. 19 and xiv. 7 proceed in 
 part from scribal doubts as to the relation between the two similar sayings, and in 
 part from a failure to recognise that dv, in John, always follows an emphatic word, 
 and that in these two sentences "my Father" is more emphatic than "know." 
 In xviii. \fi, rryuivlfrvTO dv (where P» marg. has rightly inserted dv, casually omitted 
 by B at the end of a line before iVa) comes emphatically before a short pause; and 
 this (though not much more striking than xiv. 28 e'xdpTjre dv) has caused variations 
 (2739 c). In nunc of these three passages does there seem good reason for 
 supposing that dv was originally omitted. The variations in the Johannine order 
 
 422 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2567] 
 
 between /xov and 6 dSeXc^o? is broken by the intervention of the verb. 
 This obliges us to lay stress on dv i.e. "how different it would have 
 been!" But it is not clear whether the emphasis on aV does, or does 
 not, take away the emphasis from the following /xov. If crv had been 
 inserted, we might have felt certain that /jlov (2564) is emphatic. 
 Perhaps the writer draws a contrast between Martha, ending her 
 sentence with "me" and Mary, ending hers with "brother." If so, 
 [toy is the vernacular possessive. As it is, the conclusion is doubtful 1 . 
 [2567] In vi. 51 — 5, where the Eucharistic doctrine is introduced, 
 the ordinary possessive, 77 crdp$ /jlov, occurs, first predicatively ("the 
 bread that I shall give is my flesh ") and then " except ye eat the flesh 
 of (rip o-.) the Son of man." After this, when mention is made of 
 drinking the blood and eating the flesh, the unemphatic "his" and 
 " my " are used in order to emphasize "flesh " and " blood" : — " [yea,] 
 and drink his blood {clvtov t. aT/xa)...he that eateth my flesh (/xov t. 
 aapKa) and drinketh my blood (fxov t. at/xa)." When a return is made 
 to definition, the ordinary possessive is resumed : " my flesh (rf o\ 
 
 of dv (e.g. viii. 19 rbv Trare'pa. llov av ?"5eire, viii. 42 7]~yonra,T€ b\v ifxe, xv. 19 6 KocfAOS 
 hv to 181.0V i(pi\ei) are mostly explicable by emphasis on special words, but they 
 are irregular enough to perplex scribes (comp. Gal. iii. 21 (W.H.) tv vo/xtp b\v rjv 
 (marg. e'/c i>6/jlov r\v [oV])). In xviii. 36 the final dv suits well with the imperfect — 
 the meaning being "would be in that case striving at this very moment" [comp. 
 Mt. xxvi. 53 "at this moment... twelve legions of angels"] "that I might not be 
 delivered to the Jews." Blass (p. 207) says "to?s 'lovd. is contrary to sense and is 
 omitted by Chrys." But Chrys. inserts toTs 'lovd. in quoting the passage. After- 
 wards, it is true, he omits it. But then he omits not only rots 'lovd. but also the 
 rest of Christ's sentence (rois'Iovd. vvv 8e 7) /3a<r. 17 ifiri ovk 'Iotlv evrevdev). The 
 reason appears to be that he stops short because he sees no ground for special 
 comment on the omitted words. Subsequently he casually repeats the words ovk 
 ivrevOev, shewing that he had the clause before him, though he did not think 
 it worth while to quote it in full or to comment on rois 'Ioi»5. Yet in fact there is 
 great force in "thefetvs" as denoting the real agents, Pilate being a mere puppet. 
 In Lk. xix. 23, Blass (p. 206) takes e\6wi> as = (temporal) protasis, where I should 
 prefer to supply the protasis from the context, "Why didst thou not put my money 
 into the bank. ..and [then, if thou hadst done this,] I on my side (K&yw), when 
 I came home (e\du>i>), should have exacted the sum with interest?" 
 
 1 [2566 <r] Some might urge that, if Jn had intended emphasis, he would have 
 used ept,ov, not fxov. But ifiov is never used in N. T. without ( 1 ) a preceding 
 preposition Mt. v. 11, vii. 23, x. 18 etc.; or without (2) antithesis, Lk. x. 16 
 6 oLKOvwv v/j.u)v €/jlov tiKovei : or parallelism to a preceding genitive, Rom. i. 12 vfiCiv 
 re /cat e/Aov, xvi. 2 iroWQv k. (fxov clvtov, xvi. 13 avTov k. e/uoO. (3) In one 
 exceptional passage the text varies so as to cause suspicion of error Mt. xvi. 23 
 (BN*) <tk&i>5o.\ov el e/xov, v.r. fj.ov ei, ei e/xot, ixoi et, et fj.ov, where eifxi 001 may 
 have been the original ("I am a stumbling-block [it seems] to thee!"). 
 
 423 
 
[2568] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 fxov) is true food, and my blood (to d. /xov) is true drink." Then, 
 when it has to be insisted that " abiding " in Christ is the result of 
 feeding on the " flesh " and the " blood," the nouns are again 
 emphasized : " He that eateth my flesh (/a. rrjv o-dp/<a) and drinketh 
 my blood (/x. to alfxa) abideth in me 1 ." 
 
 [2568] Where there is no antithesis we are generally safe in 
 taking the precedent possessive as unemphatic, e.g. "I manifested thy 
 name," compared with "in thy name 2 ." But antithesis and chiasmus 
 probably give it emphasis in xv. 10 "ye will abide in my love (/aevei/rc 
 kv t. ay. fxov) . . . even as I... and abide in his love (/xeVw auToG iv rrj 
 dy.) 3 ." In iii. 19 — 20, the context is too long to discuss, but the 
 genitives (one of which is separated from its governing noun by a 
 predicative adjective, irov^pa) are perhaps intended to throw the 
 emphasis on what follows in each case 4 . It is however a passage 
 where there is room for difference of opinion. 
 
 1 [2567a] In xx. 25 — 7, there is perhaps a contrast between the vehement and 
 varied utterance of Thomas and the calm regularity of the Saviour's reproach. 
 Jesus repeats four times the ordinary possessive genitive ("thy finger," "thy hand" 
 etc.). Thomas says "put my finger (/3. tov 5. p.ov) into the print of the nails, yea, 
 and put my hand (k. j3. p.ov ttjv x e ^P a ) mto h> s side." The difference cannot well 
 be expressed in English. But there appears to be intended a climax in the 
 thrusting of the whole of the "hand" (as compared with "the finger") into the 
 open wound in the side. 
 
 [2567/;] In iv. 47 "that he might heal his son (a. tov vi6v)" there may be an 
 intention to emphasize "son," partly because it illustrated the urgency of the 
 request, partly because some traditions may have differed as to whether (1862a— c) 
 the sick "boy" was a "son" or a "servant." 
 
 2 [2568 a] xvii. 6 £<pavipwoa gov t. ovofxa, comp. xvii. 11, 12 TqprjGov (and 
 irrjpovv) avTous iv T(f5 6v6fiari gov. 
 
 3 [2568/;] In iii. 32 — 3 ttjv fiapTvpiav clvtov ovdels \a/j.(3avei. 6 \a/3<W avrov tt\v 
 fxaprvpiav there is no antithesis between avrov and another pronoun. The second 
 avrov is probably unemphatic, the emphasis being thrown on \af3uiv, "he that did 
 receive" (after the assertion "none receiveth"). 
 
 4 [2568 r] iii. 19 — 20 K. T]yaivr\Gav oi tivdpunroL /j.a\\ov to gk6tos rj to (puis, r\v yap 
 avruiv irovrjpa to. t'pya. -nds yap 6 <pav\a irpaGGtov /xiGel to (puis Kai ovk fpxtTai irpbs 
 to (puis, 'iva fxi) i\tyxQy to. ("pya avrov ' 6 5i iroiuiv ttjv aXyjOeiav £px eTCU Tpos t6 (puis, 
 iVa (pavipw0ri avrov to. £pya on iv deal iGTiv eipyaG/xiva. If this view is correct the 
 meaning is that men as a rule loved darkness "for their works were essentially 
 bail \irovr)pa)" but that the truth-worker comes to the light "that his works may 
 be manifested as being worked in God." In both cases the emphasis is taken from 
 "their" and "his," to be thrown on "works." But as regards 6 <pav\a irpdaGwv, 
 emphasis is thrown on his personal shrinking from the light lest "Air works be 
 convicted." In iii. [Q the position of irovrjpa before Zpya makes both words 
 emphatic: "For there was from the first an essential badness in their works." 
 
 424 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2569] 
 
 [2569] In ii. 23 " beholding his signs (avrov ra o-r/^eta), which he 
 was [continually] doing," and also in vii. 3 " that they may behold 
 thy works (if we read aov ra. epya)" emphasis is laid on " signs " and 
 " tvorks" and the context implies, perhaps, that the speakers attached 
 more importance to these than to Christ Himself. The same 
 emphasis on the noun is to be laid in the only two instances where 
 precedent avrov occurs in the Johannine Epistles: 1 Jn ii. 4 — 5 " He 
 that sayeth...and keepeth not his commandments (ras evr. avrov /at) 
 rrjptZv) is a liar... but whoso keepeth his word (os S' av rrjpy avrov rbv 
 X6yov)\ truly in him is the love of God," 3 Jn 9 — 10 "He that loveth 
 supremacy over them, Diotrephes, doth not fitly receive us : for this 
 cause, if I come, I will call to remembrance [twt his prete?isions but\ 
 his works (yTrojxvtfO'iJi avrov ra. f'pya) 2 ." 
 
 1 [2569 a] On this Westcott says "The position of the pronoun here (avrov rov 
 \6yov), as contrasted with that which it has in v. 3 (ras ivroXas avrov), emphasizes 
 the personal idea. The main thought is that the word is His word, the word of 
 God. There is emphasis also on the 'keeping' 8s av rrjprj contrasted with 
 6...t<xs ivr. pLtj TT)pQv." In view of Jn's frequent use of the "vernacular" avrov 
 this interpretation seems untenable. Jn has not here rov avrov \6yov as in 
 1 Jn ii. 27 to avrov xp'""M a - In avrov rbv \6yov, the emphasis is taken from avrov 
 to be thrown on \6yov, which here means "t/ie {spiritual] word" or "the spirit, 
 not the letter," and is stronger than £vro\ds, "commandments. " Comp. xiv. 23 — 4 
 rbv \6yov fiov rr)pr\aei and rovs \6yovs fiov ov rtjpel. The pi. \6yoi in the Gospel 
 corresponds to the pi. evroXai in the Epistle and both occur in a negative clause 
 while the sing, \6yos is in the positive clause. The position of the pronoun, 
 then, does not "emphasize the personal idea," but throws the emphasis on the 
 spirituality of the "Word" that is to be "kept." 
 
 2 [2569 p] Somewhat similar is the mention of "those who are puffed up" in 
 1 Cor. iv. 19, "But I will come quickly unto you. ..and will acquaint myself not 
 with the speech but with the power of them that are puffed up, /cat yvJiffOfiai. ov 
 rbv \6yov ruiv Trecpvcriwin^voov dXXa rrjv ovva/xiv.'" 
 
 [2569 1] In ix. 6, the reading is very doubtful. W. H. txt has ravra eiwwv 
 Zirrvaev x<xM a ' K - erroirjaev iryfKbv em rov wrvcrfiaTos nai r €we9y]K€v'' (marg. ivexpi-O'c) 
 avrov rbv mjXbv iirl rovs 6 rp 6 aX/xovs. R. V. marg. has "the clay thereof" taking 
 avrov to refer to wrvirfxaTos, and supplying "his." AC ins. "of the blind man" 
 after "eyes." SS has "and took [it i.e. the clay] up [and] smeared [it] upon the 
 eyes of that blind man," D "and smeared upon him (irrexp'-o'ev avr^i) the clay 
 upon his eyes," d "et linuit ei lutum super oculos eius," a "et linuit oculos 
 ejus," b "et superlinuit lutum super oculos illius caeci," e "et superunxit oculos 
 caeci,"/"et superlinivit super oculos caeci, " ff^et superunxit illud super oculos 
 ejus." (i) Mark's (viii. 23) tradition about healing blindness with saliva, (2) Jewish 
 traditions about such healing, and (3) the possibilities of mystical suggestion in 
 the present passage, combine with (4) the textual variations to make its adequate 
 interpretation at present impossible. 
 
 425 
 
[2570] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 § 4. Miscellaneous variations 
 
 [2570] The following miscellaneous variations, taken in their 
 order as they occur in the Gospel, may be of use for reference, and 
 for the purpose of giving the reader a general view of John's style. 
 Many of them have been explained incidentally above : others will 
 be briefly discussed here. A few of them deal with synonyms not 
 discussed in Johannine Vocabulary. For example, the use of Kara- 
 Aa/z/JaVw in the Prologue (i. 5) was discussed in 1735 e — //, but the 
 relation between TrapaXap./3dvoj and Xa/xfiuvti) in the same context 
 was merely touched on there, and will come first in the instances 
 given below. 
 
 In l. II — 12 01 18101 avroit ov TrapeXafiov 00-01 8e tXa/3oy avrov, a 
 distinction is certainly drawn between TrapiXa(3ov and ZXaftov, and the 
 former is probably used with special reference to <n 18101. The meaning 
 probably is that, when the Son of God came to His own family, none 
 "received Him fitly as coming from the Father {irapiXa^ov)" but some 
 " received Him [though imperfectly'] (eAa/W) 1 ." 
 
 1 [2570 a] Ot idiot avrov ov wapeXafiov and the preceding et's to. idta fj\0e 
 are quoted by Clem. Alex. (882 — 3 ets r. i'dta, (p-qaiv, fiXdev 6 vlos t. deov k. 
 ol idtoi avrbv ovk ede^avro) as referring to "the world (ko^os)."' In that case we 
 might reconcile ou TrapeXafiov with oaoi iXafiov by saying that irapiXafiov means 
 a friendly "receiving" (Nonnus, iyipatpov), while ZXafiov means a less active 
 "receiving" (Nonnus, di^avro). Or we might say that John according to his 
 custom (2628) states a fact first roughly and inaccurately, and then more exactly. 
 
 [2570/;] But Chrysostom and Ammonius both take idiot in a twofold sense, as 
 meaning (1) the world, (2) Israel; and in view of the language of the prophets 
 about the rejection of Jehovah by His own children, and the language of Jesus 
 Himself about "a prophet in his own country," there can hardly be a doubt that 
 both meanings are intended. (1) Applied to the world at large, Tra.ptXa.fiov may 
 be illustrated by its use in Epictetus to describe our " receiving from [God]." In 
 one passage he uses TrapaXap.jia.vu3 (i. 6. 25 tt)v diav wapeiXricpaTe) to describe our 
 reception of the gift of beholding the sights of God's universe. Then he drops the 
 compound preposition (id. 28) "And come now, have you not received (dXr)<paTe) 
 faculties?... Have you not received manliness? Have you not received magnanimity ? 
 Have you not received patience?" The Logos itself is described as (i. 20. 5) 
 " received from [God] (TrapelXrjWTai) by [human] nature (i>7ro ttjs (/wews) " : and 
 concerning the power of the Logos (r) XoyiKT) 56vap.it) it is said that (i. 1. 4) "it is 
 received from [God]" and, in the same sentence, "it has come (iX^Xvde)." Else- 
 where TrapaXap0dvw is used (Ench. xxiv. 1, xxv. 1, xxxii. 2) of calling a friend to 
 share one's meal or one's secret plans. (2) From the Jewish point of view, 
 irapaXapfidvoj is the regular word for "receiving words, or traditions," banded 
 down from a teacher. It is thus used frequently in N.T. The very first words 
 of the Sayings of the Jewish Fathers arc "Moses received the Law from Sinai," 
 
 426 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2572] 
 
 [2571] i. 15, 30 o otticto) fxov cp^opevos i/JLTrpo<r0ev /aov yeyovtv, on... 
 (30) eiirov, 'Ottictu) [xov ep^eraL dinjp os epurpocrBev p.ov yiyovti'. Hereby 
 
 the evangelist warns us that when he represents a speaker as 
 apparently repeating a previous utterance, we are not to expect 
 identity of expression. The introduction of dvijp may (2371) allude 
 to the meaning " husband " and may prepare the way for (iii. 29) 
 "bridegroom." But in any case this is one of many passages in 
 which the writer seems to say, "The Baptist and the Lord Jesus 
 said the same things again and again in slightly different ways, 
 and there may be various traditions, all differing and yet all accurate." 
 [2572] The verb of seeing is thrice varied in i. 32—4 Ti.6iap.ai 
 
 to Trvevp.a KarafioZvov. . ./cd-yds ovk r)8€iv avrov aAA' o 7re'p.u/as pe. ..ei7rei/ 
 E<f> oV dv l8r]<i...Kayit> €wpu«a Kai p.ep.apTvpr]Ka. This may be para- 
 phrased thus, "/ have beheld the manifestation of the Spirit... and 
 I for my part did not know him [the Messiah] but he that sent me 
 
 and the following sentences describe a long succession of teachers as each 
 " receiving" from a predecessor. 
 
 [2570 (] In i. 4 — 12 the context makes it probable that Trape\a(3oi> refers to the 
 Jews: for it appears to describe three stages of failure, in three negations, with 
 KaTa\a/jL[3duw, yivwcrKU), and wapa.Xa/j.p&i'u. (1) "The life was the light of men... 
 and the darkness apprehended it not (clvto ov /carAa/Sef)." (2) "[The light] was 
 in the world; and the world, through him [or, it], came into being; and the 
 world recognised him not (avrov ovk tyvo})." (3) "To his own [house] he came, 
 and his own [household] did not receive him [as coming] from [the Father of the 
 house] (avrov ov TrapeXa/Hov)." 
 
 [2570 it] In the Synoptists, TrapaXa/xpavu is used, with 'Ir/aovv as object, in 
 Mk iv. 36 of the disciples "taking Jesus with them in the boat," and in Mt. xxvii. 
 27 of the soldiers of the governor "taking Jesus ivith them into the praetorium," 
 where Mk xv. 16 has dirriyayov and Lk. altogether differs. The use of v. to 
 describe "taking prisoners along with one" (or "accepting the surrender of 
 a city" as in 1 Mac. xv. 30 (X) wapeXajSere, LXX KareXafteo-de) is very rare in Gk, 
 and occurs in canon. LXX perh. only in Lam. iii. 2 irap4Xa^v /xe k. dirriyayev et's 
 ck6tos. It is therefore worthy of note that Jn, like Mt., has napaXafx^dfoj in his 
 account of the Passion. But, in Jn, it is not "the soldiers of the governor" but 
 the "chief priests," who thus "take with them' 1 '' or "receive" Jesus; xix. 16 — 17 
 "then therefore he [i.e. Pilate] delivered him to them [i.e. the chief priests] to be 
 crucified. They therefore received (trapeXa^ov) Jesus." The supposition that the 
 word was applied in diverse traditions to a "reception" of Jesus as a prisoner is 
 confirmed, if the txt is correctly supplied (as it probably is) by Evang. Petr. (ed. 
 Robinson) § 1 koX r6re KeXevu 'Hpwdrjs 6 ^acriXevs irap[aX7]p.](pd7]i'ai t6v Kvpiov. 
 If Jn deliberately and allusively adapted a version of this ancient tradition, so as 
 to represent the Logos as being, after this fashion, "received" by His own '■'■priests" 
 — who might be called pre-eminently "His own people" — it is one of the most 
 ironical instances of Johannine irony. 
 
 427 
 
[2573] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 ...said, On whomsoever thou shall .^...and I [taught by God's word] 
 have seen [and received the vision] and have testified" (1597 foil.). 
 ®eao-0au here means spiritual "seeing" but refers rather to the form 
 (" descent as a dove ") of the vision while iwpaKa refers to the inner 
 meaning of it. 
 
 [2573] As to iii. 3 — 5, yevvqOfi avwOev compared with y. cf vSaTOs 
 /cat irvev/xaTos, and tSeu' rqv fiaaiXtiav tov Beov compared with 
 ela-eXOelv «ts ryv (3. t. 0., it was noted in 1903 a that Chrysostom 
 apparently took <lYw#ev to mean "from above." It should be added 
 that Origen certainly does this in a passage in which he comments 
 
 On Vlll. 23 VfAtLS (K TWV KO.TO) €<TT€, iyw CK TOJV UVW el/XL, 111. 3I O WV €K 
 
 rrys yrj<;...o Ik tov ovpavov ep^o/xevo?, where he says to. fjikv yap 7repryeia 
 koltu) eo-Ti, to. 8k ovpdvia drw, and then, afier quoting Matthew's 
 doctrine about the " heart " and the " treasure " being together, he 
 adds : " If a man be treasuring up (diqaavpt'Cij) on earth, [then] as 
 the result of his treasuring up on earth he becomes ''from below'' {Ik tw 
 kcitw yiVe-riu), but if a man is treasuring up (Orjo-avpiC,^) in the heavens 
 he is born from above (yevvarai avwOzv) and assumes (i Cor. xv. 49) 
 ' the image of the heavenly 1 J " 
 
 1 [2573 a] Huet ii. 280 E — 282 c. Comp. Origen's Homily on Gen. i. 6 — 7, 
 where he refers to the "living water" as being that which is "above the 
 firmament" and as opposed to the " "water below," which is the water of death: 
 " Studeat ergo unusquisque nostrum divisor aquae effici ejus q jae est supra, et quae 
 est subtus : quo scilicet spiritualis aquae intellectual, et participium capiens ejus 
 quae est supra firmamentum, flumina de ventre suo educat aquae vivae salientis in 
 vitam aeternam, segregatus sine dubio, et separatus ab ea aqua quae subtus est, id 
 est, aqua abyssi, in qua tenebrae esse dicuntur, in qua princeps hujus mundi, et 
 adversarius draco, et angeli ejus habitant, sicut superius indicatum est. Illius ergo 
 aquae supernae participio, quae supra coelos esse dicitur, unusquisque fidelium 
 coelestis eflicitur, id est, cum sensum suum habet in arduis et excelsis, nihil 
 de terra, sed totum de coelestibus cogitans, quae sursum sunt quaerens, ubi 
 Christus est in dextra Dei patris." 
 
 [2573/'] Toward the end of the first century Christian teachers would find 
 it necessary to emphasize the possibility that a man might be " born again" for 
 evil as well as for good. This is recognised in some of the Gospels by the Parable 
 of the "seven devils" entering into the man delivered from one devil, and by 
 Christ's description of a proselyte as "twofold a child of Gehenna" : and 
 I hristians might apply this doctrine to Simon Magus and others. Hennas 
 implies this double possibility of proselytism in a passage that contains an attempt 
 to draw a distinction (heir made by John) between "seeing" and "entering 1 ," as 
 regards the "kingdom of God." According to him (Sim. ix. 13 — 15) there are 
 twelve holy Virgins (who arc "holj spirits") and twelve unholy, Vexation \.\inrr)), 
 Wickedness etc. : "The servant of God that bears these names, though he shall 
 
 428 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2575] 
 
 [2574] iv. 13 — 14 7ra? o 7nW>i/...os 8' dv -rrty. Here 7rSs 6 
 introduces the multitude of those that go wrong, b\ 8" uV the in- 
 dividual that goes right. Comp. iii. 20 7nxs yap 6 epavXa -n-pdo-o-wv . . . 
 with ill. 2 I o Se ttouov ttjv dXrjOeiav. 
 
 vi. 48 — 51 eyw eipi o apros T775 £0)775. . .ey (J eipt o dpros 6 £<ov, is 
 
 not variation but development — a good example of the way in which 
 John leads the reader on from suggestion to statement. "The bread 
 of life" like "the tree of life," is a comparatively simple phrase; 
 but — after the analogy of " the water of life " and " living (i.e. 
 running) water " — the Teacher passes on to say that the bread is 
 itself "living" and that it is indeed the "flesh" of a living Man. 
 This was a new doctrine for the Jews, though it is only an application 
 to the spiritual world of a physical law — that life feeds on life. 
 
 [2575] In vii. 30 etfjrovv ovv avrov 7riu'crai kou ouSeis eTrifiaXev err 
 avrov T7]v x € 'P a OTL ovttw iXrjXvOeL tj ojpa avrov, is there any explanation 
 of the sing. x e W a nere ar >d the pi. x € W a, > m vn - 44 Ttv « 8e rjdeXov ef 
 avrwv TTLacrat avrov, aXX ouoei? k/3aXev Itt avrov ras ^eipa? ? It has 
 
 been pointed out above (2135 foil.) that dXXd as compared with kcu 
 represents Greek idiom as compared with Hebrew. So does rj9eXov 
 as compared with itjjrow — which, though meaning in Attic Gk 
 "desire to" (Steph.) before such verbs as rrvdeaOai, eKfxadetv, euSeVai, 
 XaOe.lv, or other verbs expressing what one desires for oneself does 
 not seem to be used as in LXX (Ex. ii. 15, iv. 24, Esth. ii. 21, 
 Ps. xxxvii. 32 etc.) in such phrases as "desire to kill." Possibly, in 
 the same way, x € V a mav De explained as Hebraic and x € V as as 
 Hellenic. At all events, in Esth. vi. 2, where the Heb. has " lay 
 hand" the LXX has t<xs x e 'P a ? (comp. 1 K. xx. 6) : and Eustathius 
 (Steph. i-n-ifiaXXio 1524 d) speaks of the phrase in the pi., to x"P a ? 
 
 see the kingdom of God yet shall not enter therein," ravra to. 6u6/u.aTa 6 (popCiv tov 
 deov 8ov\os T7}v fiaGihelav p.ev oiperai tov deov els avrrjv Se ovk eareXeiVexcu, where 
 the Latin has "spiritus" for ovoixara. Irenaeus (i. 13. 6 and i. 21. 1 — 5) shews 
 that parodies of baptism were common among certain heretics promising a 
 "redemption" or "restitution" that was to be compatible with the grossest 
 immorality. For these reasons it became needful to insist that the "new birth" 
 was not only "new" but also "from above." 
 
 [2573 c] In addition to the facts adduced in 1903 as to Chrysostom's interpreta- 
 tion of avudev it should be added that Cramer has to de avwdev e/c tov ovpavov ov 
 drjXoL in a context that indicates either (1) that ov 5??Aoi means "does not make 
 clear," or (2) that final -ov in ovpavov has been repeated as ov. 
 
 429 
 
 if ^ OF THE 
 
[2576] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 hrefiake 1 . As to iirefiaXev compared with c/faXcv, the latter is 
 perhaps the less aggressive, and John indicates, in vii. 44, that those 
 previously mentioned as longing to capture Jesus dared not now 
 play the part of aggressors even in a minor degree. 
 
 [2576] In reply to Christ's words viii. 51 idv n? tov i/xbv \6yov 
 Trjfrqaij, 6a.va.T0v ov fxrj Oewpujo-r] as tov alwva, the Jews say, Vlll. 52 crv 
 Aeyeis 'Eav Tts tov Aoyov fxov' TTqprjo-r), ov fir/ yevcrrjTai, oavarov eis tov 
 al(Zva. " Taste of death " is an expression assigned to our Lord by 
 all the Synoptists just before the Transfiguration, and it means 
 literal death :i . But "behold death" appears to refer to spiritual 
 death, and perhaps contains an assumption that whatever one 
 "beholds" — whether it be the true glory of Goodness or the false 
 glory of Satan — one is, as St Paul says, "conformed to it 4 ." In 
 what follows, Christ says about Abraham, " He saw it [i.e. my day] 
 and rejoiced," i.e. he spiritually "saw" the joy of the day of the 
 Messiah and was conformed to that joy so that he himself "re- 
 joiced 5 ." Our Lord elsewhere uses the word Ihdv of "seeing the 
 kingdom of God 6 ." Here John uses Onapfiv — a word that sometimes 
 (1598) means blank, unintelligent, or superstitious vision — perhaps, 
 as being more appropriate to the view of the dark powers of spiritual 
 death 7 . But the Aramaic phrase "see death" — as distinct from 
 
 1 [2575 a] Aristophanes, however, has sing, in Nub. 933 t\)v x"p' V" 
 67ri/3dX\77s, Lys. 440 Tavrr/ ttjv x € 'P e""'/3a\eis. Polybius has i. x e 'P a s with sing, 
 subj. xviii. 34. 8, and with pi. subj. in iii. 2. 8, iii. 5. 5 : it means "lay sacrilegious 
 hands on" in Lucian [Tim. 4, Vol. i. p. 107). 'E. x^P a ^ occurs in Mk \iv. 46, Mt. 
 xxvi. 50 (where Lk. xxii. 54 (nearly but not quite parall.) has (rvWajSovres), also in 
 Lk. xx. 19 ('cr}TT}Gav...eTri^a\filv ew olvtov ras x e ~P as > anc l Lk. xxi. 12 eTrilSaXovaiv 
 ecf> i/fxas t. xe<pas clutwv. 'ETrt.(3d\\w occurs only 4 times in Acts and alw. with r&s 
 Xeipas. In I Esdr. ix. 20 eir^iaXov ras X e 'P as (Ezr. x. 19 ZSukclv x e 'P a olvtQv) 
 means " they gave their hands as a pledge," but Steph. does not quote this or other 
 instances ; and it is difficult to find any reason why Jn should use /3a\e2V X"P as 
 here (a very rare constr. if one may judge from Steph. (/3a\\u> 90 B) who quotes 
 nothing except Zenob. 5. 93 k&tw paXuv ras x e ~P as eUrr^Ka). Possibly he meant 
 " They dared not so much as move the hand against him." 
 
 " [2576 a] Top Xbyov fiov is not quite so emphatic as tov i)xbv X6yoi>, which again 
 is nol so emphatic as 6 X. 6 «>6s would have been. In Jn, 6 e/x6s occurs thrice, 
 v. 47, vii. 16, viii. 51, whereas 6. ..6 e'/uos is much more frequent. 
 
 8 [2576/$] Mk ix. 1, Mt. xvi. 28, Lk. ix. 27, comp. Ileb. ii. 9. 
 
 ' [2576 c] See 2 Cor. iii. 18 KaToirTpi^fjLtvoi, Rom. xii. 2 <rvvcrxVf J - aT ^ (ff ^ f -- 
 fi£TaiJLOf>(poi'<r0e. ° viii. 56. 6 iii. 3. 
 
 7 [2576 o^" This view is favoured by the fact that, when the "seeing" refers 
 to " the kingdom of God " and to " life," Jn has iii. 3 ov dvvarai idilv, iii. 36 ovk 
 oyf/frat fwqv (not Oewpetv). 
 
 430 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2577] 
 
 "taste death," and without any discrimination between different 
 verbs of seeing — may have referred to Biblical usage, which some- 
 times attaches to " see " the meaning of " see for oneself," " have 
 personal experience of," "realise 1 ." The fact that both Peter and 
 Paul are represented in the Acts as quoting Ps. xvi. 10, to shew that 
 the Messiah was distinguished from David by " not seeing the pit" 
 makes it probable that the phrase " see death " was variously applied, 
 not without controversy, toward the end of the first century. John 
 here teaches that " not to behold death " was a spiritual gift, ex- 
 tending, not only to Enoch, Elijah, and the Lord Jesus Christ, but 
 to all Christ's true disciples. At the same time, he points out that 
 the Jews co?ifused this with a phrase not used in O.T., " tasting death," 
 which they interpreted as referring to physical death. 
 
 [2577] ix. 2 1 — 3 7rdj? 8e vvv /3Ae7rei ovk olSa/xei', rj T19 ijvot^ev avrov 
 tow; o<$>6. rj/xels ovk otbapev avrov ipuyrrjaare, rj\iKiay e^ei...8ia. rovro.. 
 liirav on HAi/aav £X et > a ^ TOV ivepwr-qo-aTe (marg. ipwryjaare). The 
 difference between " we know not " and " 7ve (y/J-els) know not " is 
 that the latter implies a more emphatic disavowal because the 
 speakers, in the latter case, are more frightened : " But how he 
 now sees we know not. Or, who opened his eyes, [if indeed some 
 one opened his eyes] — we know nothing about it." In what follows, 
 the fact that the evangelist puts the last words of the parents first in 
 repeating their utterance is in conformity with the rule mentioned 
 
 above (2552 — 3). But the change of ipivrrjaare to eVcpwr^craTe is 
 a remarkable concession to dramatic effect or impressionism. " In 
 effect," John seems to say, "what the parents meant was, He is of 
 age, ask him, [not us, and ask him\ as much as you like" 1 ." 
 
 1 [2576 r] See (Buhl 752—3) Is. xliv. 16 " I have seen the fire;" Eccles. ix. 9 
 "See life with the wife whom thou lovest," Ps. lxxxix. 49 "...and shall not 
 see death," Targ. "see the angel of death " (comp. Heb. xi. 5 "translated that he 
 should not see death "), Ps. xvi. 10 " Neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see 
 corruption (or, the pit) " (quoted in Acts ii. 27 foil, and xiii. 34 foil, as applying not 
 to David but to Christ). In Esth. ix. 26 "that which they had seen." LXX has 
 " suffered," Tveirbvda.<ri.v. Lk. ii. 26 has fxi] Ldeiv ddvarov and Rev. xviii. 7 irevdos 
 
 OV fJ.7] l5<j}. 
 
 2 [2577 a] There is much variety in the O.T. and N.T. use of ewepiorav 
 (456(h) a). It occurs in Mk (25), Mt. (8), Lk. (17), Jn (2), namely, here and 
 xviii. 7 ttoKiv iwripLOTr)crev, " repeated his question again." The two instances 
 indicate that in both J n takes im- to mean "further," " again." SS has here 
 " Lo, he also is of age ; from him ye can know. These things said... Therefore 
 
 431 
 
[2578] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 [2578] In xiii. 33 (rep. from viii. 21) ottou eyw wayw fyms ov 
 Swao-de iXOeu', which had been uttered to the Jews, the pronouns 
 emphasize the opposition between "/" and "ye" ("Where /go ye 
 cannot come") — as also in vii. 34, 36— hut when Christ repeats this 
 
 to Peter, Xlli. 36 ottov virdyo) ov hwaaai fioi vvv aKoXovdrjaai, the 
 
 pronouns are omitted so as to lay no stress upon personal antithesis 
 but only on present time, "Where I go thou canst not follow me at 
 present.'''' 
 
 [2579] In XIV. IO — 1 1 ov 7rio"Tei;e(.s on eyw iv tuj 7t. kou 6 rr. iv ipot 
 eo-Tti' ; the position of eWiv at the end of the sentence marks it as 
 emphatic — and all the more emphatic because the meaning would 
 have been clear without it, — "Do ye not believe... that in me the 
 Father truly is 1 ?" In the repetition, -n-io-TeveTe [xoi on iyd> eV to it. 
 koi 6 ir. iv ifioi, the stress on " is " is dropped by the omission of 
 io-TLv in order to emphasize " me " ("Believe me"), and the sentence 
 concludes, " But if [ye can] not [do this], believe /or the mere works' 
 sake " — thus omitting the whole of the object of " believe " in order 
 to emphasize the cause of belief. 
 
 [2580] In xiv. 23 — 24 idv ns dycnra. /xe tov Xoyov fxov Trjprjcrei, 
 Compared With o /J.rj ayaTrwv yue tous Xoyov; fxov ov Trjpel, idv tis is 
 
 more selective than o ixrj (2552 c), and tov Xoyov represents " the 
 word " taken as a whole, the spirit of Christ's teaching, whereas 
 tov? Xoyov; means the separate doctrines, " does not [even] keep 
 [the letter of] my words." This is the only occasion where Christ 
 in the Fourth Gospel uses the plural A.o'yot 2 . 
 
 [2581] In XV. 9 — II fiet'raTe iv rrj dydirr] rfj i/xrj...fji€V€LTe iv rrj 
 aya-ir-fl llov. ..kolOws eyw...Kal fxivm avrov iv rrj d.ydrrrj . . . Iva rj \u-pd rj i/mrf 
 iv v/xlv y Kal 77 x a P* w V^ l/ TrXrjpwOrj, the phrase rj i/xrj emphasizes the 
 " love " and the " joy " so that they are distinguished from the 
 
 said his parents, Ask him." In classical Gk iwepwrav sometimes means "ask in 
 turn,' 1 '' i.e. "ask after answering," as in Mk xi. 29 (where Mt.-Lk. have epwrav) 
 but Steph. gives no instance where it clearly means "ask further." 
 
 1 [2579 a] See 1'hilo i. 267 in 2588 r, oVrws yap 6 a\T]9ii>ds ovtos lariv, where 
 Iotiv is similarly emphatic. 
 
 8 [2580^| In the Synoptists, besides other less important passages, \6yoi 
 (Chri.) occurs in Mk xiii. 31, Ml. xxiv. 35, Lk. xxi. 33, "my words shall not pass 
 away"; also in Mt. vii. 24 — 6 (bis) (pat all. Lk. vi. 47) "whosoever therefore 
 heareth these words of mine"; also in Mk viii. 38 (parall. Lk. be. 26) "whosoever 
 shall be ashamed ol me and my words" (Mt. <>m.). Comp. 1 Jn ii. 4 — 5 where 
 the sing. X670S in a positive clause with TTjpioj is contr. with the pi. li>to\clI in 
 a negative clause (fir) rrjpujv) (2569a). 
 
 432 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2583] 
 
 ordinary feelings so called — "the love that is peculiarly mine... the 
 joy that is peculiarly mine " — indicating that a new kind of love has 
 been brought into the world by the Son of God. 
 
 [2582] In XV. 2 1 tomto. Travra. Trotr/crovcriv . . .otl ovk olbauiv tov 
 7re/xi//cnTU yu.e, and xvi. 3 Tavra iroLrjcrovo-iv on ovk eyvaycrav tov iraripa 
 ov8e £{jl4, the exact meaning is hard to give without paraphrase, and 
 is not given by R.V. " know not," " have not known." The first 
 sentence says " They will persecute you, my followers, because they 
 knoio not the nature of him that sent me." Then Jesus shews that 
 this want of knowledge arose, not from intellectual but from moral 
 fault, and lastly He repeats " They will persecute you, I say, because 
 — not having in themselves the spirit of love, the spirit of fatherhood, 
 the spirit of sonship — they failed to recognise the Father and failed to 
 recognise me, — his Son \jvhen the Father sent the Son to theni\. r ' 
 
 [2583] xvi. 14 — 15 £k to£> €/xou XrjpxpzTai. ..8iu tovto etrrov on Ik 
 tov ipoi) \ajx(Sdi'€L is a remarkable instance of verbally inaccurate 
 quotation. SS, and the Latin versions except a, read Xrjjx\pe.Tai for 
 Xa/jifSdvet so as to make the quotation accurate 1 . After saying " He 
 will take from what is mine," Jesus explains, that "mine" means 
 "the Father's" because "all things as many as the Father hath are 
 mine." Then, having passed into the present, while describing the 
 ever present relations between the Father and the Son, He continues 
 in the present tense when repeating what He had previously uttered 
 about the relations between the Holy Spirit and the Son. Another 
 case of variation in repeating occurs in xvi. 16 — 19 where Jesus says 
 "ye behold me no longer (ovkztl)," but the disciples repeat it as "ye 
 behold me not (ov)," and our Lord Himself, accepting their variation, 
 says, " On this matter are ye questioning with one another because 
 I said, A little while and ye behold me not (ou) ! " Perhaps "no 
 longer " was intended to suggest " no longer in the old familiar way, 
 after the flesh." But the disciples, panic-stricken, fasten on the bare 
 negative " not," and their Master adapts His reply to their fears, and 
 accepts their version of His utterance 2 . 
 
 1 [2583 a] S omits the whole of verse 15 (homoeotel. ), e omits the last part of 
 it (on €K t. e. X. k. avayyeXei) reading " propter hoc dixi vobis pusillum...," (/has 
 " accipiet " though D has Aa/i/Meet. 
 
 - [2583 Z>] In xvi. 16 — 19 a, d, e, /and SS have " non " throughout. 
 
 [2583 <] On other variations of Christ's sayings see 2545 foil., 2190. And add 
 ix. 7 viraye vi\pai ets ttjv KoXvfi^rjdpav tov 2., repeated by the blind man thus, ix. 1 1 
 elirev /j.ol OTi'Tiraye eh tov 2. ko.1 vtyai. 
 
 A. VI. 433 28 
 
[2584] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 12584] In xvii. 12 6Ve ry^m- /act' avrdv eyw enjpovv uirrous ev tw 
 6v6fxaTi...Ka\ i<pvka£a, a difference is intended by the difference of 
 verb and tense. 'Enjpow, " I was always watching, or keeping 
 my eye on," implies the continually watchful care of the Lord during 
 His incarnate life, on which He is supposed to be, by anticipation, 
 looking back; i<f>v\a£a "I protected" (not "I have protected") 
 implies action regarded simply as past. There is emphasis 
 on " I " as distinct from the Father, " / could do it once, now I 
 beseech thee to do it." Mct o.vtC>v (2349) implies friendly com- 
 panionship : " As long as I was side by side with them" i.e. in the 
 world— a phrase that is supplied by many authorities. On xi. 50 
 o-v/x(t>€pii...ha €ts avOpuT-os d-n-oOmr), compared with xviii. 14 avjLcptpti 
 iva dvOpwTTOV dTroOarelv, see 2104 '. 
 
 12585] xiii. 19 aV apri Ae'yw vplv irpo totj yeveo-fjai Iva TridTevrjTe, 
 otolv ye'i'T/Tai, on eyw ei/xi (marg. eyo] eifii) is to be compared with 
 
 1 [2584a] Another instance of synonymous juxtaposition is in iii. 20, 21, 6 
 (pav\a vpdaauiv...b ttoiuv tt> d\rideuxv and v. 29 01 to. dyadd iroL-r)<yavTt^...o[ to. 
 <j>ad\a tt padres. In other passages of X.T. a distinction is recognised between 
 these two verbs, and irpdacw— which means " do habitually," "do as a business" 
 —is rather frequently connected with notions of evil: but 2 Cor. v. 10 irpos 
 a iirpa^f etVe dyadbv eiVe (pav\ov, and many other passages, indicate that irpdoou) 
 may be applied to habitual action good or bad. We shall not find elsewhere 
 in N.T. the thought implied here, that the word "making,'" or "creating" Troiew, 
 is appropriate to good, a- distinct from irpaaaw which does not imply creation. 
 
 [2584 /'] iv. 46—53 presents synonyms that may bear on disputed tradition 
 concerning the boy healed by our Lord at a distance. In Mt. viii. 6 he is called 
 TraFs i.e. "boy" which may mean (in the phrase "thy boy") "son" or "servant." 
 In l.k. vii. 2, he is called SoOXos, "slave" or "servant." In Jn, the evangelist 
 begins by saying "whose son (uios) was sick." The father then says, "Come 
 down before my little child (iraioiov) dies." Jesus then says, " Thy son liveth." 
 Then servants of the father " met him saying, ' Thy boy (ttuls) liveth.' ' Thus, in 
 Jn, three names are given to the child, all of them compatible with fact, and 
 indicative of the manner in which a mistake might have arisen from mistaking 
 7rai0ioi', or ttcus, for 5o0\os. See 1862 a — c. 
 
 [2584 r] On the synonymous juxtaposition of dya.-rrdw and $>C\iu in xxi. 15 — 17, 
 see 1436 foil. , 1716 d—f, 1728 m foil. To the facts there alleged add Origen (on 
 1. i. 2 I, XX oi'X i'Trdpxa b irapaKa\£>v avTrjv dirb irdvTUv tCiv dyairwvTWV avTrjf 
 wavres 01 <f>i\odvres avrr/v i\dkrt)<jav iv avr{j) ol6p.(8a yap rb /xiv dyanav deibrepov 
 elvai xal, Iv ovtws enrw, TrvevtxariKuv rb 5t <f>i\elv awp.a.TiKOV Kal dvOpwirLK&repnv. 
 No doubt the prophet writes according to the canon of Hebrew parallelism and 
 
 draws little distinction between the two Hebrew verbs. Hut the second of the 
 two is more correctly rendered by Aq. and Sym eraipoi " her companions" and 
 titled by I. XX usage in saying that " dyanq.v i- the more divine and, 
 so to speak, the more spiritual, but <jn\nv is bodily and savours more of men." 
 
 434 
 
ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION [2586] 
 
 xiv. 29 Kal vvv elpr/Ka vjjIv Trpiv yev€a6ai iva, brav yevrjrai, irMTTtvarjre, 
 and both may be compared with the tradition in Mark and Matthew, 
 "I have told you beforehand 1 ." The first saying refers to the betrayal 
 by Judas, but this is regarded in the Last Discourse (xiii. — xiv.) as 
 part of a general persecution, which is to befal the Church hereafter, 
 all of which Christ predicts "before it come to pass." The first saying 
 is longer than the second and emphasizes the date ("from this 
 moment") and the object of the prediction, "that ye may grow in 
 the belief (2525—8) that I am [He] 2 " (2221 foil.). The second 
 emphasizes the time to come when the coincidence will be observed 
 — between what will have " come to pass," and what was said before 
 it "came to pass" — so as to cause a special belief based on this 
 evidence. 
 
 1 2586] xix. 8 ore ovv ijKovcrev o II. tovtov t6v Xoyov fxuXXov 
 i(f}of3'i']0i] may be compared with xix. 130 ovv II., aKovcras twv Ao'ywi' 
 rovTwv yjyayev ?£w rbv 'I. In the former, the "hearing" does not 
 produce (1614 /;) any result beyond emotion ; and the clause, being 
 subordinate in thought, is introduced with a subordinate conjunction. 
 In the latter, tovtuv is emphasized by position (2553 c) and r. \6ytov 
 tovtwv by case (1614/;) — referring to the words "thou art not 
 Caesar's friend." This is a charge that Pilate cannot hear unmoved. 
 Now therefore he is goaded to action, and the sentence introduces 
 the action as the consequence, 6 ovv II...?;yayev 3 . 
 
 1 [2585 <z] Mk xiii. 23 irpoeiprjKa Vfilp wdvTa, Mt. xxiv. 25 Idov wpoeipy)Ka 
 vfj.lv, following a mention of " false Christs," who would lead astray " if possible, 
 even the elect." All this Lk. omits. A little above, Mk xiii. 6, Alt. xxiv. 5, 
 Lk. xxi. 8, predict the coming of those who will say " I am [He] " or " I am the 
 Christ": and Mk-Mt. (but not Lk.) add "they will lead many astray." 
 
 - [2585/?] The phrase "I am [He]" appears to connect this Johannine 
 tradition directly with Mk xiii. 6 and parall. mentioned above, and hence 
 indirectly with Mk xiii. 23 "I have told you beforehand." 
 
 3 [2586 a\ On the following minor points there is perh. not evidence enough to 
 ■establish any conclusion. Ets, in Jn, is regularly followed by in but the Gk MSS. 
 omit e/c in xix. 34 i. r. crrpartajrcDv, (a, e,f"\inus ex") and W.H. (following BL) 
 omit it in xii. 4. The great likeness of eic to gk in some mss. {e.g. D) increases 
 the uncertainty. But in xii. 49 ei; e/jLavrov . . .iXaXr/aa — as compared with XaXeiu dird 
 ifiavTou (or, eavrov) in vii. 17, 18, xiv. 10, xvi. 13 — perhaps indicates a more 
 emphatic statement, made at the end of Christ's public teaching, that He did not 
 speak " out of" His own treasure but from that which the Father gave Him. 
 
 [2586/;] According to W.H., Mary Magdalene is called Mapt'a in xix. 25, 
 xx. 1, 11, but Mapidfi in xx. 16, 18. According to Tischendorf, it should be 
 ~Mapidfj. throughout. If W.H. are correct, the explanation suggests itself that 
 
 435 28—2 
 
[2586] ARRANGEMENT AND VARIATION 
 
 Mapta. was used in evangelistic narrative up to the point where Jesus called her by 
 her Aramaic name xx. 16 " Mary (Mapid/u.)," and that here, and in the subsequent 
 xx. 1 8, the Aramaic form was retained. 
 
 [2586 (J In xi. II — 12 KeKoitxrfTai — ei k^kojjxtjtcll acoOrjcreTai, SS has " is lying 
 do-<i<n...sleepeth," a " obdormit.. dormit" b, e, f" dormit...dormit" (agreeing with 
 D KOLfj.arai...Koifi.S.Tai, but d has " dorm'n'it ...dor/nit"). Nonnus has evdei... 
 Ki>w<r<ret. Perhaps the desire to explain the alleged misunderstanding of the 
 disciples caused some translators to represent the disciples as using a different word 
 from Christ's when repeating what lie had said. On the other hand an ancient 
 comment (Cramer on xi. 7) boldly asserts " They did not really think it was sleep, 
 but supposed Him to be talking in a dark saying (aiviyfiaTt).'" The writer declares, 
 not without force, that it would be senseless for the disciples to suppose that their 
 Master would go "fifteen furlongs (sic)" to wake the sleeping man. Cramer 
 (Vol. ii. 3 r6) prints, as from Origen, an explanation suggesting that Thomas 
 supposed the Lord to mean that He was "going down to the place of the 
 [departed] souls (KaTafidvTos els rd rtbv xf/vx&v x w P i0V ) " to wake Lazarus, and that 
 hence the disciple desired to die with his Master. 
 
 [2586 d\ In x. 28 — 9 oi'X apirdaei tis. ..ovdeis bvvarat apwd^'eiv, is any difference 
 intended by the variation of ov...tis and ovdeis ? The former, in (r) LXX and 
 (2) N.T., means "not a single man." (1) In LXX, ovk avBpwiros, or avdp. ov,= 
 " not any one," Heb. " not a man," or "man not," in Josh. i. 5, Ezek. vii. 13 etc. 
 Tis, "any," often= Heb. "man" in the phrase " if a man," but never (Oxf. Cone.) 
 in ''not a man." In 2 S. xix. 22 "shall [any] man die...?," ov davaTiodriaerai ns 
 dv-qp, and in Sir. x. 24 ovk 'icriv avrQv tis, the Gk seems to mean "not a single 
 one." OH...TI seems to mean "not a single thing" in LXX (where there is no 
 corresponding Heb.) in Job xxxv. 15 oik tyvu irapdiTTUfxa ti, Prov. xv. 23 ovbe p.r) 
 dwrj Ka.Lpi.6v ti, Wisd. xi. 24 ovbe yap av puauiv ti KareaKeijaa-as (comp. Judith ii. 13 
 ov Trapaprjo-ri 'iv ti). (2) In N.T. , tis, ti etc., after ov or ju?7. appear to be 
 emphatic in Mk iv. 22 marg., Mt. viii. 28, xi. 27 ovoeis... ovde ... tis, xii. 19, xxii. 46 
 ovdels eovvaTO...ov8e eTo\p.-r)o-ev tis, Lk. xi. 36 etc. In Mk v. 37 ovk d^rJKev ovoeva 
 the parall. Lk. viii. 51 has wt d<prjKev...Tiva (al. ovde'va). It is very emphatic in 
 1 Cor. ii. 2, iv. 5, 1 Thess. ii. 9, 2 Thess. iii. 8, 1 Pet. iv. 15 etc. In 2 Pet. iii. 9 
 p.T) fiov\bnevbs rivas dwo\i<x6ai d\\d TrdvTas...x^PV ffai shews an exceptional use of 
 the pi. Perhaps the writer means "not desiring that some should perish [while 
 others are saved] but that all should come to repentance." 
 
 [2586, ] In Mt. xi. 27, xxii. 46 oiSe...ns is stronger than the preceding ovdeis. 
 Here fx. 28 — 9) it is stronger than the following ovdeis. The question is at first 
 about "snatching*' from the Son, and it is said, emphatically, that " not any" can 
 snatch from the Son. Afterwards, when "snatching" from the Father is spoken 
 of, stress is laid, not on "anyone," but on the notion of "snatching": — 
 " there is no such thing as snatching from Him," — where it is better (2767) to read 
 ovdeis apwd<;ei with Origen ; but in any case, the verb, not the />w/<v,<//. is emphatic. 
 If John had wished to emphasize the pronoun he might have used (2257) ov... 
 ovoeis. 
 
 436 
 
CHAPTER II 
 REPETITION 
 
 § i. The fiature of Johannine repetition 
 
 [2587] Johannine repetition may be roughly classified as (i) word- 
 repetition, (2) phrase-repetition. In (1), the repetition follows closely 
 in the context, e.g. " confessed and denied not and confessed?' In (2), 
 it is sometimes of the nature of a refrain, as in " A little while and ye 
 shall see me," " Feed my sheep," " All that thou hast given me " etc. 
 Repetition may, or may not, be accompanied with variation of order, 
 such as we find in one of the prayers before sleep in the Jewish 
 Prayer Book : " Behold, He that guardeth Israel will neither slumber 
 nor sleep." This is "to be said three times" apparently without 
 variation. But the next sentence is varied thrice, as follows : — " For 
 thy salvation I hope, O Lord. I hope, O Lord, for thy salvation. 
 O Lord, for thy salvation I hope (to be said three times) 1 ." Few or 
 none of the Johannine variations will be found to present any 
 ambiguity ; but they are of importance as illustrating the deliberate 
 and poetic arrangement of large parts of the Fourth Gospel and the 
 weight and mystical meaning attached by the author to certain 
 utterances, and indicated by him in twofold, threefold, and sevenfold 
 repetition. 
 
 1 [2587 «] Jewish Frayer Book, transl. by Rev. S. Singer p. 296. In the 
 Confession on a Death-bed (p. 317) " The Lord reigneth ; the Lord hath reigned ; 
 the Lord shall reign for ever and ever " is to be said three times, and so is 
 " Blessed be His name, whose glorious kingdom is for ever and ever." But "the 
 Lord He is God " is to be said seven times. Presumably, and appropriately, there 
 is to be only one utterance of the final confession of the unity of God : " Hear, 
 O Israel : the Lord our God, the Lord is one." But even here the bald truth 
 might have been expressed by "The Lord our God is one," and the addition of 
 "the Lord" suggests a "threefold effect" like that in the first sentence of the 
 Fourth Gospel. 
 
 437 
 
[2588] REPETITION 
 
 § 2. Jewish canons of repetition 
 
 [2588] Jesus is represented as saying to the Jews " Yea even in 
 your own law it is written that the witness of two men is true." The 
 passage referred to says, " At the mouth of two witnesses or at the 
 mouth of three witnesses shall a matter be established 1 ." This would 
 naturally lead to a discussion as to the matters for which, severally, 
 the witnesses should be "two" or "three." Philo says (i. 243) 
 " A holy matter (uyiov Tvpayp.a) is approved (SoKt^a^erat) through 
 three witnesses (Sia rpiuiv fxapTvpwv)." Commenting on the words of 
 the Psalmist "The Lord spake once, twice I have also heard this," 
 he connects terrestrial "hearing" with the imperfect " ditad 2 ." 
 Elsewhere he explains the idiomatic Hebrew reduplications of nouns 
 and verbs as indicating a twofold application to body and to spirit 3 . 
 Scripture, he asserts, never sets down a superfluous word, and never 
 commits "tautology — the worst kind of verbosity 4 ." 
 
 [2589] In Rabbinical literature we find much allusion to twofold 
 but not much to threefold witness. Philo is fuller on the latter : 
 We must not, he says, delight in casual witness, but must believe 
 that the [Supreme] God is very near us : " For there is no need, 
 says the sacred writer (Deut. xxx. 12), to go away to heaven, nor yet 
 to travel across sea, in search of the Good : for it is near and close 
 to each. And he divides it [i.e. the Good] threefold— most naturally. 
 
 1 [2588<7] Deut. xix. 15, referred to in Jn viii. 17. Westc. says, " The exact 
 form used here is found in St John of the old Scriptures only in this place 
 (compare xx. 31). It is the common form of citation in other books. St John 
 elsewhere uses the resolved form {yeypap.p.ivov iariv), which is read here by Cod. 
 Sin." Apparently yiypa-rrrai on is here used to introduce the substance of 
 a quotation not given exactly. It would be absurd to take "is true'''' ("the 
 witness of two men is true ") as meaning anything more than " is to be regarded as 
 truer 
 
 '-' [2588/'] Philo i. 284 — 5, on Ps. lxii. 11 and lxxv. 8. Ts. lxii. 11 is quoted 
 by Nedarini iii. 2 (Schwab viii. 179) to explain the apparent contradictions of the 
 Law; and the Targ. has "God spake one law... we heard it twice from Moses." 
 
 3 [2588c] See Philo i. 63 (on Gen. ii. 16 " eating thou mayest eat") and i. 129 
 ((Jen. xxii. 17 "Blessing I will bless") and i. 554 (Kx. xxi. 12 "let him die the 
 death"). On Lev. xviii. 6 (lit. and LXX) "man man shall not approach" Philo 
 says (i. 267) "I lis saying 'man, man' not once but twice, is a sign that the 
 iin. niing is not the [man] of [mere] body and soul but the [man] of virtue. For 
 this is really the true [man] (/xtj rbv €K crto/xaros k. V'i'X') 5 o.\\a rbv aperr} KexpV^" 0U 
 OyfKovddai. "Ovtw; yap 6 aX-qthvos ovt6s tOTiv). 
 
 4 [2588r/] Philo i. 520. ot'' p.<xKpo\oyias to (f>av\6raroi' d5os ravroXoylav 
 iwiT(Tii5tvKe. 
 
 438 
 
REPETITION [2590] 
 
 ' For,' says he, ' it is in thy mouth and in thy heart and in thy hands,' 
 that is, in speech, purpose, and act 1 ." Then, after quoting, from 
 Deuteronomy, " Ask thy father, and he shall declare unto thee," he 
 protests that no human "father" can describe the immemorial past, 
 but the "father" must mean "the Right Logos 3 ." Afterwards comes 
 the conclusion, "Now a holy matter is approved through three 
 witnesses 3 ," where there seems to be an underlying assumption that, 
 since the nature of the highest Good is threefold, the nature of the 
 testimony to the highest truth, and to that which is " holy," must 
 also be threefold 4 . 
 
 [2590] As regards twofold repetition Philo says that there are 
 " two divine Words (Verba), one, the pillar and support of the world 
 of reason, the other of the world of sense... two Reasons (Rationes) 
 of the twofold Universe, shewing forth foreordained and fixed event, 
 that is to say, the harmonious connexion of all things 5 ," and this 
 harmonizes with a mystical view found in Jewish Midrash that " two 
 zvords," when found together in Scripture, denote a twofold fulfil- 
 ment — "in the kingdom above" and "in the kingdom below 6 ." 
 
 1 Philo i. 241. 
 
 2 Philo i. 242, quoting Deut. xxxii. 7. 
 
 3 Philo i. 243. 
 
 4 Comp. Philo ii. 19 — 20 on "the three strangers" seen by Abraham (Gen. 
 xviii. 1 foil.) and (i. 657) on Jacob's pillar as representing a threefold recognition 
 of God. 
 
 5 Philo (P. A. 510) (tansl.) on Ex. xxv. 11 — 14. 
 
 6 [2590 a] Thus Schottg. (ii. 67) quotes Bammidbar r. xv. f. 230. 1 as 
 connecting Is. Ixii. 10, lvii. 14 " sternite, stemite, viam" with Ezek. xi. 19, as 
 implying (1) a "clearing away" of the "stones" by men, and (2) an "eradica- 
 ting" of the "stony heart " by the Messiah. lb. ii. 71 quotes Vajikra r. x. f. 153. 
 3 " Dixit Deus S. B. ad Iesaiam : ' Omnes prophetae proferunt vaticinia simplicia, 
 tu autem consolationes duplices,' " in support of which are alleged Is. xl. 1 
 " Comfort ye, comfort ye" li. 9 " Awake , awa/ce," li. 12 " /, /, am he that 
 comforteth you," li. 17 "Arouse thyself, arouse thyself" lxi. 10 " Rejoicing 1 will 
 rejoice." 
 
 [2590/;] It is interesting to note how Onkelos (followed by Jer.) deals with the 
 repetition in Ex. xv. 16, which is really nothing but poetic repetition for emphasis : 
 " Until thy people, O Lord, pass over [Arnon], until thy people whom thou hast 
 redeemed pass over [Jordan]" All Jewish commentators of the first and second 
 century would agree with Philo that no word of Scripture is " tautological." But 
 they would defend it against the charge of tautology in different ways. Non- 
 mystical writers would try to supply references to two distinct historical events ; 
 mystical writers would explain by reference to "the kingdom above" and "the 
 kingdom below." 
 
 [2590c] Hot. Heb. (i. 84) quotes (from Menachoth ch. x. and Tosapht. ibid.) a 
 
 439 
 
[2591] REPETITION 
 
 St Paul assumes that the Corinthians are familiar with the Deutero- 
 nomic saying above quoted — when he says, "This is the third time 
 that I am coming to you. At the mouth of two witnesses or three 
 shall every word be established 1 " — and his Scriptural illustrations of 
 the doctrine about " the second man," who is " of heaven 2 ," indicate 
 that Jewish canons of sacred writing would very soon influence 
 writers, and especially mystical writers, of Gospels intended largely for 
 Greeks 
 
 § 3. Repetition through negation 
 
 [2591] The Fourth Gospel shews traces of another Jewish canon, 
 of which little or no mention seems to have been made by Philo, — 
 namely, that a full statement includes the negative as well as the 
 positive aspect of a fact. Expressions on which it might he based 
 are frequent in O.T., such as " I shall not die but live," "The dead 
 praise not the Lord... but we will bless the Lord that live," "Not 
 unto us, O Lord, but unto thy name," "Not their own arm but thy 
 right hand" — all of which are in the Psalms 3 . It does not appear to 
 have been formulated in early Jewish literature; and the principal 
 authority for it is the work Sohar, known to be of late origin as 
 a whole but generally acknowledged to contain elements of great 
 
 quaint tradition combining the "twice" and the "thrice," apparently because the 
 " twice" denoted certainty and the " thrice " certainty about a holy matter (i. 84): 
 "The sheaf of first-fruits was reaped from the Ashes-valley of the brook Kedron. 
 The first day of the feast of the Passover, certain persons, deputed from the 
 Sanhedrim, went forth into that valley. ..And the reason of the pomp was... 
 because the Baithuseans, or Sadducees, did not think well of doing that action on 
 that day : therefore, that they might cross that crossing opinion, they performed 
 the business with as much show as could be. ' When it was now even, he on 
 whom the office of reaping lay, saith, "The sun is set"; and they answered, 
 " Well."—" The sun is set " ; and they answered, " Well."—" With this reaping- 
 hook"; and they answered, "Well." — "With this reaping-hook"; and they 
 answered, " Well."— " In this basket"; and they answered, " Well."— " In this 
 basket " ; and they answered, " Well." — If it were the sabbath, he said, " On this 
 sabbath"; and they answered, "Well." — "On this sabbath"; and they 
 answered, "Well." — "I will reap"; and they answered, "Reap." — "I will 
 reap"; and they answered "Reap." This he said tkrice\ and they answered 
 thrice, "Well."'" 
 
 1 2 Cor. xiii. 1 . 
 
 - i Cor. xv. 45 — 7 "So also it is written, The first man Adam became a living 
 soul, the l.i.i Adam [became] a life-giving spirit.... The second man is of 
 heaven." The amount of quotation in this passage is DOl char. 
 
 • ; 1's. cxviii. 17, cxv. 17 — 18, cxv. i, xliv. _;. 
 
 44O 
 
REPETITION [2592] 
 
 antiquity. Expressed in the words of Gratz 1 , who does not err on 
 the side of exaggerating the importance of Sohar, the canon is as 
 follows: "All laws of the Torah are to be considered as parts and 
 constituents of a higher world ; they resolve themselves into the 
 mysteries of the masculine and feminine principle (positive and 
 negative). Only when both parts meet together does the higher 
 unity arise." 
 
 § 4. Repetition in the Synoptists 
 
 [2592] The Synoptic Gospels contain but few repetitions. These 
 are mostly in traditions peculiar to one or two writers, and of a very 
 different character from those of the Fourth Gospel. For example, 
 " If thy hand cause thee to stumble," repeated thrice by Mark with 
 the substitution of " foot " and " eye " for " hand " — a tradition 
 condensed by Matthew and omitted by Luke — is manifestly of a 
 concrete and non-mystical character 2 . Non-mystical also, and 
 manifestly rhetorical, are the repetitions of " A greater than Solomon 
 is here " (varied as " A greater than Jonah is here "), " Woe unto you, 
 scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites," " Ye have heard that it hath been 
 said to them of old time," " Thy Father, who seeth in secret, shall 
 reward thee " etc. 3 Emotional repetition of a single word, such as 
 that of Isaiah quoted above (2590 a), is found in Christ's lamentation 
 over the Holy City ("Jerusalem, Jerusalem") 4 : but the Fourth 
 
 1 History of the Jews, Eng. Transl. iv. 16. 
 
 2 Mk ix. 43—7, Mt. xviii. 8—9. 
 
 3 Mt. xii. 41 — 2, Lk. xi. 31 — 2, Mt. xxiii. 14 — 29, Mt. v. 21, n, Mt. vi. 4, 6, 
 18. 
 
 4 [2592 a] Mt. xxiii. 37, Lk. xiii. 34. On the other hand, a mystical meaning 
 is perhaps assumed by the editors or scribes of some early MSS. and versions of 
 N.T. which represent Jesus as saying, " Young man, young man," "Maiden, 
 maiden" " Lazarus, Lazarus" Aphraates says {Horn. viii. 6) "By two words He 
 raised up each of them " ; and " the former is this resurrection, the latter is the future 
 resurrection." Comp. Beresh. R. (Wunschep. 268) on Gen. xxii. n "Abraham, 
 Abraham," where the reduplication is explained by one Rabbi as indicative 
 of " love and encouragement " but by another thus : " God desired thereby to say 
 to him that it should extend to him and to his posterity for merit (es werde ihm und 
 der Nachwelt zum Verdienste (Ruhme) gereichen). There is no generation in 
 which there is not one like Abraham or Jacob (Gen. xlvi. 2 'Jacob, Jacob') or 
 Moses (Ex. iii. 4 'Moses, Afoses') or Samuel (1 S. iii. 10 'Samuel, Samuel')." In 
 Ps. xc. 17 (lit.) "and the work of our hands establish thou upon us and (R.V. 
 yea,) the work of our hands establish thou," the reduplication is omitted by Targ. 
 and by LXX (and the whole is mistransl. by Syr.), but it follows xc. 16 "let thy 
 work appear unto thy servants and thy glory upon their children," so that the 
 second clause might well be taken as referring to posterity. 
 
 441 
 
[2593] REPETITION 
 
 Gospel contains nothing of this kind. Perhaps the nearest Synoptic 
 approximation to Johannine repetition is in Mark's version of the 
 Rich Ruler, where the words "How hardly shall they that have riches 
 enter into the kingdom of God" are followed by "Children, how 
 hard it is to enter into the kingdom of God 1 " — a repetition that 
 is omitted by the parallel Matthew and Luke. Others might be 
 mentioned, but few or none like those in the Fourth Gospel as will 
 appear later on. 
 
 [2593] Repetition by negation in the Synoptists is more frequent 
 comparatively in Mark than in Matthew, and in Matthew than in 
 Luke. Mark alone inserts the negative clauses in ' Receiveth not 
 me but him that sent me " and " With men it is impossible but not 
 with God' 2 " and the positive clauses in " Is not able to stand but 
 hath an end" and " Hath not forgiveness...^/ is liable to condemna- 
 tion 3 ." Also, where Mark and Matthew write "Have no root... but 
 believe for a season" Luke changes the construction so as to avoid 
 ovK...aX.kd 4 , and many passages containing this construction are 
 altogether omitted by him or given differently, e.g. " The Son of 
 man came not to be ministered unto but to minister 5 ." Where Mark 
 and Matthew say that those who shall be raised from the dead " do 
 not marry... but are as angels," Luke has "do not marry... for neither 
 can they die any longer, for they are angel-like"," and this and other 
 passages indicate that he, or the documents that he followed, some- 
 times eschewed the construction that abounds in Mark's and 
 Matthew's versions of Christ's words, " not this but that 7 ." But the 
 three Synoptists agree in retaining ovK...dA.A.u in the sayings "Not 
 they that are whole. ..but they that are sick," "Not the righteous 
 but sinners," " She is not dead but sleepeth," " Not so with you, 
 
 1 Mk x. 23 — 4. 
 
 2 Mk ix. 37 as comp. with Mt. x. 40, Lk. ix. 48, also Mk x. 27, Mt. xix. 26, 
 Lk. xviii. 27. 
 
 3 Mk lit. 26, Mt. xii. 26, Lk. xi. 18, also Mk iii. 29, Mt. xii. 32, Lk. xii. 10. 
 * Mk iv. 17, Mt. xiii. 21 ; Lk. viii. 130" instead of d\\d. 
 
 6 Mk x. 45, Mt. xx. 28; Lk. xxii. 27 "But I am in the midst of you as he 
 that serveth." 
 
 '■ Mk xii. 25, Mt. xxii. 30, Lk. xx. 3,^—6. 
 
 7 I 2593,/ 1 In Christ's words, besides the passages above quoted or referred to, 
 Mk alone has oilK (<>r /X77). ..a\\d in vi. u, vii. [9, \i. :;, xiii. 1 1 a, xiii. 20 ; Mk Mt. 
 .done in Mk x. 8 and Mt. xi\. 6, Mk \. 40 and Mt. xx. 23, Mk xiii. 1 i /', Mt. x. 
 20. In Mk vii. 15, Mt. xv. 11 and Mk viii. 33, Mt. xvi. 13, Lk. is wanting. 
 
 442 
 
REPETITION [2594J 
 
 but..." "God is not God of the dead but of the living," " Not my 
 will. ..frut thine 1 ." The evidence tends to shew that our Lord 
 frequently used this form of speech in His doctrine, and that His 
 usage, in this respect, is better represented by Mark than by Luke. 
 
 § 5. The Johannine Prologue 
 
 [2594] Before giving a list of Johannine repetitions, twofold, 
 threefold, and sevenfold, it will be convenient to touch on the first 
 six verses of the Gospel from the point of view of the " canon of 
 repetition," including also the "canon of negation " above mentioned 
 (2591), and adding a few remarks on the context. The first sentence, 
 for example, contains three statements about "the Word." Schottgen 
 tells us that " when one word in the sacred text is twice or thrice 
 repeated, then the Cabbalists multiply that event and make many 
 persons or events out of one 2 ." Doubtless it would be an ana- 
 chronism (as well as a fault of judgment) to impute to John such 
 fancies as these. Yet it is probable that he followed Jewish tradition 
 as well as prophetic inspiration in his three repetitions of " the 
 Word," implying a threefold aspect, first, the Word in itself, and 
 then the Word in two other aspects : " In the beginning was the 
 Word, and the Word was with the Divine Being 3 , and Divine Being 
 was the Word." The three relations of the Logos are then summed 
 up thus : " This [i.e. the Word conceived as above] was in the 
 
 1 [2593/'] See the parall. to Mk ii. 17, v. 39, x. 43, xii. 27, xiv. 36. In 
 Mk i. 44 (Mt. sim.) Lk. v. 14 changes firidevl pLr/Bev eiirrjs to irap-qyyeCKev ...fj.r)8evl 
 fiireiv so as to exclude the negative portion of /x7j...d\\a. from Oratio Recta. 
 
 [2593 1] In the Sermon on the Mount, ovK...d\\d occurs in Mt. v. 17, 39, vi. 13 
 (" Lead us not. ..but deliver us from evil"), vi. 18, vii. 21 : but Lk. omits either the 
 phrase, or the phrase and its context. In Mt. xviii. 22, Lk. omits the phrase. 
 
 [2593 «'] A curious exception to Synoptic usage occurs in Mk iv. 21 pvr\TL...y\... 
 ovx 'iva... ; where Mt. v. 15 and Lk. viii. 16, xi. ^^ have d\Ad after a negative. In 
 Mk ii. 22, W. H. bracket the dXXd-clause, giving it unbracketed in parall. Mt. Lk. 
 
 2 ii. 361. 
 
 3 [2594a] "With the Divine Being," irpbs rbv debv. The author might have 
 written 7rpos debv here as in i. 6 he has irapa. deou, and in xiii. 3 d7ro deov. But he 
 apparently wishes (as does Philo i. 6$$) to call attention to the distinction between 
 debs and 6 debs. In the last clause, "the Word" though it comes last (as in Gk) 
 is subject, and we should express it more naturally in English by "the Word was 
 Divine Being." This is stronger than saying "the Word was divine {detos)." It 
 means that the Word must be regarded as " God,'" but never apart from the 
 relationship described as "being with, or towards, the [one] God." 
 
 443 
 
[2595] REPETITION 
 
 beginning with the Divine Being," a summary that is not tauto- 
 logical ; for it teaches us that the three propositions about the Logos 
 were all true "in the beginning." 
 
 [2595] There follows a sentence in chiasmus, which also contains 
 a negation : "All things through him 1 came into being ; and without 
 him came into being not even one [thing]." From the logical point 
 of view the second clause is superfluous ; but it is suggestive of the 
 possibility that a thing might be " without him" i.e. apart from the 
 Word, apart from law, order, and harmony. Grant that " all things 
 came into being " through the Word, does it follow that they may 
 not fall away so as to be "without him"? This phrase prepares the 
 way for the subsequent mention of "darkness" (which is "without 
 the light "). Moreover the sentence, beginning with " all " and 
 ending with " one," suggests (though it does not state) that " with- 
 out " the Logos or Word, there is no oneness or unity. 
 
 [2596] The writer began by three propositions about the Word, 
 telling us first what the Word was "in" ("in the beginning"). Now he 
 calls our attention to that which is " in " the Word — first defining it 
 as " life," and then stating two facts about it : — i. 4 " That which 
 hath come into being 1 in Him was life, and the life was the light of 
 men ; and the light in the darkness shineth and the darkness ap- 
 prehended it not." But in these three propositions the same subject 
 is not repeated (as it was above, " the Word "). The construction 
 goes forward step by step, the predicate in one clause being repeated 
 as the subject of the next, so as to suggest cause and effect 3 . More- 
 over, whereas the first verse contained one tense (rjv) thrice repeated, 
 this contains three predicative tenses (yjv t <£aiW, and xaTekafiev) 
 suggesting that we have passed from the Eternal "was" into the 
 conditions of change and time. We have also been brought down 
 from " God " to "men." Immediately after the mention of "men" 
 there has come a mention of " darkness " as that in which " the light 
 
 1 [2595 </] Al avrov, "through him" or "through it." It is most unfortunate 
 that English does not allow us to retain the deliberate ambiguity of the Gk, 
 which gradually prepares the way fur the revelation of the Logos or Word, as 
 a Son. 
 
 2 [2596 a I On ytyoviv see 2478. It seems to imply that although "all things 
 cam,- into being" (aorist) through the Word, yet not "all things" retain the state. 
 SO i" -.peak, of "having come into being" thus. Only that which retains the state 
 is "life." 
 
 1 [2596^] Comp. Rom. v. 4 — -5 "tribulation worketh patience, and patience 
 experience, and experience hope, and hope maketh not ashamed." 
 
 444 
 
REPETITION [2598] 
 
 [of men] shineth." Last comes a negation, discussed elsewhere 
 
 (1735 <? — g), "the darkness apprehended not" the light. This— 
 
 whether it means "did not overcome" or "did not apprehend" or 
 
 both — apparently implies something suggestive of failure or conflict. 
 
 [2597] After "men" comes mention of "a man," i. 6 "There 
 
 came into being a man (eyeVero avdpwTros) sent from God, his name 
 
 [was] John." The writer could have said simply, "A man named 
 
 John was sent by God " or " God sent a man named John." But he 
 
 apparently wishes to draw a distinction between "was" above ("In 
 
 the beginning was the Word") and "came into being" here ("there 
 
 came into being a man "). Perhaps, too, he wishes to suggest a 
 
 distinction between "the Word was with God" and "a man sent 
 
 from God." Next follows a statement that this man "came to be 
 
 a witness," which might have been briefly and naturally expressed 
 
 by saying simply that he "came to be a witness about the light." 
 
 But this Gospel, in accordance with the canon of twofold repetition, 
 
 throws the statement into what may be called two "witness-clauses": 
 
 " This [man] came [to be] for a witness, that he might bear witness 
 
 about the light, that all might believe through it (2302—4)." Then, 
 
 in accordance with the canon of negation, the fact is restated after 
 
 a negative : " He was not the light, but [he came, or, it was ordained 
 
 (2063, 2105 foil.)] in order that he might bear witness concerning the 
 
 light." 
 
 § 6. Johannine repetition through negation 
 
 [2598] This is very frequent both in narrative and in words of 
 Christ. In i. 20 "and confessed and denied not and (A.V. but) confessed" 
 the negative (ov) is followed by "and" (instead of "but (dAAa)," which is 
 almost invariably used). Very frequently the negation means " not of 
 man," or "not of this or that lower kind," or "not evil"; and the 
 affirmation means "but of God," or "but of a higher kind" or "but 
 good," e.g. i. 13 " not... nor yet from the will of man, but from God" 
 iii. 16 "should not perish but should have life eternal," iii. 17 "for 
 God sent not his Son... that he should judge the world but that the 
 world through him should be saved," v. 24 "Cometh not into 
 judgment, but hath passed from death into life," v. 30 " I seek 
 not mine own will, but the will of him that sent me 1 ." 
 
 1 It is comparatively seldom that ovk ..d\\d introduces evil as in iii. 36 "shall 
 not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him." But the negation of the good 
 follows the good, without ovK...d\\d, in xiv. 23 — 4 " If any one loveth me he will 
 keep my word... he that loveth me not keepeth not my words" 
 
 445 
 
[2599] REPETITION 
 
 [2599] Instances of repetition with //.17 are less frequent. The 
 fit] clause comes second in iii. 18 "He that believeth in him is not [to 
 be] judged. He that believeth not (6 /xt) it.) hath been judged already " ; 
 v. 23 "that all may honour the Son even as they honour the Father. 
 He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father, who sent 
 him " ; xiv. 23 — 4 "If any one love me he will keep my word... he that 
 lozeth me not keepeth not my words." The p.r) clause comes first in 
 x. 1 — 2 "He that entereth not through the door. ..is a thief and a 
 robber, but he that entereth through the door is shepherd of the 
 sheep," xv. 2 "Every branch in me that beareth not (jitj <f>£pov) fruit 
 he taketh it away, and every [branch] that beareth fruit he cleanseth it." 
 
 [2600] There is no special ambiguity arising out of these con- 
 structions or out of John's general use of the negative. But it is 
 worth noting that ov occurs in his Gospel almost as ofien as in Mark 
 and Luke taken together. And we may often perceive how the 
 negation leads the reader towards an affirmation in a very suggestive 
 and stimulating way, as when our Lord says, " I have not come from 
 myself," " I am not alone," " I speak not from myself," " I seek not 
 mine own glory," and " I will not leave you orphans 1 ," preparing the 
 way for some positive doctrine. The negative, however, is not often 
 thus used in communicating the highest kind of truth. After stating 
 that the Baptist came to bear witness about the light, the evangelist 
 proceeds, " He was not the light " ; and his description of the 
 "witness" is as follows: "And this is the witness. ..And he con- 
 fessed and denied not and confessed, ' I am not the Christ ' : —the 
 two subsequent answers being also negative ("I am not," "A r o") 2 . 
 Then, and not till then, follows the positive testimony. The writer 
 perhaps feels that divine teaching is often a " dark saying " misunder- 
 stood for a time, and that the interpreter must explain by negatives, 
 " not this but that." At all events the last saying of Jesus recorded 
 in this Gospel affords an instance of a "not. ..but" correcting a 
 misunderstanding : " But Jesus said not unto him that he was not 
 to die, but...\" 
 
 i 7. Twofold repetition in the Baptist's teaching 
 
 [2601] The teaching of the Baptist, being rudimentary, contains, 
 as might be expected, several instances of twofold repetition. First 
 
 vii. 2.S, viii. 16, xii. 49, viii. 50, xiv. 18. 
 i. 20 — 21. ■'■ \\i. 23. 
 
 44C 
 
REPETITION [2602] 
 
 the evangelist speaks, i. 7 — 8 "John. ..came for witness that he might 
 witness concerning the tight... he was not the light, but [came] that he 
 might witness concerning the light." Then the Baptist (probably, 1927) 
 speaks, i. 15 (W. H. marg.) " This was he (lit.) that (6V) / said" re- 
 peated with variation in i. 30 " This is he in behalf of whom {v-n-lp ov) 
 I said 1 ." The participial clause "he that cometh after me" is also 
 repeated twice'-. So is the difficult sentence, "He is become before 
 me because he was first in respect of me 3 ." The mission to "baptize 
 in water" is also twice stated as a preparation for something higher 4 . 
 [2602] The words, "Behold, [here is] the lamb of God" are 
 twice repeated ; first, without mention of any particular hearers, 
 "Behold, [here is] the lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the 
 world," then, in the presence of two of John's disciples, "Behold, 
 [here is] the lamb of God\" The descent of the Spirit is twice 
 attested, "I have beheld," "J have seen"; but it is also predicted by 
 God Himself (" Upon whomsoever thou shalt see the Spirit descend- 
 ing "), so that it gives the impression of being twice attested on earth 
 and once from heaven, being one of those " holy things " described 
 by Philo as " approved by three witnesses." Strictly speaking, the 
 
 1 [2601 a] See 2369—71. The repetitions in the context— i. 14 " We beheld 
 his glory, glory as of [the] only begotten," and " full of grace and truth " followed 
 by i. 17 " the grace and the truth" — probably spring unconsciously from a writer 
 reflecting on the way in which the "glory" of heaven is seen in the "glory" on 
 earth, and in which "the grace and the truth" that were latent in the law of 
 Moses were revealed in the person of the Messiah. See also 2718 — 22. 
 
 " [2601/'] i. 15 6 dwicxoi /xov ipxbfievos. In i. 26, W.H. have oiriaw fiov 
 fpXOM-evos (with BX 1 ) without the article; SS has "he that cometh," Origen 
 varies. The testimony of B as to o following e is sometimes untrustworthy. In 
 i. 30 ottLctu jj.ov ipxeTau, the vb is indicative. 
 
 3 i. 15, 30, see 1896—1900 and 2665—7. 
 
 4 [2601 c\ i. 26 " / baptize in water..." i. 31 " For this cause came I baptizing 
 in water..." The mention of "baptizing in the spirit" is assigned, not to the 
 Baptist (as in the Synoptists) but to God, i. 33 " Upon whomsoever thou shalt 
 see the spirit descending... this is he that is to baptize in the Holy Spirit." 
 
 5 [2602 a] This happens on the third day. The account of the first day (i. 
 19 — 28) contains the Baptist's negative testimony, ending with " one whomye&now 
 not..., the latchet of whose shoe / am not worthy to loose." The second day 
 (i. 29 "the morrow") contains the first testimony to "the lamb of God," which 
 testimony, however, is not recorded to have produced any effect. The third day 
 (i. 35 " on the morrow again ") brings a repetition of the testimony to " the lamb " : 
 and this second testimony being uttered in the presence of two witnesses, who 
 immediately become converts, results indirectly in the beginning of the Church of 
 Christ upon earth. 
 
 447 
 
[2603] REPETITION 
 
 Baptist's testimony may be said to end here. But there is an appeal 
 to it later on in the section describing the close of his mission, where, 
 after negation and antithesis — " I am not the Christ, I am his 
 messenger"; "he, the bridegroom, must increase but I, the bride- 
 groom's friend, must decrease " — there follows a remarkable instance 
 of twofold repetition, "He that cometh from above is above all. He 
 that is from the earth, from the earth he is, and from the earth he 
 speaketh : he that cometh from the heaven is above all 1 ." 
 
 § 8. Twofold repetition in Christ's words 
 
 [2603] In Christ's words, the twofold repetitions are for the 
 most part confined to negative or comparatively rudimentary 
 doctrine. The earliest of any importance is expressly said to 
 refer to "earth." It describes the necessity of something more 
 than mere baptism by water, iii. 3 "Except a man be born from 
 above, he cannot see the kingdom of God" iii. 5 "Except a man be 
 born from water and the Spirit (2573, 2612) he cannot enter into the 
 kingdom of God" —concerning which statements and their context 
 Jesus says, " If I told you earthly things and ye believe not, how 
 will ye believe if I tell you heavenly things ? " Another twofold 
 protest in behalf of "the spirit" is in iv. 23 — 4, "the true worshippers 
 shall worship the Father in spirit and truth... they that worship him 
 must worship in spirit and truth." The following refers to the 
 resurrection, v. 25 — 8 "the hour cometh and now is, when the dead 
 shall hear the voice of the Son of God and they that shall have heard 
 shall live... the hour cometh when all that are in the tombs shall hear 
 his voice and shall go forth." 
 
 [2604] The belief in Christ for His works' sake, being regarded in 
 this Gospel as rudimentary", is naturally made the subject of twofold 
 repetition, v. 36 " for the works that the Father hath given me that 
 I may accomplish them, the very works that I do, bear witness con- 
 cerning me," compared with x. 25 "the works that J do in the name 
 of my Father, these bear witness concerning me." As regards the 
 reduplication in xiv. 13 — 14 "Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name 
 this will I do... if ye shall ask [me] anything in my name this will I 
 do" it may be intended as a preparation for a further doctrine in 
 xv. 16 " that whatsoever ye may ask the Father in my name he may 
 
 1 iii. 28 — 31. " ii. .\;, xiv. 1 1. 
 
 448 
 
REPETITION [2605] 
 
 give it to you/' and xvi. 23 — 4 " If ye ask the Father anything he 
 will give it to you in my name. Hitherto ye have asked nothing in 
 my name. Ask and ye shall receive 1 ." 
 
 [2605] Further instances of twofold negative repetition, in Christ's 
 words, occur as follows: v. 19, 30 "The Son can do, from himself, 
 nothing" "I can do, from myself, nothing 2 "; v. 30, vi. 38 "I seek 
 not mine own will but the will of him that sent me," " not that I may 
 do mine own will but the will of him that sent me " ; v. 34, 41 " But 
 I receive not my witness from man," " I receive not glory from man," 
 vii. 6, S " My time (xaipos) is not yet present," " My time is not yet 
 fulfilled." The effect of a twofold repetition is produced both in 
 vii. 34 — 6 and in viii. 21 — 2 because Christ first says, and the Jews 
 then repeat, "Where I («y^) am ( or ' 8°) y e (^M 6 ^) cannot come." 
 Later on, Christ repeats the second of these sayings to the disciples, 
 xiii. 2>Z "Ye shall seek me 3 , and even as I said to the Jews, 'Where 
 /(cyw) go, ye (vfxeL?) cannot come ' — to you also I say it now (apn)." 
 Then, to Peter, He drops the emphatic pronouns, saying xiii. 36 
 "Where I go, thou canst not follow me for the present." All this 
 implies that what had been said to the Jews in one sense is repeated 
 to the disciples in another, which is explained to Peter. The 
 following is an utterance of mere condemnation, x. 25 — 6 " I told 
 
 you and ye believe not But ye believe not because ye are not of my 
 
 sheep 4 ." 
 
 1 [2604 «] It might be urged that the twofold use (xii. 23, xvii. 1) of 
 iXrjXvdev t) wpa announcing that the time has come for the sacrifice and for 
 the "glorifying," is to be contrasted with the sevenfold use (2625) of epxerai 
 r\ wpa referring to the time when the sacrifice shall have been consummated 
 in victory. But a closer examination shews that Zpxerai and i\r]\vdev are 
 combined with wpa in the description of the bitterest trial of all, which is to 
 leave Christ deserted and "alone," yet "not alone," xvi. 32 Idov £px €TCU &pa kclI 
 e\r}\vdev, closely followed by xvii. 1 Harep, e\r)\vdev 17 wpa, 86^aa6v crov rov vlbv. 
 Hence the more probable view is that eXrfkvdw i] wpa is used thrice as referring to 
 (2589) "a holy matter." 
 
 2 [2605 a] Note the emphasis laid on ovdiv by its position at the end of the 
 clause or sentence, iroulv d</>' eavrov ovdtv, woieTv cltt' epiavTov oi/dev. The saying is 
 repeated, without duva/^ai, in viii. 28 cLtt' epLavrou woiw ovdtv, "from myself I do 
 nothing." 
 
 :! [2605/'] To the Jews Christ had said, viii. 21 "Ye shall seek me and in your 
 sin ye shall die." The disciples were to "seek" Jesus, after His departure, but in 
 a different way (2545). 
 
 4 [2605 c] It may be added that Christ twice says to the soldiers arresting Him 
 (xviii. 4, 7) " Whom seek ye?" On this, and on its possible relations with other 
 sayings about "seeking," see 2649 d — e. 
 
 A. VI. 449 29 
 
[2606] REPETITION 
 
 [2606] In Christ's words, the pleonastic repetition of a noun or 
 verb may sometimes be sufficiently explained by the desire of 
 emphasis as in x. 32 " Many deeds have I shewn unto you [and those] 
 good... For which deed of [all] those do ye stone me?" The verb is 
 clearly emphatic in vi. 63 " The words that I have spoken unto you — 
 spirit they are and life they are (irvf.vix.tx io-riv ko.1 £0)77 Icttlv)," x. 10 
 ■"that they may have life and abundantly may have [it] 1 ." It is 
 interesting — and probably we are intended — to compare Christ's 
 words, x. 18 "Authority have I to lay it [i.e. my life] down and 
 authority have I again to take it," with Pilate's words, xix. 10 
 '•'■authority have I to acquit thee and authority have I to crucify" — 
 in view of (1593 — 4) the two different views of "authority" here 
 contrasted. There is no pleonasm in the following, but the repetition 
 of the noun (instead of using a pronoun) adds weight: iii. 20 " hateth 
 the light and cometh not to the light," iv. 14 "whosoever shall drink 
 of the water that I shall give him... but the water that 1 shall give him 
 shall become...," xii. 47 "for I came not that I might judge the 
 world but that I might save the world" with which compare iii. 17 
 " For God sent not the Son into the world that he might judge the 
 world but that the ivorld might be saved through him." In the last 
 two or three instances mystical meaning may be intended. 
 
 § 9. Twofold repetition in narrative 
 
 [2607] Twofold repetition in narrative may occasionally be in- 
 tended to emphasize a disputed or doubtful fact, as in the Anointing, 
 where some said that Christ's head was anointed 2 but John says xii. 3 
 "She anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped with her hair his feet." 
 Emphasis is also laid on the piercing of Christ's side by a "soldier" 
 thus, xix. 32 "There came therefore the soldiers... but, having come 
 to Jesus... they brake not his legs but one of the soldiers with a spear 
 pierced his side." Or it may be used for clearness after a parenthesis 
 as in ii. 9 " But when the master of the feast had tasted... the master 
 
 1 [2606 a] In xii. 49 ivTo\r)v blbuiKev t'l fiVw koli tL XaXr/crw. the meaning seems 
 to lie, "what I should say [particularly, on rue// occasion] ami what I should 
 speak [generally, in proclaiming the Gospel]" Weight is added by the pleonastic 
 repetition of rl, as well as by tin- I « verbs. Comp. Ruin. iii. 19 6aa 6 vdfios Xdyei 
 rotj tv t£ t>6fJU{) \a\ft. "whatsoever the Law sayi t<n any particular occasion it 
 invariably proclaims t" those who are in the pale of the Law." 
 
 - Mk xiv. 3, Mt. xxvi. 7. 
 
 45O 
 
REPETITION [2609] 
 
 of the feast calleth" or in scorn as in vii. 35 " Will he go to the 
 scattered people of the Greeks and teach the Greeks?" It is 
 manifestly emphatic in ii. 25 "he needed not that any should testify 
 about the [nature of] man, for he knew of himself what was in the 
 [nature of] /nan" and in the words of Thomas xx. 25 "and [unless] 
 I put my finger... and put my hand." There is a twofold repetition 
 in i. 20 " He confessed and denied not and confessed" and probably a 
 pair of twofold repetitions with slight variations, in xix. 35 "And he 
 that hath seen hath borne witness (/AepapTiip^Kev) and real-and-true 
 (a\i]6tvrj) is his witness (/xaprvpta), and he knoweth that he saith true 
 (aXrjdr})." But on the whole the evangelist's tendency to twofold 
 repetition appears not so much in words as in the insistence on 
 parallelism in events, which is discussed later on (2646 — 9). 
 
 § 10. Twofold or threefold repetition 
 
 [2608] In Christ's words, there occurs the twice repeated state- 
 ment (x. n, 14) "I am the good shepherd." This describes a 
 condition of conflict intended to prepare the way for victory — the 
 shepherd contending against the wolf — and may be read as a twofold 
 repetition or attestation. But the addition of (x. 11) " the good 
 shepherd layeth down his life for the sheep " suggests a threefold 
 repetition of " the good shepherd" as a separate phrase, implying a 
 reference to the sacrifice of Christ, which would be regarded as 
 (2588 — 9) "a holy matter," to be triply attested. So, too, the triple 
 mention of the vine in xv. 1 — 5 "/ am the true vine... if any man 
 abide not in the vine... I am the vine" — these being the only instances 
 of " vine " in the Fourth Gospel — suggests a triple attestation. And, 
 if this is so with "good shepherd" and "vine" it is probably true 
 about x. 2 — 9 "But he that entereth through the door... I am the 
 door of the sheep.../ am the door" : and we are to regard the only- 
 other mention of "door" (in Christ's words) in this Gospel ("he 
 that entereth not through the door. ..is a thief and a robber") as a 
 negation, serving as a foil to a threefold attestation. With these 
 must be compared the duality of viii. 12 eyw elfxi to <£ws t. k6o-[jlov, 
 ix. 5 <£ws el/xi t. Koo-fjiov supplemented by xii. 46 eyw ^>ws ets t. koct/xov 
 iXrjXvOa, and that of vi. 35, 48 " I am the bread of life," supplemented 
 by vi. 51 " I am the bread that liveth." 
 
 [2609] The same possibility of various interpretation occurs in 
 xii. 45 " he that beholdeth me beholdeth him that sent me." This, if 
 
 451 29—2 
 
[2610] REPETITION 
 
 taken with xiii. 20 " he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me" 
 would suggest a twofold statement that the vision, and the reception, 
 of the Messenger on earth, are to prepare the way for a vision, and a 
 reception, of the Sender in heaven ; but if the two are combined 
 with xiv. 9 "He that hath seen me hath, seen the Father" — the three 
 passages suggest a threefold attestation. So, too, the command 
 " Love one another " would be a twofold repetition if taken merely 
 in xiii. 34 "A new command I give you that ye love one another even 
 as I loved you that ye also love one another" ' ; but it is probably to 
 be taken as repeated a third time in xv. 12 "This is the command- 
 ment that is [peculiarly] my own that ye love one another even as I 
 loved you " (see also 2612). On the other hand the statements 
 xiv. 15, 23 " If ye love me ye will keep my commandments" " If a man 
 love me he will keep my word" are rudimentary and repeated only 
 twice 1 . 
 
 [2610] In the Epistle, duality characterizes the passages that 
 deal with earthly testimony. We may give the name "dual" — or 
 " quadruple " but certainly not " triple " — to the attestation with 
 which the Epistle opens, i. 1 " That which we have heard, that which 
 we have seen (kwpa.Kaix.ev) with our eyes," followed by (//;.) "That 
 which we gazed on (Weaa-d/xeOa) and our hands handled." Similarly 
 ii. 12 — 13, containing a solemn testimony to all classes in the 
 
 1 [2609 a] 'Avl(TT7)piL (trans.) occurs four times in Jn thus, vi. 39 avaaT7]aw avrb 
 t. iax&Ty V^P a — where avrb refers to the Church ("all that thou hast given me"), 
 40 avacTTTjcnj) avrbv eyw t. e. 77., 44 Kayw avacxT-qau avrbv ev r. e. t/., 54 K&yui 
 dvaaTTjaw avrov t. e. t/. Here some may say that the language is a varied refrain 
 four times repeated, others that it is first a promise of resurrection to the whole 
 Church, and then a thrice repeated promise to individual believers. The emphasis 
 on "I" in the last three sentences, and the sing, "him," differentiate these three 
 from the first sentence. 
 
 [2609/'] In the following three clauses, describing Christ's legacy of "peace" 
 (xiv. 27), the word "peace" is twice actually repeated, and a third repetition is 
 suggested. In the first clause it is simply "peace" in the second "my peace." 
 In the first clause the action is described as "leaving" ; in the second, as "giving" ; 
 in the third, as "giving not as the world giveth" \ and it is no longer oiduiMi 
 "I-give," bul iyic 518oj/jli "I give." It would be contrary to all rules of 
 tine and good taste — and, we may almost say, of morality — to suppose that 
 tin- writer deliberately wrote the sentence according to numerical canons. But the 
 ue of the most beautiful instances of inspiration working under rule 
 — like the rule of poetic metre for a true poet- rule that .^ives life and force and 
 
 mony to expression: "Peace / leave (a<pir)iu) unto you: the peace that is 
 mine /-,.'■".- (diowfju) unto you; not as tin- world giveth give I (e'-,u> 818w/j.i) 
 
 unto you." 
 
 452 
 
REPETITION L 2611 ] 
 
 Church, repeats twice, to each, "I write," "I have written." It is 
 true that in this Epistle the witness is notably threefold in v. 6 — 8 : 
 "This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not in the 
 water alone but in the water and in the blood ; and the Spirit it is 
 that witnesseth, because the Spirit is the truth. Because three are 
 they that witness, the Spirit and the water and the blood, and the 
 three make up the one." But even in this passage, the writer seems 
 to indicate by his arrangement of the " three " that " the water " and 
 " the blood " come first as representing the testimony of the life of 
 Jesus on earth, and that " the spirit " comes afterwards as witnessing 
 from heaven. The dual form of expression is naturally adopted 
 while the writer is describing the witness of apostles and the mani- 
 festation that led to it, and while his mind rests, at the outset, on 
 the dual aspect of the Christian message when the Son was drawing 
 men to the Father and when " the Holy Spirit was not yet " : (i. 2 
 foil.) "And the light (a) ivas manifested and (b) we have seen; and 
 we (a) witness and (b) declare to you the life eternal, which (a) was 
 with the Father and (b) was manifested to us: (3) what we have 
 (a) heard and (b) seen, that we declare also to you, that ye too may 
 have fellowship with us, and indeed our fellowship is with {a) the 
 Father and with (b) his Son Jesus Christ.... (5) And this is the 
 tidings that we (a) have heard from him and (b) declare to you, that 
 (a) God is light and (b) darkness is not in him at all." 
 
 [2611] Returning to the Cospel we may say in conclusion that 
 the general impression left on us by the form of its ordinary doctrine 
 is that of twofold attestation 1 . In statements made by our Lord 
 
 1 [2611 tf] It is an interesting question whether Jn has any symbolic allusion to 
 twofold attestation in his remarkable use of d.yvi\v afx-qv (instead of the Synoptic 
 single afiTjv) and awei<pL9r) k. elwei> (instead of the Synoptic airoicpiOels elirev) as 
 introductions to utterances of Christ. In both of these, his deviation from 
 Synoptic usage must have seemed very strange to readers of the earlier Gospels. 
 It may be illustrated by the surprise that would have been felt by readers of 
 BoswelPs biography coming upon a new life of Dr Johnson in which "Sir, Sir" 
 was regularly substituted for "Sir." 
 
 [2611 b\ 'Ajj.7]v dfji-riv occurs twenty-five times (a/j.r}v never) and is used in 
 predictions (i. 51, xiii. 21, xiii. 38, xxi. 18) of good and of evil including the 
 prediction of betrayal. It introduces (viii. 58, x. 7) "I am [he]" and "I am the 
 door," and on the other hand (vi. 26) "Ye seek me... because ye have eaten of the 
 loaves," and (viii. 34) "Everyone that doeth sin is a slave," and it is thrice used 
 (iii. 3, 5, n) in the Dialogue with Nicodemus. The facts suggest no special 
 doctrine for which the phrase is reserved. 
 
 [2611c] ' A.ir€KpL07) ('Iijo-oOs) k. elirev, in its last three instances, is used where 
 
 453 
 
[2611] REPETITION 
 
 about Himself, the duality of " I am the good shepherd," " I am the 
 light of the world," " I am the door," " I am the bread of life," 
 " I am the vine," is supplemented in such a way as to suggest a 
 trinity; but for the most part the doctrine is distinctly dual, 
 especially in the teaching of the Baptist. That there should be 
 passages in which the distinction is not clearly drawn is fit and 
 natural in a work that expresses spiritual truth with dramatic yet 
 natural vividness. A book made up of manifest twofold, threefold, 
 and sevenfold repetitions, broken by regular and systematic variations, 
 would be intolerably artificial. But the work we have before us 
 betrays nothing that could fairly be called artificiality — at least in a 
 Jew, trained to the study of the Bible in the literary school of Philo 
 (though raised up above the narrower formalities of that school by 
 the Spirit of Christ), and committing to paper some among many 
 traditions of the Christian Church, with his paraphrases and ex- 
 planations of them, according to the manner and pattern of the 
 Hebrew Scriptures and Jewish Targums. One reason for duality of 
 form may have been that he was profoundly impressed by the Lord's 
 statement that His doctrines, without the Spirit, were "dark sayings." 
 Hence perhaps, in a point of detail, the contrast between the Gospel 
 and the Epistle as to the " blood and water " from the Cross. The 
 Gospel says, "He that hath seen hath borne witness and true is his 
 witness 1 ." The Epistle speaks of " water " and " blood " and "spirit." 
 The latter suggests trinity ; the former duality — because " the Holy 
 Spirit was not yet." 
 
 there is some misunderstanding in the context, as where the Voice from heaven 
 is taken by some to be "thunder," and Christ (xii. 30) explains that it came for the 
 sake of the multitude. It also introduces the saying to Peter (xiii. 7) "What 
 I do, thou knowest not now," and the answer to "Judas not Iscariot" (xiv. : t,) 
 who cannot understand how a manifestation can be made to the disciples and not 
 to the world. At the outset of the Gospel it is used twice (i. 48, 50) in the 
 Dialogue with Nathanael, once before the words (misunderstood) (ii. 19) "Destroy 
 this temple," and thrice (iii. 3, =;, 10) in the Dialogue with Nicodemus, who 
 is supposed not to understand even elementary truths. Subsequently it i> used 
 (iv. 10, 13) in the Dialogue with the Samaritan woman, who takes the Doctrine 
 of Water literally, and (from vi. 26 to viii. 14) several limes in discussions with 
 [iteralising or hostile controversialists. The facts suggest that the phrase intro- 
 duces elementary doctrine or explanation of misunderstanding. 
 
 1 xix. 35 followed by sal tudvos oUtv on &\r)t)i) X^yei, on which see 2383 — 4 
 an. I 2731. 
 
 454 
 
REPETITION [2613] 
 
 §11. Threefold repetition 
 
 [2612] It is obvious that a threefold repetition of the same 
 saying, with little or no variation, and in the same context, would 
 be monotonous and unimpressive, except in special circumstances 
 where a refrain is intended, as in the threefold question to Peter, 
 "Lovest thou me?" followed by the threefold precept "Feed my 
 sheep " : and, even there, the three utterances are not quite identical. 
 Hence, if the writer introduces this form of doctrine in Christ's words, 
 it is diversified in various ways. For example, the commandment 
 " love one another " might be regarded as repeated twice as a com- 
 mandment and once more as a sign (xiii. 34 — 5) "A new command- 
 ment give I you that ye love one another; even as I loved you thatjy<? 
 (emph.) also love one another : herein shall all know that ye are my 
 disciples if ye have love among one another" ; but it is also repeated 
 once again (2609) as a commandment. It has been pointed out 
 (2608) that this variation so affects such sayings as " I am the good 
 shepherd " that we may regard them as either twofold or threefold 
 repetitions ; and the same statement applies to the doctrine about 
 new birth, which, though called an "earthly" doctrine from one point 
 of view (iii. 12), may be regarded as " heavenly " since it concerns the 
 Holy Spirit (iii. 3 — 7) "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man 
 be born from above... Except a man be born from water and the spirit... 
 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born from above 1 " In 
 the prediction of the suffering of the Good Shepherd, the monotony of 
 a repetition of " I lay down my life for the sheep " is avoided by 
 dropping " for the sheep " in the second clause, and " my life for the 
 sheep " in the third, and by substituting for them phrases suggesting 
 the resurrection and the spontaneousness of the sacrifice (x. 15 — 18) 
 u I lay down my life for the sheep... For this cause doth my Father 
 love me because / lay dozvn my life that I may receive it again... No 
 man hath taken it from me, but I lay it down of myself." The result 
 is a threefold repetition of nothing but " I lay down " : yet the 
 meaning is clear and the threefold effect is retained. 
 
 [2613] A triple effect is imparted to a long saying of Christ in 
 the following passage by the questioning of the disciples and the 
 
 1 [2612a] That "baptism" in water implied something more than mere 
 washing in water, might be called an earthly doctrine. But what that "something 
 more" was, and whence it came, might be called a heavenly doctrine. 
 
 455 
 
[2614] REPETITION 
 
 explanation of their Master: xvi. 16 — 19 "A little, and ye no longer 
 behold me, and again a little, and ye shall see we?... What is this that he 
 saith to us, A little, and ye behold me not, and again a little, and ye 
 shall see me}... Jesus... said to them, Question ye with one another 
 concerning this that I said unto you, A little, and ye behold me 
 not, and again a little, and ye shall see me}" In the following, which 
 states the absolute knowledge (ot<5u) of the Father possessed by the 
 Son, a third clause is introduced negatively : viii. 55 " Ye have no 
 understanding of {lyvwKaji) him. But / know (oT8a) him. And, if 
 I say / know (oTSa) him not, I shall be a liar like unto you. But 
 / know (ol8a) him 1 ." As in the Dialogue with Nicodemus a triple 
 repetition of the verb "to be born'" was accompanied with a double 
 repetition of other circumstances, so there is a triple repetition of 
 " he that feedeth," with variations, in the following: vi. 54 — 7 " He 
 that feedeth on my flesh and drinketh my blood hath life eternal... he 
 that feedeth on my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me. ..he 
 that feedeth on me, he (emph.) shall live on account of me." 
 
 [2614] Concerning the Wind or Breath or Spirit Christ says 
 (iii. 8) that man (1) hears its voice, but knows not (2) whence it 
 comes, and (3) whither it goes. This may refer to (1) the work, 
 (2) the origin, and (3) the object of the Holy Spirit, and may suggest 
 a threefold aspect of it. Certainly the Spirit's "convicting" influence 
 is triply described later on as referring to (xvi. 8) "sin," " righteous- 
 ness," and "judgment." It is also thrice mentioned (xiv. 17, xv. 26, 
 xvi. 13) as "the spirit of truth 2 ." And in the following passage — 
 along with an implied threefold statement that what the Spirit will 
 " declare " comes from Him who is speaking, indicated by the thrice 
 repeated " me " or " mine " — the words " He shall declare unto you " 
 occur as a triple refrain (xvi. 13 — 16) "For he shall not speak from 
 himself, but what he heareth that shall he speak and things to come 
 (1) he shall declare unto you. He shall glorify me, for he shall take 
 from mine and (2) he shall declare unto you. All things that the 
 Father hath are mine. For this cause said I that he taketh from 
 mine and (3) he shall declare unto you." The thought of the Spirit is 
 
 1 [2613 </] Sec 1621 — 9 for the difference between olha. and -yiv&o-Kw. In only 
 one other passage (vii. 29) dues Jesus use the words olha. avrbu <>i I rod, so that the 
 total number <>f positive repetition • is three. 
 
 2 [2614a] The Paraclete is mentioned positively thrice (xiv. r.6, 26, xv. 26) 
 and negatively once (xvi. 7) "For ii I go not away t lie Paraclete will surely not 
 come unto you." 
 
 456 
 
REPETITION [2616] 
 
 connected with the thought of unity — -unity both in the being of God 
 and in the Church ; and the prayer for this, which is uttered, first for 
 the Church as a whole, and then for the Apostles in particular, is 
 thrown (in both cases) into a threefold form (xvii. 21) "That all may 
 be one: — even as (1) thou, Father, art in me, and (2) I in thee, that 
 (3) they, also, may be in us," (xvii. 23) "that they may be one as we 
 are one : — (1) I in them, and (2) thou in me, that (3) they may be 
 perfected into one 1 ." Negative doctrine would naturally be seldom 
 expressed with threefold repetition ; but when it points to the divine 
 unity an exception may be expected, as in viii. 16 " I am not alone" 
 viii. 29 " He [i.e. the Father] hath not left me alone" xvi. 32 "And 
 I am not alone because the Father is with me." 
 
 [2615] As regards the use by the evangelist (in his own person) 
 of threefold repetition, it is most prominent in the Prologue, which 
 begins with a triple mention of " the Word " in the same sentence, 
 commented on above (2594). The last words of the Prologue (i. 18) 
 are not quite certain, but they are probably — as has been maintained 
 above (1964) — "God no one hath seen at any time. Only begotten, 
 God (R.V. Son), He that is in the bosom of the Father, he hath 
 declared him." If so, instead of one name (R.V. txt) " the only begotten 
 Son," we may suppose the writer to mean two names, making a total 
 of three : (1) " Only begotten" (2) " God" (3) " He that is in the bosom 
 of the Father." These will correspond to the three clauses in the 
 first verse: (1) "In the beginning," (2) "with God" (3) "God" 
 This is far more symmetrical than the view that the Prologue begins 
 with three clauses describing the Word, and ends with two. 
 
 [2616] The act of " lifting up the eyes " is thrice attributed to 
 Jesus. Once also He uses the phrase as a precept, iv. 35 " Lift up 
 your eyes (iTrdpare t. 6.) and behold the lands how that they are 
 
 1 [2614/'] To these might have been added Christ's triple repetition of the 
 doctrine that "the Son of man (or, /) must be lifted up" in iii. 14, viii. 28, xii. 32, 
 the last being "if I be lifted up from the earth I will draw all men unto me." 
 
 [2614 c] There remain threefold repetitions of words partly by Christ partly 
 by the evangelist. Of these, et'/xa/KO-reo (vi. n, 23, xi. 41) is probably accidental. 
 But Jn's statement that Christ (xi. 33) " troubled {eTapa^ev) himself" and (xiii. 21) 
 " was troubled in spirit" may be intended to be read along with (xii. 27) " Nozv 
 is my soul troubled,'" as a threefold repetition (920). There is also His doctrine of 
 "the way," introduced with the words (xiv. 4) "Ye know the -way," to which 
 Thomas answers, ' ' How can we know the way?" whereon Jesus replies " I am the 
 ivay, and the truth, and the life," which has decidedly the effect of a threefold 
 repetition. 
 
 457 
 
[2617] REPETITION 
 
 white for harvest." This is obviously a spiritual act. Philo (on 
 Gen. xviii. 2) treats it as such when he describes how Abraham, 
 seated at the door of his tent, " lifted up his eyes " and beheld the 
 three divine Persons to whom he ministered and gave bread (1608). 
 It is a commonplace in Jewish tradition that whatever Abraham does 
 in service to God, God will do, in return, to Abraham's seed. Most 
 appropriately, therefore, before the Feeding of the Five Thousand, 
 John says that the Logos (vi. 3 — 5) u sat" with His disciples on the 
 mountain 1 and "lifted tip [/lis] eyes (e7rapa5 ovv r. 0.) and beheld that 
 a great multitude was coming unto him," i.e. He sees the spiritual 
 harvest, the seed of Abraham after the spirit, the future Church. 
 Then, as Abraham gave bread to the three Persons, so He gives 
 bread to Abraham's children. 
 
 [2617] On the second occasion it is said (xi. 41) " He lifted \his\ 
 eyes upward (r/ptv r. o. avw) and said, ' P'ather, I thank thee that thou 
 didst hearken to me...,'" before the raising of Lazarus ; and, on the 
 third (xvii. 1) "These things spake Jesus, and, having lifted up his eyes 
 to the heaven (eVapa? r. o<£#aA.pot"» avrov ei's t. oupavoV), he said, ' Father, 
 the hour hath come..." In Isaiah (li. 6) "Lift up your eyes to the 
 heavens and look upon the earth beneath " introduces a contrast be- 
 tween the eternal righteousness of God and the perishableness of men, 
 and Ibn Ezra says (though dissenting) " Philosophers derive from this 
 verse the doctrine of the immortality of the soul of man." Having 
 regard to the Scriptural use of the phrase, to the comments of Philo, 
 and to the metaphorical use of it as a precept by Christ, we are justified 
 in concluding that John attaches a spiritual meaning to the thrice 
 repeated act of our Lord, and that the last is regarded as the 
 climax of the three. No outward action, it is true, accompanies 
 the third utterance ; but it prepares the way for the sacrifice on 
 the cross 2 . 
 
 1 [2616,/] As regards the "mountain," Philo appears twice to use forms of the 
 word dpixds of thoughts, "high,' - "uplifted."' But his use of the word is based on 
 a mistransl. of Numb. xx. 19 "by the highway,"' 7rapd to 6'pos, which he explains 
 by (i. 207 > i'^rjXais nal /itTewpois 5vi>dp.eai...Kai opiKus &auTa (TKoirdv, playing on 
 dpiKuis and opiaws, of which the latter means "proceeding by definition." So in 
 i. 290, ddvvaTov yap rov /jlt) reus v\f/r)\ats Kai opinais Xpc6,aevov 65ois dnoyvCjvai fitv to. 
 OvrjTa p.(Ta.K\ii>ai 5t kclI neTavacrTevaat wpbs to. drpDapra. Steph. recognises 6p€ti<6s 
 as applied to a mountainous district in Polybius, but not 6piK6s as above. 
 
 - [2617 f/ 1 It may be noted that Otdo-Oat is twice applied to Jesus, once (i. 38) 
 when He sees the lw<> disciples "following," once (vi. 5) when He sees "that 
 a great multitude is coming to him." Nu- two disciples are the lirstlruits of the 
 
 45 8 
 
REPETITION [2619] 
 
 [2618] The word K^a£w, "cry aloud," applied to our Lord by 
 Matthew alone (or possibly by Matthew and Mark) 1 is applied to 
 Him thrice by John on three solemn occasions. It has been pointed 
 out (1752 a — -/) that there may have been various traditions as to the 
 Messiah's not "crying aloud," based on Isaiah xhi. 2, which may 
 have induced evangelists to refrain from assigning this act to Him at 
 any time, or at all events till the "victory" consummated in the 
 crucifixion. The first Johannine mention of it applied to Christ is 
 in vii. 28, "Jesus then cried aloud in the temple teaching and saying, 
 Ye know both me and ye know whence I am ; and I am not come 
 of myself, but he is true that sent me, whom ye (emph.) know not." 
 This clearly "witnesses" to the Father. The second is in vii. 37, 
 " In the last day, the great one, of the Feast, stood Jesus, and cried 
 aloud saying, If any man thirst, let him come to me and drink. He 
 that believeth in me — as said the Scripture — rivers from his belly 
 shall flow forth, [yea,] of living water." This "witness" — the 
 evangelist himself tells us in the next verse — "he spake concerning 
 the Spirit." The third and last (xii. 44 — 50) introduces the final 
 public utterance of Jesus on finding Himself rejected by His 
 countrymen, and it is a series of statements concerning Himself: — 
 that He represents the Father; that He has come as the Light of the 
 World ; that His word will judge those who reject Him ; and that 
 His utterances are the words of the Father. Of these three utter- 
 ances we may say, roughly, that they severally witness to the Father, 
 the Holy Spirit, and the Son. Thus the peculiar nature of the 
 subject-matter supplies, in itself, some kind of probability that the 
 author deliberately chose this special and unusual word (Kpd£w) to 
 emphasize the public threefold witness of Jesus to a " holy matter." 
 
 [2619] Corresponding to the threefold " crying aloud " of Christ 
 in His preaching of the Gospel we might naturally expect to find 
 a threefold manifestation of Himself after the Resurrection : and this 
 is stated as a fact (xxi. 14) "This is now the third time that Jesus 
 
 Church ; the Five Thousand are a type, though an elementary one, of the Church 
 as a whole. There is, therefore, an inward similarity between the two scenes, 
 however much they outwardly differ. BXerno is only applied once to Christ, and 
 then describes the Son (v. 19) " noting" the acts of the Father in heaven. Philo, 
 too (1607), uses the same word to describe the Eldest Son "noting" the acts of the 
 Father "as patterns for His own action." 
 
 1 [2618 a] Mt. xxvii. 50. Some authorities add it in Mk xv. 39, including 
 ACD ff, k and SS. These passages describe Christ's death. 
 
 459 
 
[2620] REPETITION 
 
 was manifested to the disciples (having been raised from the dead)/' 
 Having previously mentioned one manifestation to Mary and two to 
 the disciples, John might have said, "This is now the fourth time." 
 Bat presumably he lays stress on "to the disciples'''' here, meaning 
 that it was "the third''' to them collectively, excluding manifestations to 
 single persons. The first Epistle to the Corinthians enumerates three 
 manifestations to collective witnesses thus, (xv. 6 — 8) " He appeared to 
 Cephas, then to (i) the Twelve ; then he appeared to (2) Jive hundred 
 brethren at once ;.. .then he appeared to James; then to (3) the 
 apostles all [together] (tois a-n-oo-njAois iramv). But last of all he 
 appeared as unto one born out of due time, yea, even to me." If 
 both writers were to be supposed to have known all the manifestations, 
 and to be here enumerating all the manifestations they knew, it would 
 follow that the manifestation here mentioned by John in which 
 Christ sends forth Peter and his companions to "feed the sheep" is 
 identical with the one described by Paul as being "to the apostles 
 all [together]." But John mentions only seven disciples as being 
 present. 
 
 [2620] More probably there were a vast number of manifestations 
 during the period described by Luke in the Acts (i. 3) as one of 
 "forty" days : and John uses the phrase " this is now the third time" 
 in order to describe that particular one (out of a very large number) 
 which he intends to place third and last, as being the crowning 
 manifestation (apart from the one to Mary Magdalene) 1 . In con- 
 fining himself to "three" manifestations, he would be following 
 Hebrew precedent, as to phrases about Jehovah making His face to 
 shine on Israel. This refrain is thrice repeated in one of the Psalms"', 
 and the phrase occurs in the Blessing of Israel, which contains the 
 name of Jehovah in threefold repetition :t . In view of these circum- 
 
 1 [2620(7] Cramer has the following (on Jn xxi. 14) Aid tI dire, " tovto rjoi) 
 rpirov €(pavepu;0rj 6 lycrovs rots fj.aOrjrais clvtov eyepdds ck veKpCov ,• " Sd^ai OeXwv (k 
 toutov oti ov avvexws (Trexupiaitif avrois ov8e 6/j.olw ko.1 ivravda fih ov Xtyei on 
 i(payt ixtT avTuiv ■ 6 5e Aovk&s aWaxov avro (pr]cnv, 8ti crvvaXiidfievos avrois y\v • to 
 ot 7twj, oi>x r^fxirepov eiwelv. Chrysostom (Migne) has, more briefly, "On 5£ ovb~e 
 ovvtx&s iirexuplafrv ovde 6//.ota>s, \t~yei oti Tpirov tovto ((pdv-q ai'Toh OTt rjyepdri (k 
 vtKpGiv. See 2715. 
 
 '-' l's. lxxx. 3, 7, in. 
 
 :: (2620/'] Numb. vi. 24 6 "Jehovah bless thee and keep thee! Jehovah 
 make his face to shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee. Jehovah lilt up his 
 countenance upon thee and give thee peace." Here the dual clauses in the three 
 
 460 
 
REPETITION [2622] 
 
 stances it is probably not accidental that the evangelist, besides 
 inserting "third" mentions the verb 4> ave P ( > M thrice, in connexion 
 with Christ's resurrection, xxi. i — 14 "Jesus manifested himself again 
 to the disciples on the sea of Tiberias. Now he manifested himself 
 
 thus This is the third time that Jesus manifested himself to the 
 
 disciples." How simple, in the first verse, to have written merely, 
 "Jesus manifested himself again thus... Tiberias," using the verb once ! 
 How can we possibly acquit the writer of that "tautology" which 
 Philo so gravely rebukes — unless he wrote with a sense of the 
 spiritual meaning and weight conveyed by this threefold repetition ? 
 
 [2621] The following passage contains a curious instance of the 
 threefold repetition of a mere pronoun, which, in an ordinary writer, 
 would naturally be set down to mere slovenliness of style: — xii. 16 
 " These things (Tairra) his disciples recognised not at the first. But, 
 when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things 
 had been written concerning him, and [that] they did these things to 
 him." What are "these things"? The previous narrative describes 
 Jesus entering into Jerusalem riding on an ass : and it might be 
 supposed by one familiar with the Synoptists — who say that the 
 disciples found the ass and (according to Luke) placed Jesus 
 upon it — that John refers to this action of the disciples. But John 
 says expressly, "Jesus, having found an ass, sat on it." Consequently 
 "these things" must refer to the fact that the multitude welcomed 
 Jesus as king in the words of the Psalms (cxviii. 25 — 6) crying 
 " Hosanna, blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." 
 Now in the LXX of this Psalm " these things," or its equivalent, 
 occurs in a very peculiar form. The whole of the Psalm may be 
 regarded as Messianic, and part of it is quoted by all the Synoptists 
 as being uttered by Jesus soon after the Entry, " The stone that the 
 builders rejected...." Then follow words, omitted by Luke, but 
 quoted by Mark and Matthew as follows ; " This (avrrj) is from 
 the Lord 1 " — meaning "this thing" or "these things," where the 
 evangelists (following the LXX) curiously reproduce a Hebrew 
 feminine use of the demonstrative pronoun. 
 
 [2622] Westcott, at this point, reminds his readers that (1) the 
 cry of Hosanna is from Ps. cxviii. 25, and adds, on "these things," 
 
 sentences suggest a blessing in heaven fulfilled upon earth : and the threefold 
 repetition suggests that the words contain "a holy matter" (2588 — 9). 
 1 Mk xii. 11, Mt. xxi. 42. 
 
 461 
 
[2623] REPETITION 
 
 the remark, "(2) The triple repetition of the words is to be noticed." 
 But he does not connect the two statements. Schottgen, however, 
 calls attention to the fact that the Hebrew feminine pronoun occurring 
 here is interpreted by the Cabbalists in a symbolical sense as referring 
 to the Messiah, and he quotes a very large number of passages in 
 which the pronoun is similarly symbolized 1 . But in Greek the 
 feminine is so unintelligible that even Origen misunderstands it and 
 refers it to the preceding Kec^aA.?/-, and perhaps the difficulty of it 
 was the reason, or one of the reasons, that induced Luke to omit it, 
 and to substitute something about a "stone" of a very different 
 kind. The facts, taken as a whole, point to the conclusion that 
 there was early difficulty as to the meaning of the words " This 
 (avrrj) was from the Lord " —quoted from the Psalm that was con- 
 nected on the one hand (through the cry of the multitude) with the 
 " Hosanna" in the Entry into Jerusalem, and, on the other (through 
 our Lord's quotation about "the stone that the builders rejected"), 
 with Christ's doctrine about the rejection of the Messiah or about 
 the Stone of Israel. Luke at all events omits both the cry 
 "Hosanna" (1816 b) and the difficult "this" or "these things." 
 John (besides following Mark and Matthew in retaining "Hosanna") 
 paraphrases and amplifies an explanation of " these things " that 
 contains a latent symbolism. See 2757. 
 
 [2623] Another parallel instance of threefold repetition, as to a 
 fulfilment of prophecy, only touched on by Mark and Matthew and 
 given quite differently by Luke, refers to the " sponge " full of 
 vinegar given to Christ at the crucifixion. John introduces this as 
 part of the total " accomplishment " (2115) of the will of the Father 
 by the Son "in order that the Scripture might be perfected" and as 
 prefaced by a special utterance of our Lord, " I thirst." Then he 
 says xix. 29 — 30 "A vessel lay [near] full of vinegar. A sponge 
 therefore full of the vinegar... they brought near to his mouth. When 
 therefore he received the vinegar Jesus said, It is finished... 3 ." 
 
 1 [2622</] Schottg. ii. 45, " de Cabbala Exegetica," places Ps. cxviii. 23 first 
 in the list of these interpretations. lb. p. 1 40 places Dan. ii. 35 (on "the stone") 
 first, and then (after Ezek. i. 28) I's. cxviii. 23. It will be remembered that 
 Lk. xx. [8, instead of the quotation about avrt], has "everyone that falleth on this 
 stone," which W'.Il. aKo bracket in Mt. xxi. 44. 
 
 - 12622 A] Origen (on Ml. xxi. 42) Huet i. 46S a. Field {ad loc.) refers only to 
 modern commentatoi . aol to Origen, but calls the explanation "objectionable." 
 
 :i |2623</| Comp. Mk xv. 30. Mt. xxvii. 48, Lk. (of the soldiers of Herod 
 
 462 
 
REPETITION [2625] 
 
 § 12. Sevenfold repetition 
 
 [2624] The number " seven " occurs in Revelation more often 
 than in all the rest of N.T. taken together. In the Fourth Gospel, 
 which was probably written by some one connected with the author 
 of Revelation, "seven" never occurs at all (though fairly frequent 
 in the Synoptists). But the Gospel is permeated structurally ivith the 
 idea of "" seven" as might be expected from one accepting the tradition 
 about (Rev. iii. i) " the seven spirits of God." John records only 
 seven "signs," a small number as compared with the greater number 
 of the "mighty works" recorded by the Synoptists. Again in xii. i 
 ■"Jesus, six days before the passover, came to Bethany," Westcott 
 says, "St John appears to mark the period as the new Hexaemeron, 
 a solemn period of ' six days,' the time of the new Creation. His 
 Gospel begins and closes with a sacred week." But an ordinary 
 reader might easily overlook the " sacred week " here, and still more 
 easily that at the outset. For there it is (we may almost say) 
 carefully disguised from those who are not on the alert for mysteries 
 by the phrases (i. 29) "on the morrow," (i. 35) "on the morrow," 
 (i. 43) "on the morrow "; (ii. 1) "on the third day" : and the reader 
 has to go through an addition of 1 + 1 + 1 + 3, before he realises that 
 " those who see " are intended to " see " here a solemn period of six 
 days of spiritual creation. Again, a searching analysis of the work is 
 needed before one realises that the witness to Christ is, as Westcott 
 shews again, of a sevenfold character 1 . 
 
 [2625] As soon as this symbolism is recognised, we are led to 
 enquire whether it may not be also latent elsewhere. Thus, the 
 words I AM, though in their full sense occurring only once (viii. 58) 
 are repeated elsewhere in Christ's words five times (directly or 
 indirectly) before the arrest of Jesus (iv. 26, vi. 20, viii. 24, viii. 28, 
 xiii. 19), so as to make up six; and then at the arrest we have a 
 single threefold testimony as follows : — xviii. 5 — 8 " He saith unto 
 
 Antipas) xxiii. 36. Jn, alone of the Gospels, mentions "Scripture" in connexion 
 with this incident. Very early writers connect " gall " with the " vinegar " in such 
 a way as to shew that they regarded the action as predicted in Ps. Ixix. 21. Jn 
 does not mention "'gall," and leaves it open to suppose that he may have included 
 in "Scripture" the words Ps. xlii. 2 " My soul is athirst." 
 
 1 [2624 a] According to Westcott (xlv — vii) it is (1) the witness of the 
 Father; (2) the witness of Christ Himself; (3) the witness of works ; (4) the 
 witness of Scripture ; (5) the witness of the Forerunner ; (6) the witness of 
 disciples ; (7) the witness of the Spirit. 
 
 463 
 
[2626] REPETITION 
 
 them 'I am [he] '...(6) When therefore he said unto them '/ am 
 [he] '...(8) Jesus answered, I said unto you '/ am [he].'" The 
 supposition of a sevenfold intention is somewhat confirmed by the 
 fact that " I am " certainly occurs seven times in the sevenfold 
 representation of His relationship to mankind: (i) vi. 35 etc. "/ 
 am the Bread of Life"; (2) viii. 12 etc. "/ am the Light of the 
 World"; (3) x. 7 etc. "/ am the door"; (4) x. n etc. "/ am the 
 Good Shepherd"; (5) xi. 25 "/am the Resurrection and the Life"; 
 (6) xiv. 6 "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life"; (7) xv. 1 etc. "/ 
 am the True Vine." Again, in the last words of Jesus, when He is 
 reviewing the whole of His teaching, He uses seven times (xiv. 25, 
 xv. 11, xvi. 1, 4, 6, 25, 33) the expression " These things have I spoken 
 to you (ravra XeXdXrjKa v/xlv) " (which occurs nowhere else in the 
 Gospel 1 ), and also, in connexion with promises (xiv. 13, 14, 26, xv. 16, 
 xvi. 23, 24, 26), the phrase "in my name." There is also fair evidence 
 for a sevenfold repetition of h> in the expression of the divine unity 
 in the words of Jesus, first (x. 30) " I and the Father are one" ; and 
 then in prayer that men may be one in that unity (xvii. 11, 21 
 (twice) 2 , 22 (twice), 23). Again, whereas the noun "love" is not 
 mentioned at all by Mark and only once by Matthew and Luke, 
 John uses it seven times, and always in the words of Jesus 3 . The 
 promise "thou shalt, or, ye shaft, see" occurs also seven times, almost 
 always in reference to "glory" or resurrection 4 , and so does the 
 prediction "the hour is coming 5 ." 
 
 [2626] In concluding the instances of repetition, we may add 
 that the "Law" is mentioned six times (vii. 19 (twice), 23, viii. 17, 
 x. 34, xv. 25) in the words of Jesus, an imperfect number as ap- 
 propriate to the imperfect law as is the number " six " applied to the 
 water-pots which were (ii. 6) for " the purification of the Jews." We 
 
 1 [2625 a] On the mystical meaning that may attach to " these things," see 
 2621—2. 
 
 2 [2625 /'] The evidence of C for the omission of 'iv is here discredited by the 
 fact that it omits it previously (against all the MSS.) missing the meaning. 
 
 :t [2625 . I Bul the first <>f these (v. 42 "the love of God ") is negative. 
 The others are \iii. 35, XV. 13 aydTnjv , xv. 9 (v rrj a. rrj e/xrj, xv. 10 <V rrj a. fiov, 
 xv. 10 avTov iv ry a., xvii. 26 17 a. fjv r/yaTrrjirds fie. 
 
 4 [2625</| i. 39, 50 — 51, xi. 40, xvi. 16, 17, 19. In xvi. 17 the words are 
 < Ihrist's bul repeated by the disciple , 
 
 [2625 1 I "K/>x fTa < wpa is in iv. 21, v. 38, xvi. 2, 25 also (with nai vvv iarlv) in 
 iv. 2.?, v. 25 ; also (with ^ai i\i)\\it)<i>) iii \vi. _',2. 
 
 464 
 
REPETITION [2627] 
 
 might have expected perhaps that the Paraclete would have been 
 mentioned "three" or "seven " times. But the mentions are four. 
 Of these, the fourth is negative, xvi. 7 "If I go not away, the 
 Paraclete zvi/l not come unto you," and possibly this may be intended 
 to be excluded from the total. Westcott (p. xiv) reckons as five the 
 quotations from Scripture in Christ's words ; but if we add viii. 17 
 " It is written in your law, The witness of two men is true" the 
 number is six. If we also add xix. 28 " In order that the Scripture 
 might be perfected he saith ' I thirst,'' " the number is seven 1 . 
 
 [2627] What was said as to threefold must be repeated as to 
 sevenfold repetition. Several instances of the latter are certain, but 
 some are doubtful, e.g. the repetition of " love " which perhaps, 
 instead of being taken as one group of seven, might be grouped 
 as two pairs of three positive statements with one negation. The 
 same word may be differently regarded by the author in different 
 circumstances. <J>ai/epoa> applied to the Son in the Gospel is repeated 
 thrice. But when applied to the Father and to the Son in the 
 Epistle it is repeated seven times. Making every allowance for 
 doubtful cases and different aspects, we find enough to assure us 
 that the author of this Gospel was largely influenced by a habit of 
 sevenfold grouping that affected his whole narrative as well as 
 particular words and phrases in it. 
 
 1 [2626 a] In xix. 28, W. H. print " I thirst" as a quotation from Fs. lxix. 21 
 els tt)v di\pav /j.ov eTrbriaa.v /j.e oi;os. But Jn may contemplate also Ps. xlii. 2 
 idiypTjuev 77 if/vxy /J-ov. The five quotations mentioned by Westcott are vi. 45 
 (Is. liv. 13), vii. 38 ("Even as the Scripture said, ' River of water... ,'" on which 
 Westcott remarks " there is no exact parallel. The reference is probably 
 general"), x. 34 (Ps. lxxxii. 6), xiii. 18 (Ps. xli. 9), xv. 25 (Ps. xxxv. 19 and 
 Ps. lxix. 4). Westcott is justified in excluding i. 51 ("the angels of God 
 ascending...") on the ground that "Scripture," "law," "written," etc. do not 
 occur in the context. But I do not understand why he includes vii. 38 and 
 excludes viii. 17. 
 
 A. VI. 465 30 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 CONNEXION OF SENTENCES 
 
 § i. Self-correctiotis 
 
 [2628] One occasional Johannine characteristic, which might be 
 alleged as being incompatible with the view that the author paid 
 much attention to words or aimed at strict accuracy, is that he 
 occasionally sets down what he himself, by subsequently repeating it 
 accurately, admits to be inaccurate, e.g. iii. 32 — 3 "No one receiveth 
 his testimony. He that [/iat/i] received his testimony [hath] set his 
 seal [to this] that God is true," viii. 15—16 "Ye judge according to 
 the flesh, I judge no one. Yea, and if I judge, my judgment is real 
 and true." Somewhat different is iv. 1 — 2 " When therefore the Lord 
 recognised that the Pharisees [had] heard [the saying] that 'Jesus is 
 making more disciples and baptizing [more] than John 1 ' — and yet 
 Jesus himself did not baptize, but his disciples [did]." This last 
 statement may be defended as strictly accurate. The writer tells 
 us, not what Jesus did, but what the Pharisees heard that He was 
 doing— a very different thing. But this illustrates the evangelist's 
 way of putting before his readers the popular view, or roughly 
 accurate view, and then correcting it. And this may explain iii. 1^. 
 In comparison with the world-wide acceptance that might have been 
 expected, it might be said that "no one" accepted the testimony of 
 the Logos. So, as to viii. 16, Christ came not to judge but to save 
 the world : yet indirectly He would necessarily judge those that 
 rejected Him, in so far as any moral ideal "judges" those that 
 behold it and reject it. 
 
 1 [2628,7] W.I I. have jSanrffei [if] 'luivift, but the omission of h may be expl. 
 by the similarity of ihi coming together. 
 
 466 
 
CONNEXION OF SENTENCES [2630] 
 
 [2629] In this last passage there may have been a desire to 
 subordinate the literal view of Christ as the future Judge, seated 
 on the clouds of heaven, in order to give more prominence to 
 (1581 — 5, 1714, 1859) the righteousness and present power of divine 
 judgment. And this indicates that John's other so-called "in- 
 accuracies" are really deliberate. The Pauline Epistles in various 
 phrases describe "all" mankind as "concluded in unbelief" and 
 John, in effect, may desire to say the same thing when he speaks of 
 "no one" receiving the testimony of the Logos 1 . Possibly, too, the 
 evangelist was moved by the fact that Christ Himself frequently 
 expressed a truth briefly and broadly at first and then " narrowed it 
 down" afterwards. This manner of speaking is at all events manifest 
 when He says " I go not up to this feast," and yet " went " (only not 
 after the manner of " going up " expected by His brethren)' 2 , and 
 "Ye will leave me alone and yet I am not alone 3 ," and "My teaching 
 is not mine*" and when He first says, concerning the Paraclete, " He 
 will take of mine" and then explains that He has said "mine" 
 because " All that the Father hath is mine 5 ." 
 
 [2630] As compared with the first and the third of Christ's 
 utterances about "requesting 6 " the Father (xiv. 16 /cayw epamfcraj 
 
 rov irarepa kclI aAAoi/ Trapd.K\i]rov Swcret Vfxlv and xvil. 9 e'yw irepi avrwv 
 
 ipwTw) there is some difficulty in a second one (xvi. 26 iv eKtivjj rfj 
 
 rfp-epa ev t<5 oVopari p.ov alr-rjcreuOe, kcu ov At'yco vp.lv on cyw ipuiTTjaoi 
 t6i' Tvaripa Trepl vp.wv cztjtos yap 6 TraTrjp (ptXu vpas). 1 he first says 
 "J will request the Father and he will give you another Paraclete," 
 the third, addressed to the Father, says "7" request concerning them," 
 i.e. the disciples, the second, " I say not to you that I will request the 
 Father concerning you, for the Father of himself loveth you." But if 
 
 1 [2629 a] On i. 11 ov vapeXa^ov . . . Scot de Z\aj3oi> see 2570. 
 
 2 vii. 8 — 10. 3 xvi. 32. 4 vii. 16. 
 
 5 xvi. 14 — 15. Perhaps to these we might add "the hour cometh and hath 
 come," on which see 1639 a, b, 2485a, 2604a. On v. 31 " If I am bearing witness 
 about myself my witness is not true," contrasted with viii. 14 " Even though I be 
 bearing witness about myself my witness is true," see 2514 (i). 
 
 6 [2630a] "Request," though in some respects not a very good rendering of 
 epwrati), is used here to distinguish it from alreu " ask " and alroufiai " ask for 
 a gift" (or "ask earnestly"). On the rendering "question," see 2630 c. 
 
 7 [2630/;] Chrys. reads ovk epwrqo-u} and so does Cramer. SS has "I say not 
 unto you that I will beseech my Father — but my Father himself hath loved you," 
 a has " et ego rogabo propter vos." 
 
 467 30—2 
 
[2630] CONNEXION OF SENTENCES 
 
 the context be examined, it will appear that our Lord is distinguish- 
 ing between two stages of spiritual development for the disciples. 
 He first says that, if the disciples love Him, they will keep His 
 commandments even though they may have momentarily deserted 
 Him, and He will "request" the Father to give them another 
 Paraclete. Then He leads them to a higher stage, xvi. 23 — 6 " In 
 
 that day ye shall request nothing from me These things have I 
 
 spoken to you in proverbs " — which we might perhaps call metaphors, 
 or parables — " the hour cometh when I shall no longer speak to you 
 in proverbs but shall announce to you plainly about the Father. In 
 that day ye shall ask-for-gifts (aiT-qcreo-de) in my name, and / say not 
 \twu<\ to you that I will request the Father about you ; for the Father 
 of himself loveth you...." Here He speaks of what He will not do 
 after the Resurrection and after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. 
 And this is quite compatible with the fact that just before His arrest 
 — while the disciples are still in the stage of " dark sayings " and 
 without the Spirit — He pours forth one last "request" for them 1 . 
 
 1 [2630 r] 'Epojrri<TO} rbv irar^pa can hardly mean " I will question the Father," 
 for — apart from other objections — ipurdw, meaning "question," in Jn, is always 
 followed by a direct or indirect interrogative, i. 19, 21, 25, v. 12, ix. 2, 15, 19, xvi. 
 5, xviii. 21, or has something in the context that implies questioning (ix. 19, 21, 
 xvi. 19, 30, xviii. 19, 21) (xvi. 23 is doubtful and perhaps includes both "ask 
 a question" and "ask a boon"). 
 
 [2630 c/J 'Epwrdw, in Alexandrian Greek of the 1st and later centuries, very 
 freq. means " I ask whether you are pleased to do so and so," and is used in 
 invitations to dinner and polite requests generally (Oxyr. Pap. i. no. no and in 
 etc.). Hence epwrrjOeLs (Oxyr. Pap. ii. no. 269) (perh. literally " being asked what 
 your pleasure is") means "■please" (a.d. 57). Comp. ib. i. no. 1 1 3 epurijOeis e5 
 7roi7?<reis ayopaceis " I beg you to be good enough to... buy," ipUT-qdtis dydpaaov, 
 " ' beg you to buy" (2nd century), iv. no. 744 tpwru) oe k. irapaKaXCs ae 
 (B.C. 1) etc. 
 
 [2630 1] From classical Gk no instances of epurdw, "ask a boon," are given by 
 Steph., but the- germ of it may perh. be traced in Eurip. Phcenissa 15. where the 
 childless Laius eXOCov iponq. Qoifiov i^atrel 6' ap.a i.e. he not only asks Apollo 
 whether it is the divine will that he should have children, but also asks for the 
 boon. There is a close connexion between "Is it thy will?" and " Let it be thy 
 will.'" Jn uses airtu concerning the disciples "asking" (not concerning Christ, 
 except in the words of the Samaritan Woman iv. 9 (act.) and Martha \i. 22 (mid.)) 
 but ipwrdu) concerning the Son when He describes Himself as " requesting" that 
 the Father's good will may be fulfilled for the Church (xiv. 16, xvi. 26, xvii. 9 
 {it's), 15. 20). 
 
 |2630/ ] 'I lie distinction apparently drawn in xvi. :6 between alr-qa-fade and 
 iporfyrw invites comparison with 1 Jn n- 10 >dv ru iSyrbv &5e\<pbi> aurov a/J-apTdpovTa 
 UfMaprlav /urj 7rpos 06.vo.tov, airrjoet, Kal Suiaei aiVy jun;i>, roh ap-aprdvovo-iv fxr) irpos 
 
 468 
 
CONNEXION OF SENTENCES [2630] 
 
 66.va.TOv. 2<ttiv afxapria irpbs ddvarov. ov wepi eKelvijs X^ui 'iva ipo}Ty](Tr). This is 
 preceded by the statement " If we ask a gift (airw/xeOa) according to his will he 
 heareth us. And if we know that he heareth us [as to] whatsoever we ask as a gift 
 (aiTuufda), we know that we have our (lit.) askings [the things] that we have asked 
 from him (^x ^ 6 " T< * atr-fifia/ra a ^Tr)Ka/j.ev aw avrov)." It would be pedantry to 
 express in a translation intended for general readers the precise differences between 
 alr^io, airov/xai, and ipwrau : but it would be an insult to the writer to suppose 
 that he did not discriminate between them. The impression left on the reader is 
 that epwrdu means asking with a question as to what God's will may be, " if it be 
 thy will" " if it be possible.'" 
 
 [2630 g~\ If that is the distinction in Jn, the meaning of i Jn v. 16 (b) may be, 
 "There is a sin [that tends] toward death. I am not [now] speaking about that, 
 in onler that he should ask [if it be possible, that it may be forgiven, or stopped 
 before it be too late]." In other words, the writer distinguishes between two 
 classes of sins. About one class of sins he says, in effect, Xeyw 'iva airrjarj^. About 
 the other — which would require epcorricris not aiTrjais — he does not say Xtyoj 'iva yurj 
 epwT7)ar)s. He simply says ov \iyw 'iva epcorrjarjs, "I am not at this moment 
 enjoining such an epu)T7]cns, I am not now talking about that." 
 
 [2630//] Comp. Hernias Vis. iii. 10. I — -6 -qpwTuv 'iva /xoi diroKaXv\pri...(Tepov 5e' 
 <re eTrepwTTJcrai 'iva aoi aTTOKaXv(pdrj...Trao'a ipJor-qcns TaTruvo4>poo-vv7)s xPVi eL --- T ^ °~i> 
 inrb x € ^P a aireis aTroKaXv\J/et.s ev derjcrei ; fiXine /xrjTTOTe woXXa atToiifxevos (3Xa\pris aov 
 tV aapKa, where ipu>rq.v 'iva expresses "request" for a revelation, and this 
 "request" is afterwards called an "asking" or an "urgent asking." If we had 
 before us the whole Christian literature of 50 — 150 A.D. we should probably find 
 many such distinctions between verbs of praying. For example, Seofiai is never 
 used by Mk, Jn, Heb., Pet., Jas, and Rev. HapaKaXew, to mean " beseeching the 
 Lord " (as in 2 Cor. xii. 8), is very rare in N.T. (apart from " beseeching" Christ to 
 heal etc. in the Gospels). Jn consistently represents the Son, when praying to the 
 Father, as epwrwv, not TrpoaevxofJ-evos, nor Seb/ievos, nor airuv, nor airovpievos, nor 
 irapaKaXQv. It is true that the Epistle says (1 Jn ii. 1) "If any man sin, we have 
 a Paraclete"— ("one called in to aid," "advocate," 1720 /•)—" with the Father, 
 Jesus Christ the righteous"; but this does not mean that the Paraclete "beseeches 
 (irapaKaXd) " the Father. The Johannine doctrine is that the Son, when on earth, 
 offered " requests" to the Father, but that, in heaven, " request" became unmean- 
 ing in the unity between the Father and the Son. 
 
 [2630 i] Westcott (on 1 Jn v. 16) says, "It is interesting to notice that epiorav 
 is used in this sense of Christian prayer for Christians in a very early inscription in 
 the Roman Catacombs : zhchc 6N kco kai epcoTA YTrep hmoon (Northcole and 
 Brownlow, Roma Sotteranea, ii. 159)." It is much to be regretted that Westcott 
 neither adds the evidence shewing that this inscription is "very early," nor gives 
 any indication as to the rarity or frequency of epurdu} in this sense in other "very 
 early " inscriptions. I have not been able to find in Boeckh more than the 
 following, which may be the one he has in view, "9673 Romae lapis nuper 
 repertus in coemeterio Callisti. Edidit Renier apud Perretum Les catacombes de 
 Rome VI. p. 28 et 178, qui habet a Bonnettyo Annales de philosophic chretienne 
 IV. serie, torn. IX. p. in, quem librum inspicere mihi non licuit. Versus duos 
 extremos citat etiam Wiseman Fabiola p. 147." The inscription is KaT[aOe<ris] ti\ 
 irpo ty Ka\[av5u)v~\ iovv[iuv] AiryeeSe fvcrcus ev kw sai epwra inrep tj/uluv. Boeckh 
 makes no further remarks. Karddeais, here abbreviated as nar, is not given by 
 Steph., L. S., or Sophocles, in the sense of " interment" — which it seems to have 
 
 469 
 
[2631] 
 
 CONNEXION OF SENTENCES 
 
 § 2. ParentJieses 
 
 [2631] When a clause with " therefore (ow)" follows a parenthesis, 
 the " therefore " ought to look back beyond the parenthesis to some 
 preceding statement, e.g. iv. 7 — 9 " Jesus saith to her, ' Give me to 
 drink' (for his disciples had gone away into the city to buy food). 
 The Samaritan woman therefore saith unto him...." Here ovv means 
 " in consequence of Christ's request." But, if we remove the marks 
 of parenthesis, it might seem that the woman uttered this because the 
 disciples had gone azvay, and it is perhaps partly because of this 
 ambiguity, and partly because of a feeling that the chronological 
 order should be kept, that SS rearranges the whole text as follows : — 
 
 iv. 6—9 (SS) 
 " Now there was there Jacob's 
 spring of water, and Jesus came 
 
 [and] sat over the spring And 
 
 his disciples had entered that town 
 that they might buy themselves 
 food ; and when Jesus sat down 
 it was about the sixth hour, and 
 a certain woman had come from 
 Samaria to draw water. Jesus 
 saith to her, Give me water to 
 drink. That Samaritan woman 
 saith to him Lo, thou art a few ; 
 how askest thou me for water to 
 drink...?" 
 
 Here the Syriac once omits " therefore " and once renders it by 
 "and." It also connects with the context the detached or parenthe- 
 tical "it was about the sixth hour" by means of a "when." But 
 the most important change is that SS places the parenthesis about 
 the departure of the disciples earlier, in its chronological order. 
 
 iv. 6 — 9 (Gk) 
 " Now (8i) there was there 
 Jacob's spring. Jesus therefore... 
 sat. ..over the spring. Itwas about 
 the sixth hour. There cometh a 
 woman from Samaria to draw 
 water. Jesus saith to her, Give 
 me to drink. — For his disciples 
 had gone away itito the city to buy 
 food.... The woman of Samaria 
 therefore saith to him, How dost 
 thou — being a few — ask drink from 
 me...?" 
 
 here, and in 9598, 9610, 9649, 9651, 9660, 9063, 9675, 98^1 (comp. 9661 
 KaTertB-q). It occurs also in Oxyr. Pap. 475. 31 "burial." There are some 
 hundreds of Christian sepulchral inscriptions given by Boeckh in the adjacent 
 pages, and I have heen unable to find any other that lias tpwra. It should 
 be added that KaraOecns generally occurs at or near the end of an epitaph (except 
 where the epitaph states nothing but the fact of Karddecris and the date) and not, as 
 here, at the beginning. If genuine, ('pdira would seem to be quite exceptional 
 like \xip.vi\ao [tov aov wartpoi] ib. 0865. 
 
 470 
 
CONNEXION OF SENTENCES [2632] 
 
 [2632] The arrangement of SS is chronological, but it is not 
 Johannine. John does not accumulate his descriptions of scenery 
 and circumstance at the beginning of a scene as in a stage direction, 
 but prefers to give them in parentheses, each in its turn as it is 
 wanted. Thus, after the words of Christ's mother, " Do whatsoever he 
 may say unto you," John inserts " Now there were there stone water- 
 pots... holding two measures or three" — but not till the insertion is 
 made absolutely necessary as a preparation for Christ's following 
 words, " Fill the waterpots with water 1 ." Again, it is not till after 
 Christ's exclamation " I thirst," that we read " A vessel lay near full of 
 vinegar. A sponge, therefore, full of the vinegar... they brought near 
 to his mouth. When therefore he received the vinegar, Jesus said, 
 // is finished' 1 .'''' In these passages, "the waterpots " and "the vinegar" 
 would be unintelligible without what we may call the immediately 
 preceding and parenthetical stage direction 3 . 
 
 1 ii. 5 — 7. - xix. 28 — 30. 
 
 3 [2632 a] SS is wanting for these two passages. But, so far as the faithful 
 representation of Johannine connexion of sentences depends — as it does very 
 largely — upon the faithful representation of the Johannine ovv, we must pronounce 
 SS worthless, as may be seen from its renderings of odv in ii. 18 om., ii. 20 om., 
 ii. 22 "but," iii. 25 "now," iv. 1 "now,'' iv. 5 "and," iv. 6 "and," iv. 9 (see 
 2631), iv. 28 "and," iv. 33 om. Compare also the Gk and Syr. of xxi. 7: 
 Gk SS 
 
 "Simon Peter therefore, having "Now Simon, when he heard it was 
 
 heard [that] ' It is the Lord,' girt him- our Lord, took his coat [and] put [it] on 
 self with (lit.) the coaX—for tie was his loins ^ and fell into the lake and was 
 naked — and cast himself into the sea. swimming and coming, because they were 
 But the other disciples came in the not far from the dry land. And the 
 little boat,— for they -were not far from rest of the disciples were coming in the 
 the land, but about two hundred cubits boat drawing that net ^ ." 
 off— dragging the net of the pish." 
 
 Here SS omits "for he was naked" and the curious addition "of the fish." 
 It also places the parenthesis "for. ..land" earlier in the narrative, just as it did in 
 the Samaritan Dialogue (2631). 
 
 [2632/'] In vi. 10 "Jesus said Make the men sit down. — Now (b~£) there was 
 much grass in the place — The men therefore (ovv) sat down," Syr. (Burk.) has "Go 
 make the folk sit down [to meat] companies by companies. Now the green grass 
 was plentiful in that same spot, and the folk sat down [to meat]," but SS "He 
 saith to them : Make the folk sit down [to meat]. Now the green grass was 
 plentiful in that same place. He saith to them : Go, make the folk sit down 
 [to meat] on the herbage." Mk vi. 39 has eirira^v avrocs avaKKidrivai (marg. 
 dvaKXivai) iravras, cv/j.w6cna crvfiirdaia, ewi rqi x^^PV X^P T V' which seems to have 
 influenced the Syriac. 
 
 [2632c] There are two parenthetic clauses, followed by "then therefore" in 
 
 471 
 
[2633] CONNEXION OF SENTENCES 
 
 [2633] A parenthesis is frequently followed by a resumptive ovv, 
 which, in some cases, may mean " consequently " but in others little 
 more than "well, then" (or "to return, then"): ii. 16 — 18 "Make 
 not my Father's house a house of merchandise. — His disciples re- 
 membered that it is written, ' The zeal of thine house shall eat me ttp.' — 
 The Jews therefore answered and said..."; in. 23 — 5 " And they used 
 to come to [John] and to be baptized. — For John had not yet been 
 cast into prison. — There arose therefore a questioning... about puri- 
 fying"; iv. 8 — 9 "Jesus saith to her, Give me to drink. — For his 
 disciples had gone away... to buy food. — The woman therefore saith to 
 him...." So probably we should regard as parenthetical all that 
 comes between iv. 26 "Jesus saith to her / am [the Messiah]" and 
 iv. 28 "The woman therefore left her waterpot... 1 ." In the following, 
 however, the italicised words are probably not parenthetical, vi. 3 — 5 
 " Now (Se) Jesus went up to the mountain and there he sat with his 
 disciples. Now there was (rjv Be) near at hand the passover, the feast 
 of the Jews. Jesus therefore having raised his eyes and having 
 beheld that a great multitude was coming to him..." The mention of 
 the passover may have a mystical meaning connected with what 
 follows. Jesus is described as " raising his eyes " to the contempla- 
 
 xi. 12 — 14, "The disciples therefore said to him, 'Lord, if he is asleep he will be 
 saved [from death].' — But (5e) Jesus had spoken about his death. But (5e) they 
 supposed that about the falling asleep of slumber he was speaking. — Then therefore 
 (t6t€ ovv) Jesus said to them plainly, 'Lazarus is dead.'" SS renders 5^ first by 
 "now" and then by "and"; and, for "then therefore," it has "again," thus: 
 "They say to him: 'Our Lord, if he sleepeth, he will live.' Now Jesus on {the 
 grountl] that Lazar was dead had said [it] to them, and they were supposing that 
 of sleep he said it. Again Jesus said to them plainly, 'Lazar is dead.'" 
 
 [2632 f/] In xix. 23 "The soldiers therefore... took his upper garments (and 
 made four parts, for each soldier a part) — and the tunic. Now the tunic was 
 without seam...," John passes rapidly over the "garments," for which there was 
 no need to draw lots, to the "tunic," for which there was the need; and he twice 
 mentions the "tunic," partly perhaps because the Synoptists had wholly omitted 
 this detail. SS and D are wanting here. But this twofold mention of the tunic 
 is avoided by most of the Latin and other versions by dropping "and the tunic." 
 Thus they also avoid the parenthesis: e has "simili modo et tunicam. Erat 
 autem ei tunica...," thus avoiding t lie parenthesis in a different way. 
 
 1 [2633a] The intervening words describe the arrival of the disciples: "And 
 they were marvelling that he was speaking with a woman. No one however said, 
 What seekest thou? or why speakesl thou with her?" This does not seem to 
 contain a reason for the woman's departure. Hut the astounding utterance "1 am 
 [the Messiah]" may he intended to explain her sudden departure and her leaving 
 her waterpot behind her — either in amazement or in reverence for the "prophet." 
 
 472 
 
CONNEXION OF SENTENCES [2634] 
 
 tion of the New Passover, of which a type was to be presented in 
 the Feeding of the Five Thousand. In xi. 4 — 6 " ' This sickness is 
 not unto death....' — Now (Sc) Jesus loved... Lazarus. — When there- 
 fore he heard that he was sick, he abode at that time two days in the 
 place where he was...," ovv may mean "well, then," or it may mean 
 that, because He knew that the sickness was " not unto death," 
 Jesus "consequently" abode where He was 1 . 
 
 [2634] In some instances a 8e clause is followed by an ovv clause 
 that might express the consequence of the former, as in xviii. 1 — 3 
 "...Jesus went forth. ..where was a garden. ..But (8e) Judas also... 
 knew the place... Judas therefore. ..cometh." In this case it is 
 reasonable to take the Se clause as not parenthetic. But in what 
 follows, xviii. 5 — 6 " He saith to them 'I am [he].' — Now (8e) there 
 stood Judas. ..with them.... When therefore he said to them, 'I am 
 [he] ' they went away backward and fell on the ground," the 8e 
 clause seems parenthetic, and the "falling" is described as the effect 
 of the majestic and mysterious utterance "I am [he]." In the 
 following, the ovv clause may be regarded possibly as the sequel of 
 the immediately preceding sentence but more probably as looking 
 back past a parenthesis, xi. 12 — 14 "His disciples therefore said, 
 Lord, if he is fallen asleep he will recover. — But (Se) Jesus had said 
 [the words] concerning his death. But (Se) they thought that he was 
 saying [them] about falling really asleep. — Then therefore Jesus said 
 to them plainly, ' Lazarus is dead 2 .'" 
 
 1 [2633 />] In the following, 8i (or ovSe") introduces a parenthetical clause, which 
 is followed by an ovv clause : vi. 10 lloLrjcrare . . .dvairecruv (riv 8e x°P T0S '"'oXvs iv t<£ 
 rbirui). dve'ireaav odv, vii. 3 — 6 dirov ovv irpbs avrov ol d8. avrov... <pai£pwaov 
 aeavrbv rip nbapiip (ovSe yap ol dS. avrov iirlarevov ds avrov). \iyei ovv avroh 6 'I., 
 vii. 38 — 40 6 TriffTevwv...vdaTos fcDcros (rovro Se eIirev...edo^do-07]). £k rod oxXov 
 oOv . . JXeyov , xi. I — 3 r\v M ris dcrdevQiv ...Map. k. Map#. rijs d<5e\</>?7S avrrjs (r)v 8t 
 Map. 7) dXeitpaaa.. .) dire'crreiXav ovv al d5eX<pai, xi. 29 — 31 eKeivrj 5e...ijpxeTo irpbs avrov 
 (oviru 5e iXrjXvdei ol — ) 01 ovv 'Iov3aLoi...TjKoXovdr)crav..., xi. 50 — 3 crv/juptpei vp.iv 
 Iva els avdpunros diroddvrj... (rovro 82 d<p' eavrov ovk elirev...) 'Air eKeivrjs ovv rijs 
 ij/xepas ejiovXevaavro..., xii. 5 — 7 Aid ri...ovi;...e5b6Tj irrwxois; (elwev St rovro...). 
 elirev ovv 6 Irjaovs, xii. 32 — 4 irdvras eXuvaw irpbs e/xavrov (rovro 8$ ZXeyev 
 o-rjpaivwv...). direKpidr] ovv avrip.... In xviii. 10 — 11, Christ's reply is to an action 
 2. ovv II — dwe'KOipev avrov rb urdpiov rb de^ibv (r)v be bvop.a Tip bovXtp MaX^ 05 )- 
 elirev ovv 6 T. In all these cases odv follows a parenth. with 5^ or ovSL 
 
 2 [2634 a] There is something extremely impressive in the reticence of the clause 
 that defines the personality of Barabbas (in contrast with the details of Lk. xxiii. 19, 
 25). Coming at the end of a section, the clause is rather an appendix than 
 a parenthesis, xviii. 40— xix. 1 "They therefore cried aloud again, saying 'Not 
 
 473 
 
[2635] CONNEXION OF SENTENCES 
 
 [2635] After xi. 57 "He will surely not come to the feast. — Now 
 (Se) the chief priests... had given commandment... so that they might 
 take him," a new section begins, xii. 1 " Therefore Jesus... came to 
 Bethany." The Se clause cannot here be called parenthetical : but 
 it takes the reader behind the scenes to the previous plotting of the 
 chief priests, after having exhibited on the stage the gossipping 
 multitude. As to the ovv clause it is perhaps not merely resumptive 
 but describes Jesus as knowing the danger and " conseqne?itly " 
 advancing to meet it. This view is supported by the sentence 
 following the arrival of Judas with the soldiers, xviii. 4 " Jesus, 
 therefore, knowing all things that were coming on him, went forth, and 
 saith to them, 'Whom seek ye?" In many cases opinion may be 
 divided as to whether a Se clause is, or is not, parenthetical: but it is 
 certain that ovv (far more frequently than Se) introduces the more 
 weighty words and deeds of Christ 1 , and that an ovv clause is often 
 preceded by a parenthetical, explanatory, or subordinate statement. 
 
 [2635 (i)] A parenthesis on a very large scale — a great parenthetic 
 work of Christ in the conversion of Samaria — may possibly be 
 indicated by the extraordinary construction in iv. 1 — 3 ws ovv cyrw 6 
 Kvpio%. . .a(f>rJK€v TTjv 'lovoatav kcu dTrrjXdtv tviiXlv eis ttjv YaXikalav, on 
 which Blass (p. 192) truly says that it "is at least remarkable, since 
 the aorist denotes the journey as completed, whereas in verses 4 ff. 
 we have an account of what happened on the way, and the arrival in 
 Galilee is not reached till verse 45." The Diatessaron places iv. 7, a 
 
 this [man] but Barabbas. — A 7 cnu I should explain that (5e) B. was a robber.— Then 
 therefore [without more delay] (rore odv) Pilate took Jesus and scourged [him]." 
 
 1 [2635a] The difference is particularly noticeable in the last nine chapters 
 where 5^ is not applied thus except in xiii. i, xix. 9, xxi. 1, 4, 19. Contrast the 
 frequency of ovv, xiii. 6. 12, 26, 27, 31, xviii. 4, 7, 11, xix. 5, 26, 30, xx. 19, 21, 
 xxi. 5, 15. Of the live instances of 8e, one (xix. 9) introduces a negation, and one 
 (xxi. 19 tovto Oe elire o-rjuaivuv) is a subordinate or parenthetic statement of the 
 meaning of what Christ has previously said, and this characterizes some of the 
 earlier instances of 5e, e.g. ii. :i (Ketvos oi g\ty€..., vi. tovto 8e ZXeye -KfipaCuv, 
 vi. 71 ZXtye 5e rbv lov5av, vii. 39 tovto 5e elwe, xi. 13 elpfjKei 5e lrjaovs. 
 
 [2635 /'| AL when introducing a word or deed of Jesus, often follows an 
 adv. phrase or participle, i. 38 <TTpa<peh Be, iv. 43 /xer& Be rds Svo Tjfie'pas, 
 vi. 12 cJs dt (vew\r]adr)crav, vi. 61 flows Be d 'I., vii. 9 raDra 5^ eiwihv, vii. 10 u>s Be 
 aveprjo-av, vii. 14 171)7; 5^, etc. Such as the following are comparatively rare, ii. 24 
 atrrds Be 'I. ovk eirlcrTevev aiirdv, v. 17 6 Be diriKpivaTO, vi. 3 dvrjXOe Be eis to opos, 
 vi. 20 6 5^ X^ei avToh, 'Y)yd) el/u, viii. 59 'I. 5^ iicptfiri etc. : xi. 41, xii. 23, 44 are 
 exceptional and introduce acts Or words of importance, but the rule remains 
 as above. 
 
 474 
 
CONNEXION OF SENTENCES [2635(H)] 
 
 early (sect. 6) immediately before the Baptist's imprisonment : " And 
 [so] he left Judaea (Lk. iii. 19 — 20) And Herod. ..shut up John in 
 prison. (Mt. iv. 12) And when Jesus heard that John was delivered 
 up he went away (cu'c^cop^o-cr, lit. retired) to Galilee." Long after- 
 wards (sect. 21), omitting iv. 3/;, it has (after Mk vii. 31 — 7) iv. 4 
 "And while he was passing through the land of Samaria he came to 
 one of the cities of the Samaritans," omitting the very important 
 phrase in iv. 4 " it was necessary " (before " that he should pass 
 through Samaria") 1 . Origen ad toe. has a long discussion on iv. 35 
 " four months," shewing that various inferences were drawn, from this 
 expression, as to the date of the Samaritan dialogue. IIaA.iv in iv. 3 
 is omitted by A, and is only added in the margin by B. Its omission 
 suggests motives based on chronology. naA.iv makes it almost 
 necessary to suppose that Christ, having come up from Galilee to 
 Jerusalem for the first Passover recorded in this Gospel, was now 
 "going away to Galilee again" i.e. back, without any very long 
 interval, and certainly without any intervening visit to Galilee. It was 
 "a return journey." By omitting "again" the Diatessaron leaves 
 itself free to regard the Samaritan Dialogue as a much later event 
 than the delivering up of John the Baptist. 
 
 [2635 (ii)] Chrysostom, quoting the passage at some length, has 
 
 fis ovv eyviti o \rj<rov<;. . .ave^oprjerev ct7ro rrjs 'IouSaias xat rjXBtv eis t?/v 
 
 TaAiAaiav, and he repeats ara^wpew twice later on " Why, pray, did 
 He retire (aVex^pei) ?" — using the same word as that in Mt. iv. 12 
 quoted above. The context shews why he favoured this reading. 
 He points out that the Gospel was in the first instance offered to the 
 Jews, and that it was Jewish rejection that caused Jesus to preach 
 the Gospel to the Samaritans, as it caused the Apostles to preach to 
 the Gentiles. The visit to Samaria, he says, "was a parergon of His 
 journey 2 ." This seems to give us a clue to the Johannine expression 
 and arrangement. John might have written continuously that Jesus, 
 finding that His success was being magnified at the cost of the 
 Baptist, (iv. 3) "left Judaea and went away back to Galilee, (iv. 44) 
 
 1 [2635 (i)a] Nonnus has Kai puv 'in XP^ 0S € '^ e &' ewdpov 2.: e5et might be 
 confused with the following Se, or read as e5e, i.e. iv 8i (with foil. inf.). 
 
 - [2635 (ii) a] AeiKvvs 68ov wapepyov avrbv tovto Troiovfievov, printed in Cramer 
 wi nrep 'ipyov avrbv Troi.ovp.evov tj)v rrjs Sa/xapetTi5os 686v. In what precedes, Chrys. 
 has dcaxwp^cra? 7o0j< ttclKlv tGsv avrCov e'ixeTO uv Kai irpbrepov. Ov yap aw\u)S eirl 
 tt\v TaXCkaiav a-n-qpxero. This combines aeaxwp^w and d-nipxofiat. 
 
 475 
 
[2636] CONNEXION OF SENTENCES 
 
 for Jesus himself testified that a prophet in his own country hath no 
 honour." But he desires to insert a parcrgoii, or at least what some 
 might call by that name — the conversion of Samaria. This parergon 
 he expresses by a long parenthesis. According to his custom he 
 gives the reader an impression at first erroneous and then corrected. 
 " He left Judaea and went away back to Galilee." Then follows the 
 correction " But it was necessary that he should pass through 
 Samaria " : and every sympathetic reader of the Fourth Gospel 
 would at once understand that " necessary " implied " the will of the 
 Father " and that this " necessity " would issue in some divine con- 
 sequence. If this view is correct, John's use of the aorist d-n-rjXOev is 
 remarkable but not erroneous. 
 
 § 3. Instances of doubtful connexion 
 
 [2636] In i. 43 — 5 "...and he findeth Philip. And Jesus saith to 
 him, Follow me. Now (Sc) Philip was from Bethsaida, sprung from 1 
 the city of Andrew and Peter. Philip findeth Nathanael...," Se 
 probably introduces a reference to the previous discipleship of 
 Andrew and Peter, as if to say, Now I ought to explain that Philip 
 was connected locally with Andrew and Peter, and they may have 
 mentioned him to the Lord, who accordingly came to "find" him 2 . 
 The Latin and Syriac versions vary as to the italicised words in 
 vi. 64 — 5 " ' But there are some of you that believe not.' — For Jesus 
 knew from the beginning... who was to betray him. — And he proceeded 
 to say (*cu eAeyei') For this cause have I told you that no one can come 
 unto me except...," SS has " He saith to them Therefore I have said 
 to you 3 ," a " et dicebat: propterea dixi vobis, Nemo...,"« " et dicebat 
 propterea quia," Chrysostom omits "you that (v^lv on)." Perhaps 
 some rendered koX lAeycv SiA touto, " and it was for this cause that 
 he said [previously] " : but, if that had been the meaning, the text 
 would probably have been Sia tovto tlirev or Sia tovto dprJKti. " For 
 this cause" appears to mean "Because of the fundamental difference 
 
 1 [2636<z] On dir6 and in lure, see 2289 -93. SS has "Now Philip, his kin 
 was From Bethsaida, from the city <>f Andrew and of Simon." 
 
 - On vii. 22 oi>x on rov M. tarlv d\\' in tu>v irartpuv, see 2218 -19, and on 
 iv. () oi yap cvyxpuvrai I. ^a^iapciraii, sec 2066. 
 
 •' (2636/'] vi. 65 Kai ZXeyev Aia tovto tip-qua bfj.lv ore ot'5eis bvvarai . . . . Conip. 
 ix. 23 8ta tovto oi yovth ai'iTov (lirav..., and especially xiii. 11 — 12 rjdei yap 
 t'ov Trapa5i86vTa avTov <5«z tovto elirev 6tl Ovxi ir&vTfs Kadapol eare. 
 
 476 
 
CONNEXION OF SENTENCES [2638] 
 
 between the unbelieving or selfish theory of things, and the believing 
 or unselfish theory"; and this is implied in "there are some of you 
 that believe not " ; i.e. ye believe not in a Father but believe in 
 your own worldly interests and in nothing else 1 . 
 
 [2637] In xviii. 10 "Simon Peter therefore having a sword drew 
 it...," ovv cannot be resumptive of anything said about Peter, as he is 
 not mentioned in the preceding context. Nor does ovv introduce a 
 consequence of the preceding words, which are " ' ...If therefore ye 
 seek me let these depart' — that there might be fulfilled the word 
 that he spake 'Whom thou hast given me of them I have lost 
 none.'" Perhaps we may assume that the words "let these 
 depart" implied that Christ Himself would not "depart" but sur- 
 rendered Himself, and that Peter "■therefore''' intervened to prevent 
 the surrender 2 . 
 
 [2638] In xx. io — n "The disciples therefore went away to 
 their own homes. But Mary was standing at the tomb. As therefore 
 she was weeping, she glanced into the tomb," SS has " now " for the 
 first "therefore" and "and" for the second, and makes one sentence 
 of the whole. But W.H. regard the words "But Mary" as beginning 
 a new section. Probably the first ovv means " as the result of all 
 that preceded," namely, the entering into the sepulchre. Ovv is here 
 nearly equivalent to fxev ovv, and as fxiv ends a book of Thucydides 
 
 1 [2636 t] In iii. 15 iva t5s 6 truiTeviov iv aury 'ixv fayv alcoviov, R.V. txt has 
 "that whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life," but marg. " believe! 'h in 
 Aim." (1) The former is supported by the following facts. llnxTevu iv occurs 
 nowhere in N.T. exc. Mk i. 15 "believe in the gospel" (1480 a). (2) The 
 variations here, ets clvtov, iir' aurdv, eV avTqi, indicate that iv was in the original 
 text and caused difficulty to scribes assuming its connexion with irio-revw. (3) It 
 is in Jn's manner to have an adverbial phrase with iv before its verb when the 
 phrase is emphatic or metaphorical as i. 1 iv dpxv V v etc. and comp. especially 
 v. 39 iv avrah faijv at. ix €l - v > ^nd 1 J n passim. (4) It is also characteristic of Jn 
 to introduce a new doctrine, first in broad and general terms, and then to "narrow 
 down" (2290). So here the first two mentions of "believing" use the verb 
 absolutely, iii. 12 — 15 "ye believe not... everyone that believeth.''' Then comes 
 iii. 16 "everyone that believeth in {els) him," where "him" refers to the 
 previously mentioned "Son of man." 
 
 2 [2637a] It is surprising that the Latin versions here retain "therefore"; but 
 SS has "now," and D Tore. It should be added that, in the context, almost 
 every sentence of narrative is introduced with ovv as though indicating that the 
 delivering up of Christ took place in the regular sequence of divinely decreed 
 cause and effect : and the evangelist may regard Peter's impulsive action as a part 
 of the whole foreordained series. 
 
 477 
 
[2639] CONNEXION OF SENTENCES 
 
 and Se begins the next 1 , so here ovv ends the account of what the two 
 disciples saw, and Se introduces the weeping of Mary as a prepara- 
 tion for what she, in her turn, was destined to see. The effect of 
 the particles is something of this kind : " So the upshot of it all was 
 that the two disciples went back to their several homes. One indeed 
 believed. But neither he nor Peter had any message of glad tidings 
 to convey to the Eleven. So they went away, and that was all as 
 far as they were concerned. But Mary on the other hand abode by 
 the tomb in tears. While therefore she wept she received a vision of 
 angels and then a manifestation of the Saviour Himself. And so 
 she returned, not to her home but to the disciples, the first to 
 proclaim the Gospel of the Resurrection." 
 
 [2639] There is a parenthesis with asyndeton (according to W.H.) 
 
 in the following, ii. 16 — 18 "'Take these things hence make not 
 
 my Father's house a house of merchandise.' — His disciples remem- 
 bered 2 that it is written, 'The jealousy for thy house shall eat me 
 up.' — The Jews therefore answered and said to him. ..." The variations 
 of the authorities that insert conjunctions to destroy the asyndeton 
 indicate that W.H. are right. But the question arises, When did the 
 disciples remember this? At once, or after Christ's resurrection? 
 In favour of the former it may be urged that several authorities 
 insert "at the time," or something to that effect, and that, if John 
 had meant " after the resurrection " he would have inserted the 
 words as he does in ii. 22 " When therefore he was raised from the 
 dead his disciples remembered...." But on the other side it may be 
 replied that (1) John may have assumed that the clause "when he 
 was raised from the dead," which he is purposing to introduce 
 immediately, will modify "remembered" in both cases; {2) the 
 hypothesis that the disciples spontaneously called to mind a pre- 
 diction (virtually) of their Master's death at the very outset of His 
 career perhaps never entered the mind of the evangelist and is 
 certainly very improbable; (3) John habitually represents the disciples 
 as misunderstanding much, and as foreseeing nothing, that relates to 
 Christ's sacrifice; (4) the meaning "remembered [in after times]' 
 
 1 Time. iii. 116 ravra /jlZv Kara t'ov x eL ^ va tovtov iytvero... iv. r rod 5' 
 tTriyiyi'Ofx^vov Ocpovs.... 
 
 - [2639 <z] SS as elsewhere (2631 — 2) avoids or softens the parenthetic abrupt- 
 ness by inserting "When he diil these things" before "his disciples." D is 
 wanting. Chrys. and <i ins. r6re, A and b ins. 5^, c lias "et continuo," f "et' 
 (/j also strangely has "discipulus ejus"). 
 
 478 
 
CONNEXION OF SENTENCES [2640] 
 
 accords best with the two other passages that describe the disciples 
 as applying Scripture to our Lord, so as to make a threefold mention 
 of this " remembering 1 ." 
 
 [2640] The discussion of the Johannine ovv in narrative cannot 
 be quite satisfactory because it is not at present capable of illustration 
 from contemporary or earlier writers. In LXX, from the beginning 
 of Numbers to the end of Chronicles, the Oxford concordance does 
 not give thirty instances of ovv, and, of these, none are in narrative 2 . 
 In the Gospels, narrative ovv is almost 3 — and in Revelation 4 it is 
 quite — non-existent. In classical and non-classical Greek the 
 Thesaurus gives no examples that can be fairly said to establish 
 precedents or parallels for the Johannine usage. But some quota- 
 tions from a Byzantine writer in the Thesaurus shew a tendency to 
 use narrative ovv abundantly in the sense " I say," " to resume " : 
 and these, although much later than the Johannine period, preclude 
 a critic from deciding that John's usage is a mere idiosyncrasy of the 
 writer 5 . Whatever may be the causes of the usage, there can be no 
 
 1 [2639^] Perhaps we might add, as a fifth reason, that if John had meant 
 to modify ifivfio-drjcrav by rare he could have inserted tots (as Chrysostom does) or 
 something of the same kind, e.g. "in that very hour." 
 
 - [2640 a] Ovv is frequent in Genesis, but not in narrative. From Genesis to 
 the end of Chronicles, narrative odv is non-existent except in a few instances in 
 Exodus, as follows. In Ex. iv. 4 it occurs, like Johannine 5e, in parenthesis, 
 " ' stretch forth thy hand and grasp the tail.' — Having therefore (Heb. and) stretched 
 out his hand he grasped the tail and it became a rod in his hand — 'in order that 
 they may believe.'" (LXX e/rretVas oZv, F ko.1 iKrdvas.) In Ex. viii. 10, r(), 
 elirev ovv, and e?7rai' ovv (Heb. "and") occur in rapid dialogue, and ib. 17 "And 
 the Lord said., .stretch... And they did so and Aaron stretched," LXX omits "and 
 they did so and" and substitutes ovv i.e. " accordingly." It occurs also in Ex. xiv. 
 6 ££evj;ev ovv, xxxii. 26 crvvrfkdov ovv, and is a remarkable feature in this book. 
 
 3 [2640/'] 03^ narr. is in Mt. i. 17 waaai ovv al y., xviii. 26, 29 (parab.) and 
 xxvii. 17 0-vvriy/j.evujv ovv, Lk. iii. 7, xiii. 18 ?\eyev ovv, xix. 12 elvev ovv. (In 
 Lk. xx. 29 the Sadducees say ewra ovv a. Tjcrav, where Mk xii. 20 has no con- 
 junction and Mt. xxii. 25 has de. ) In Acts, narrative fiev ovv is freq. but this is 
 quite distinct from narrative ovv which is very rare (perh. only in x. 23, xvi. 11, 
 xxii. 29, xxv. 1, 17 (? speech), 23). On ovv in Christ's words in the Synoptists 
 see 2191a. 
 
 4 [2640 c] The absence of ovv narr. in Revelation is important because, like the 
 Acts, it is largely made up of narrative, so that we might have expected narrative 
 ovv in abundance if it had been written by the hand that wrote the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 5 [2640 </] In the following, ovv is repeated resumptively after clauses such as 
 e£ tKtivov tov xpb" ov > Steph. v. 2391 "Mire Jo. Malalas p. 29, 19: Oi ovv 'Supoi 
 Avtlox^s e£ eicclvov tov xp^ vov <*</>' °v °' Apyetoi e\06vr€s efr/Triaav ttjv Tw iroiovaiv 
 ovv tt\v fxvri/jirjv • neque enim delendum videtur alterutrum. Simplex sic est p. 59, 
 
 479 
 
[2640] CONNEXION OF SENTENCES 
 
 doubt that the differences in the Greek Gospel between John's 
 frequently repeated "and" and "but" and "therefore" — so often 
 covered up by the Syriac and Latin translators — do help in a very 
 remarkable manner to suggest relative importance and unimportance 
 in the events of the Gospel ; and the use of " therefore " often helps 
 the reader to receive the impression that what Christ said or did 
 was not an accident but a consequence, an effect proceeding from a 
 cause, and that cause from a cause still higher, reaching to the First 
 Cause of all. 
 
 1 6: To. 5£ perayeviarepa ^aaikeia AlyvTrriwv, Xeyw 5e awb rod Napax^ xal kcltm, 
 avveypd\j/aTo ovv ravra QeorpiXos' 101, 13: Kat ov Trapex^pijaev, <*\\' evdeus airb 
 tov KOTTov...(rviJ.pa\ii)v ovv /mxercu ' 195, 4: Kat daeXdovra wpbs avrijv ap.a tols... 
 irpeoftevTous yvcopiaaaa ovv avrbv ' 238, 4: 'Aktjkovio. 5£ ToC.XpicrroO ra idpara, 6s 
 ...depaireijei, wpbs avrbv ovv k ay th.. J 8 papov ' et similiter 362, 12; 380, I. Ceterum 
 imprimis part. odv frequentari ab scholiastis notavit Dobr. ad Aristoph. PI. 973, 
 p. 120, qui exx. illic citatis facile plurima ex schol. Aristoph. et aliis adjicere 
 potuisset." 
 
 [2640 e] The foil, are not in nam, but they are useful as illustrating the various 
 uses of odv : Fayfun Pap. 133 (4th century) /ca#' auT-tjv o?<v rr\v 6\f/t.v t p.yj wio-deis 
 oSv toIs Kapwibvais, rrjv Tpiy-qv iroitfae, ll so I say at sight of this — not listening, 
 I say, to the fruit-buyers— make the vintage." Note also the strange use of ovv 
 at the beginning of the following letter, id. 114 (a.d. 100) "L.B.G. to his son S. 
 greeting. To repeat what I said (ovv) — on receipt of my letter you will oblige ?ne by 
 sending Pindarits ...to me at the city (eO odv wv-qcras Kop.LO-ap.evos p.ov ttjv iwiaroXriv 
 Trypans pv IMvoapov ds t\\v tt6\iv)P This may perhaps be explained as a repetition 
 of the phrase in a letter from L.B.G. to S. a few days before (ib. 113). "Be sure 
 to send P'mdarus... you will oblige me therefore immediately by sending him imme- 
 diately (sic) (eC ovv irv7)o-as i^avrrjs wipo-is avrbv e'£ai'T?7s)." The later of these two 
 letters (no. 114) indicates that G. was vexed with his son for delaying — on the 
 pretext that he was busy threshing — to send some fish: "Send the fish on the 24th 
 or 25th for Gemella's birthday feast, finally (o{v)v) don't talk nonsense about 
 your threshing." Two previous letters from Gemellus (111 and 112) after a long 
 list of minute instructions, end thus p.T) oOv tLXXws wvrio-ris, "So, (or, finally) don't 
 neglect these instructions," and the same formula occurs in 115, 118, and 119, 
 besides being conjecturally supplied in 116. Note the curious spelling of iroieiv 
 as TTvetv. 
 
 48O 
 
APPENDIX I 
 TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS 
 
 § i. Our Lord's Sayings 
 
 [2641] It belongs to a Commentary, not to a Grammar, to 
 illustrate in detail the double and mystical meanings that underlie 
 large portions of the Fourth Gospel. But they may be briefly 
 touched on here, as the recognition of them sometimes influences 
 the grammatical interpretation or the textual reading, as, for example, 
 will appear (2648) in relation to i. 28 W.H. "Bethany," R.V. txt 
 " Bethany " but marg. " Bethabarah " or " Betharabah." 
 
 [2642] To begin with our Lord's sayings, John himself tells us^ 
 that the words " Destroy this temple... ' " were misunderstood by alP 
 till after Christ's resurrection, and that the disciples understood "our 
 friend Lazarus has fallen asleep 2 " to refer to literal sleep. Before 
 the Feeding of the Five Thousand, Jesus says to Philip, "Whence 
 shall we buy bread that these may eat 3 ?" and though John does not 
 say that this had a double meaning, he adds " But this he said, 
 tempting him " — implying that the words did not mean what anyone, 
 taking them literally, would have supposed them to mean. As 
 regards the prophecy " A little while and ye behold me no more and 
 again a little while and ye shall see me 4 ," he says that the disciples 
 were perplexed about it, and implies that they misunderstood it even 
 after Christ's further comment. The utterance to the Lord's mother, 
 "My hour is not yet come 5 ," and the prediction to Peter "Thou 
 
 1 ii- 19- 2 xi - "• 3 vi. 5. •* xvi. 16. 
 
 5 [2642 a] ii. 4. In 2230 it was said that this verse could present no doubt 
 about its meaning to "contemporary" Greeks. This limitation contemplated 
 Nonnus' interpretation of Christ's words to Mary tL dfioi nai <toI; which he 
 
 A. VI. 481 31 
 
[2642] TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS 
 
 shalt follow me hereafter 1 ," are not commented on, but the im- 
 pression left on the reader is that neither of these utterances is 
 supposed by the evangelist to have been understood at the time. 
 The second of these, in a slightly varied form (" Follow me "), occurs 
 again in a mysterious connexion later on, after the prediction " When 
 thou shalt grow old, thou shalt stretch out thy hands, and another 
 shall gird thee and carry thee whither thou wouldest not 2 ," to which 
 is added "This he said signifying by what manner of death he 
 should glorify God." But it seems doubtful whether the prediction 
 was understood at the time. Almost the last words of Christ uttered 
 to the multitude are "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will 
 draw all men unto me 3 ," and John adds expressly "This he said 
 signifying by what manner of death he was destined to die " — 
 namely, " lifted up " on the cross. No doubt, the evangelist included 
 (here and elsewhere) the notion of "exaltation," or "ascension." 
 
 paraphrases as ri fioi, yvvai, r)t uoi avrr/; Nonnus wrote in the fifth century, 
 and he desciibes Mary at Cana thus: — 
 
 'Es eVKairlv-qv 5k ko.1 avrr) 
 TrapdeviKT) Xpiffroio Be-qroKOS lkcto fxr\Tr\p, 
 axp&VTii) iraXd/jiri ya/xi-qs ipavovcra rpaire^s, 
 iraiooTOKOS <pvy6dep.vo$, del fiedeTrovaa Kopeit]". 
 
 It is probable that his translation of ri e/xol k. aoi was influenced by poetic and 
 theological feeling. 
 
 1 xiii. 36. 2 xxi. 18 — 19. 
 
 3 [26423] xii. 32—4. '■'■Lift tip" implies (1) Gen. xl. 13 "exalting," (2) ib. 19 
 "executing." Is it not possible that there may be some connexion between the 
 prediction that Christ would be "lifted up" and the prediction that He would 
 "give" His "flesh" for the world? Comp. Gen. xl. 17 — 19 where the baker 
 dreams that "the birds" eat bread from the baskets on his head and Joseph 
 explains it, "Pharaoh shall lift up thy head from off thee and shall hang thee on 
 a. tree and the birds shall eat thy flesh from off thee." Thus, such a saying as 
 " the crucified feeds many" would seem likely to be known to Jews from Jewish 
 sources apart from the Greek sayings quoted above (2211c), to which add 
 Artemid. iv. 49 "To fancy oneself crucified signifies glory and wealth: glory, 
 because the crucified is lifted higher [than others], wealth because he feeds many 
 birds (iroWovs Tpi<puv olwvovs)." The same writer applies the phrase "he feeds 
 many" to one condemned to fight with wild beasts in the arena, (ii. 54) "To 
 fight with wild beasts is [a] good [sign] for a poor man, for he will be able to feed 
 many (iroWovs yap ?£et Tpt<petv). For indeed the man condemned to fight thus 
 feeds the wild beasts from his own flesh (k. 7010 6 drjpioixaxCiv dwb tCiv ISiusv aapKwv 
 to. Orjpia rptipa)." Tptipw is used for feeding slaves in Pap. O.xyr. iii. 489, 
 11. 9, 17, and in the phrase "board and clothing" for apprentices, ib. iv. 725, 
 II. 15, 45. "Pasco" is applied to the feeding of slaves by their masters and 
 of crows by th<- slaves on the cross (Hor. A/, i. 16. 4* "non pasces in cruce 
 corvos,'" n-l eejuv. iii. 141, annot. Mayor). 
 
 482 
 
TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS [2644] 
 
 But the multitude apparently recognise neither of these meanings. 
 They reply " How sayest thou that the Son of man must be lifted 
 up? Who is this Son of man?" The Gospel leaves us under the 
 impression that all Christ's sayings were of the nature of " proverbs " 
 till the Holy Spirit came. The very last saying of all is recorded to 
 have given rise to a false impression about the disciple whom Jesus 
 loved — namely, that "he would not die 1 ." 
 
 § 2. The Sayings of the Disciples and of the Evangelist 
 
 [2643] Here there is perhaps only one saying of which it can be 
 distinctly said that the speaker meant one thing and unconsciously 
 predicted another, namely, the utterance of Peter, " Lord, 1 will lay 
 down my life for thy sake 2 ." Luke's version is, "I am ready to go 
 with thee to prison and to death 3 ." The latter was not true. The 
 former proved true, though not in the way anticipated by the speaker. 
 There is no double meaning in "Now speakest thou clearly 4 " — 
 uttered by the disciples to their Master at the very moment when 
 they had been warned that the time was yet to come when He 
 would cease to speak in " proverbs " — but there is an irony. As 
 regards the saying of Philip " We have found Jesus the son of 
 Joseph, [Jesus] of Nazareth 5 " — -if we were certain that John accepted 
 the tradition of the birth at Bethlehem there would be, here too, 
 a touch of gentle irony in representing Philip as thus deluded and as 
 nevertheless believing. But John's meaning may be that Philip's 
 view of facts on earth was not incompatible with belief that Jesus 
 was the incarnate Son of God from heaven. Another saying of 
 Philip is that "Two hundred pennyworth of bread" would not suffice 
 to give even "a little" to the Five Thousand 6 . This, in view of the 
 prevalence of inner mystical interpretations in this Gospel, may have 
 a double meaning : but in any case it will be found that double 
 meaning in the sayings of the disciples is not so frequent as in those 
 of non-believers (2645). 
 
 [2644] There is little of double meaning or irony in the comments 
 of the evangelist made in his own person. He prefers for the most 
 part to exhibit the Jews or Pilate as the mouthpieces of Providence 
 uttering condemnations on themselves or testifying to the Messiah ; 
 
 1 xxi. 23. - xiii. 37. 3 Lk. xxii. 33. 
 
 4 xvi. 29. 5 i. 45. 6 vi. 7. 
 
 483 31— 2 
 
[2644 (i)] TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS 
 
 or else to relate events in such a way as to suggest that while man 
 after the flesh struts on the stage in front and says "I have authority," 
 the hand of the real " authority," behind the curtain, directs all the 
 puppet's movements. But under the head of evangelistic irony we 
 may perhaps put down the statement that although many of the 
 Jews in Jerusalem, beholding Christ's signs, "trusted in his name," 
 Christ "did not trust himself to them 1 ." Later on, when he sums 
 up the cause of Christ's being rejected by the rulers, there is no 
 irony but merely grave condemnation in the words, " They loved the 
 glory of men rather than the glory of God"." 
 
 [2644 (i)] As regards the double meaning in \ix. 30 icXim? rrjv 
 K£c£aA>/V it has been maintained elsewhere that the natural meaning 
 is "rested the head," and that John intends, as the primary meaning 
 (1456), " laying His head to rest on the bosom of the Father." Since 
 that passage was written I have found the following in Origen's 
 Latin commentary on Matthew (xxvii. 50 d<fir}Kcv to Trvtvfx.a) " If we 
 have understood the meaning of ' bending the head' (inclinare caput) 
 ...let us be urgent so to keep our own lives that in our departure we 
 too may be able... to deliver up our spirit even as Jesus, who bent the 
 head and took His departure in the act of resting it as it were on the 
 lap of the Father ivho could cherish it and strengthen it in His bosom 
 (sicut Jesus, qui inclinavit caput et quasi supra Patris gremium illud 
 repausans exiit, qui poterat illud in sinu suo favere et confortare)." 
 And he proceeds to repeat " inclinasse caput super gremium Patris," 
 and " inclinare caput super gremium Dei." 
 
 § 3. The Savings of Others 
 
 [2645] Caiaphas is expressly asserted to have said, "It is ex- 
 pedient for you that one man should die for the people," under the 
 influence of the spirit of prophecy 3 , because Jesus "was destined to 
 die for the nation, and not for the nation only but also that he might 
 gather together into one the children of God that were scattered 
 abroad." Similarly unconscious utterance of divine truth by un- 
 worthy and sinful agents is implied, though not stated, about other 
 sayings indicating the sovereignty of Jesus and the destruction of 
 the Jews. Thus Pilate writes the title " King of the Jews." The 
 chief priests — who are uniquely called on this occasion "chief priests 
 
 ' ii. 23 — 4. - \ii. 45. a xi. 50 — 1. 
 
 4S4 
 
TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS [2646] 
 
 of the Jews 1 " — say, "Write not ' King of the Jews'" But Pilate 
 replies, " What I have written, I have written." Elsewhere the 
 Pharisees predict, in effect, the conversion of the world to Christ, 
 " Behold, the world hath gone after him 2 ." And, to one writing 
 thirty years after the fall of Jerusalem, the following, in spite of the 
 conditional clause, would read like an unconscious prophecy, " If we 
 let him alone thus, all will believe in him, and the Romans will come 
 and take azvay both our place and our nation 3 ." In the days of the 
 descendants of Gideon, the trees of the field chose the bramble to 
 be their king, and fire was to come out from the bramble upon 
 them 4 ; so, in the Fourth Gospel, the Jews cried, " We have no king 
 but Caesar 5 ," and fire came out from Caesar to destroy their city. 
 Other ironies may probably be found in Pilate's exhibition of " the 
 [ideal] man" with the saying, "Behold the man 6 !" and in the 
 sayings of the multitude, " Surely he will not come up to the feast," 
 " Who is this Son of man ? " " Will he go to the dispersion of the 
 Greeks and teach the Greeks 7 ?" As to Pilate, the whole of the 
 Dialogue between him and Christ inside the Praetorium, and between 
 Pilate and the Jews outside it, reads like an ironical drama on the 
 subject of " False Authority, or the Ruler that is a Slave." But on 
 this subject enough has been said elsewhere (1562 — 94) to illustrate 
 the Johannine irony latent in Pilate's words, " I have authority to 
 release thee and I have authority to crucify thee 8 ." 
 
 § 4. Events 
 
 [2646] On two occasions Christ "was hidden" from the Jews. 
 In both, a literal meaning is intended, but a spiritual meaning also 
 is almost certainly included. In both cases apparently the " hiding" 
 takes place in the Temple 9 , and in the context of both there are 
 mentions of "light" and "blindness" which imply that the Shechinah 
 is being described as withdrawn first for a time, then finally. The 
 
 1 [2645«] xix. 21. "Chief priests" occurs in Jn nine times elsewhere, but 
 never with this addition. 
 
 2 xii. 19. 3 xi. 48. 4 Judg. ix. 14 — 15. 
 5 xix. 15. B xix. 5. 
 
 7 xi. 50, xii. 34, vii. 35. 8 xix. 10. 
 
 9 viii. 59, xii. 36. The Temple is not actually mentioned in xii. 36, but it 
 follows the entrance into Jerusalem which is connected by the Synoptists with the 
 entrance into the Temple. 
 
 485 
 
[2647] TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS 
 
 Jews, it is said, came up to the passover — the passover of the 
 crucifixion — " to purify themselves* " : at the same time they discuss 
 the question of Christ's venturing to come up to the Feast, and decide 
 that He will "surely not come." They speak as spectators, neither 
 for, nor against, Christ. But this mention of " purifying'" prepares 
 the way for the hypocrisy of their rulers, who, soon afterwards, 
 "defile themselves" (as Matthew's Gospel implies 2 ) by letting slander 
 "go forth out of their mouth" ("if this man were not an evil-doer we 
 should not have delivered him up unto thee 3 ") and yet "entered 
 not into the palace that they might not be defiled^." 
 
 [2647] Of a different kind are certain arrangements and connexions 
 of events that indicate a recognition of the mysterious ways in which 
 the circle of things comes round, and history repeats itself, yet with 
 the strangest vicissitudes 5 . Thus it is implied (2624) that the public 
 life of Christ opens with a six days' work preparing the way for the 
 Feast at Cana when the wine was changed to water, and that it closes 
 with a six days' work preparing the way for the Passover, the sacrifice 
 of the Paschal Lamb, whence issued the water and the blood. The 
 typical meaning of the Feast at Cana is indicated by the words " my 
 hour is not yet come" in the former narrative, compared with the 
 words "the hour is come" which precede the latter 6 . Again, in 
 summing up Christ's work before the seventh and greatest " sign " 
 (the raising of Lazarus) it is said, " He went away again beyond 
 Jordan into the place where John was at the first baptizing... and they 
 said, 'John indeed did no sign, but all things whatsoever John spake 
 of this man were true 7 . ' " 
 
 [2648] This last passage represents Jesus — after being rejected 
 by the Jews, who try to stone Him — as retreating, so to speak, before 
 achieving His crowning victory : and He goes back " into the place 
 where John was at the first baptizing," i.e. where the Gospel began. 
 This place the Fourth Gospel — alone of the Gospels — has previously 
 described by name, "Bethany beyond Jordan*" ; and now, after 
 mentioning this retirement, it proceeds to describe a summons to 
 
 1 xi. 55. - Mi. w. 1 r, 18. 
 
 •' xviii. 30. 4 xviii. 28. 
 
 '■' I'hilo i. 298 xopei/« yap &v kvkXuj X670S 6 deios, 6v oi ttoWol tuiv avOpunroiv 
 ovon&i'ovai tOxv"- 
 
 fi ii. 4, xvii. 1. 7 x. 40 — 42, see 2649 (i). 
 
 8 i. 28. 
 
 4< S(, 
 
TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS [2649] 
 
 another " Bethany " (" a certain man was sick, Lazarus of Bethany "). 
 To this Bethany, which might be called " Bethany on this side 
 Jordan* Jesus now journeys and raises Lazarus from the dead. The 
 third and last mention of this "Bethany this side Jordan" is the 
 following : " Jesus therefore, six days before the Passover, came to 
 Bethany 1 ." At the first Bethany He was baptized for the work of 
 His life on earth : at the second Bethany He is described as being 
 anointed for His death and sacrifice. 
 
 [2649] Among minor interesting repetitions is the twofold use of 
 e/A^8Aei//as, where John the Baptist is said to have "looked intently 
 on Jesus " before pronouncing Him to be the Lamb of God, and, a 
 few verses afterwards, Jesus "looked intently" on "Simon son of 
 John " before saying, "Thou shalt be Cephas," i.e. Peter or Stone-. 
 Perhaps the evangelist regarded both the Baptist and the Messiah as 
 perceiving by divine intuition what was in those whom they severally 
 " looked on." Another interesting repetition (with variation) occurs 
 in the first words of Jesus as Preacher of the Gospel and in His first 
 words after He has risen from the dead. To Andrew and Andrew's 
 nameless companion the Lord says, " What seek ye* ? " After the life 
 of the incarnate Son is closed on earth, and when the disciples have 
 gained through sorrow and tears new insight into what that life has 
 been, the voice of the risen Saviour utters, as its first words, to Mary, 
 " Why weepest thou? Whom seekest thou 4 ?" There are passages 
 in O.T. and Philo that indicate how this question might be tra- 
 ditionally regarded as one of mystical meaning 5 . 
 
 1 Xll. I. 
 
 2 [2649 a] i. 36, 42. Comp. Judg. vi. 14 "and the Lord looked on him 
 (Gideon)," LXX eirearpe^ev, "turned," al. exempl. eTrejSXeipev, "looked on" — 
 whereby Gideon is endowed with strength ("Go, in this thy strength"). So in 
 Lk. xxii. 61 "the Lord turned and looked on Peter (arpcMpeis 6 Kvpios ev£fi\e\pev t<$ 
 llerpy)." Lk. and Jn are the only two evangelists that describe Jesus as "looking 
 intently on Peter." Mk x. 27, Mt. xix. 26, use i/xpX. of Christ "looking intently" 
 on the discouraged disciples; in the same context, however, Mk x. 21 uses it of 
 Christ looking on the rich young man, who "went away sorrowing" (1744 i — xi). 
 
 3 i. 38. 4 xx. 15. 
 
 5 [2649/;] Almost the first use of f^rew in LXX (the only earlier one being 
 Gen. xix. 11 "seeking the door") is the question of the unnamed man 
 (Gen. xxx vii. 15 "a certain man") to the wandering Joseph " What seekest thou?" 
 Philo (i. 196) regards Joseph as the type of the wandering soul to whom the ideal 
 Man (6 7rpos a\r\dzi<xv avdpwiros) — who dwells in our hearts — speaks as a Con- 
 victer (£\eyx o,i ) asking us what we regard as the object of our life. By this 
 '"man" — whom the Tar<rum calls the Man of God or Gabriel — Philo means the 
 
 487 
 
[2649 (i)] TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS 
 
 [2649 (i)] Concerning the retirement beyond Jordan, x. 40 kou 
 a.Trr}\6ei> ird\tv l Tripav rov 'lop&dvov, Alford refers to i. 28, but Westcott 
 says "the reference is probably to some recent and unrecorded visit. 
 The events of i. 28 are too remote." Both seem to assume that 
 7raA.11/means "again." But irdXiv means (1) "back" locally, as well as 
 (2) "again'" temporally 2 , and John frequently has (1) with verbs of 
 
 Logos. So here the incarnate Logos puts to the two companions the question, 
 " What seek ye?" The probability of a mystical meaning is increased by the 
 occurrence, in the context (i. 38), of the phrase "Come and ye shall see" (1598). 
 
 [2649 r] In Genesis, the answer of Joseph to the "man" is "I seek my 
 brothers," and the "man" guides him so that he may find them. So, concerning 
 the two companions, it is said that "Andrew first findeth his own brother" and it is 
 implied that Andrew's companion does the same. 
 
 [2649 a'] It is worth noting (1) that Elenchos, the Convicter, is supposed by 
 Thilo to put this question to every wandering soul, who may answer it turongly 
 cr rightly, and (2) that the question (xviii. 4, 7) " Whom seek ye?" is put — in 
 a very different sense and in very different circumstances — to Judas and his 
 companions when arresting Jesus. These men are quite ready with an answer. 
 They are the "darkness," in one sense apprehending the light, but in another 
 sense "not apprehending it." They want "Jesus of Nazareth." The answer 
 to this is I AM, which causes them to "fall to the ground." Then, when they 
 persist in their hostility, they are allowed to "apprehend" the Logos by binding 
 Him and leading Him away as a prisoner. 
 
 [2649 e] Origen (Huet ii. 83 c — d) points out that the question addressed to 
 Christ " Where abidest thou?" implies that they " long to behold the habitation of 
 the Son of God" and that their "seeking" implies that they will '■'■find." To the 
 two companions Christ does not say at once where He "abides," but only, "Come, 
 and ye shall see." Elsewhere Christ says (2263 e—f), "The slave abideth not in 
 the house for ever, the Son abideth [in the house~\for c;er" meaning in the home, or 
 bosom of the Father. In Luke, Jesus (in the days of His youth) says (Lk. ii. 49) 
 "Wist ye not that I must needs be in my Father s [abiding-place^" If it be 
 admitted that ''Come and ye shall see!" means, in its inner sense, "Come unto 
 me and ye shall experience the peace of those at home with God," then there is 
 a parallelism between this promise and the fuller revelation to Mary Magdalene 
 about that home: xx. 17 "Go unto my brethren and say to them, I ascend unto my 
 Father and your Father and my God and your God." 
 
 1 [2649 (i) a] SS and e omit 7rd\tj'. So does Chrys., in quoting; but he 
 paraphrases it as avaxupti and discusses it as being a retreat. Nonnus, exd^ero, 
 om. tt&Xiv. Perhaps SS and e were influenced by the notion that ird\iv must 
 mean "a second time" and must imply a reference to a recent visit. 
 
 - [2649 (i) b\ See Steph. (87 b) quoting Aristarchus as to Homer's use, To t&\iv 
 ovk (cttlv (K 5ei>Ttpov cos 17/uets, d\X' avri rod Zixirakiv tpu, evavriuis, ami giving 
 copious instances of both uses, and of TraXiv A0e<V= " redire." He also quotes 
 a schol. on //. ii. 276 rd 5e 7rd\ti', eis roviriaw rd 8Z aims xP 01 ' iK b''> f£ varepov. 
 Comp. 1 Jn ii. 8 iraXtv ivroXrjv Kaiv-qv ypa<pw, i.e. "on the other hand." 
 
 488 
 
TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS [2649(h)] 
 
 motion. Luke scarcely ever uses 7raA.1v 1 . Matthew uses it 
 rarely in comparison with Mark, John more frequently than either-. 
 Matthew and Luke frequently deviate from Mark's phrases with 
 7raAiv :i . One reason may have been that, when used with verbs of 
 motion, irdkiv is ambiguous, since it may mean (1) " coming back to 
 one's home, or to a place recently left," (2) " coming a second time to 
 a strange city." Another reason may have been that the Greek 
 word sometimes represented a Semitic original that might have 
 various meanings 4 . At all events in xviii. 33 elarjXOev ovv irdXiv does 
 not mean "entered a second time'" (for no previous entry has been 
 mentioned): but, "went back" into the palace, comp. xx. 10 "went 
 back (a.Trr}\0ov 7raA.1v) to their homes " : and in the present passage 
 John seems to shew that he means "back" by adding "to the 
 place where John was at the first baptizing," as if to say that the 
 Saviour, before working His greatest sign, went back to the place 
 where He had begun the Gospel. These passages make it probable 
 that others should be similarly translated, e.g. iv. 3 "went away back 
 (aTrijXOev Tra'Aiv) to Galilee," iv. 46 "he came back therefore (r/kdev ovv 
 7raA.1v) to Cana of Galilee" (i.e. on the eve of working a new "sign " 
 He came back to the place where He had worked His old and first 
 "sign"), vi. 15 "he retreated (lit.) back (av6xupv°~ ev Ta'Aiv) to the 
 mountain." He had not "retreated" before; He had "sat" there; 
 now He retires "back" to the mountain. 
 
 [2649 (ii)] UdXiv coming at the beginning of a sentence, without 
 any mention of motion in the preceding sentence, naturally means 
 " again " in the sense of " a second time." But -koXiv with a verb of 
 motion may mean either "a second time" (as in "he came to London 
 
 1 [2649 (i)<r] Only thrice, Lk. xiii. 20, xxiii. 20, and vi. 43 ovde ira\iv devdpov 
 ffa-rrpov, " nor, on the other hand, does a bad tree..." — not a freq. use of irdXiv. If 
 this was derived from a Grreco- Hebraic document, we should suspect that the 
 original was ttclv, "not any tree." See the parall. Mt. vii. 17 — 19. 
 
 2 [2649 (i)d] Mk about 27 times, Mt. about 16, Jn about 40. 
 
 :i [2649 [i)e] Mk ii. 1, Mt. ix. 1, Lk. v. 17; Mk ii. 13, Mt. ix. 9, Lk. v. 27; 
 Mk iii. 1, Mt. xii. 9, Lk. vi. 6; Mk iii. 20, Mt. xii. 22, Lk. xi. 14. All these 
 Lk. -parallels are greatly modified by D, which inserts ird\iv in Lk. v. 27, vi. 6. 
 
 4 [2649 (i)/] In the canonical books of LXX, ird\iv may be roughly regarded 
 as an experimental way of rendering the Heb. "/ \re\turn and do," i.e. 'V do 
 again," — a rendering rare in later books. It occurs Gen. (10), Ex. (4), Lev. (1), 
 Num. (1), Deut. (1), Josh. (1), Judg. (4), never in S. or K. and only once in 
 Chron. That it is characteristic of a free Gk. transl. is shewn by the fact that it 
 occurs (5) in 1 Esdr., (o) in Ezra, and (10) in Job. The freq. use of irdXiv is one 
 of many characteristics common to Genesis and Mark. 
 
 4 3 9 
 
[2649 (in)] TWOFOLD MEANINGS AND EVENTS 
 
 again") or "back" (as in "turn again, Whittington "). In John, the 
 general rule is that 7raAtv after a verb of motion means "back," hut 
 irakiv hefore a verb of motion may mean either "back" or "again" 
 and the meaning depends on the preceding context. In xiv. 3, where 
 Christ has previously said, " If I go [away]," 7raA.1v ep^ofxat, coming in 
 the middle of a sentence, is best rendered " I come back." So, too, 
 
 in xvi. 28 i$r}X8ov (K t. Trarpo; k. iXr/XvOa £ts r. koct/ulov 7rdA<.v de£i?7//.i 
 
 t. Kooyxoj/..., though 7raA.1i' comes at the beginning of a clause, the 
 meaning is not " a second time I leave the world," but " rererse/v, or 
 returning back, I leave the world," referring to what precedes. In 
 XI. 7 — 8 uyuifj-iv €19 TTjv I. 7raAir...7ra'Aiv VTrdyeis eKei ; the meaning of 
 the first TraX.iv seems to be "back-again"; and in the reply, the 
 second rrdXiv may have a temporal meaning, the local adverb being 
 €K€i emphatic : "A second time dost thou go there (1527)?" In the 
 description of Pilate's going to and fro between Jesus in the palace 
 and the Jews outside, it has been shewn above that 71-dAiv at least 
 once means "back," but once it may mean "a second time," xviii. 33 
 foil. do-rjXOev ovv irdXiv {back)... (38) 7raAiv i^rjXOev (a seco?id time went 
 out)...(xix. 4) (i^rjXdw irdXiv 2£ci>) went out again outside [or, went 
 out back to the Jews outside]... (9) tlar}X$ev eis to tt. ttuXlv (went into 
 the palace back again, or again)." 
 
 [2649 (iii)] In xiii. 12 (W.H.) ore ovv evi<//ei/...Kai eAa/3ei' r. l/xdna 
 avrov Kal r di/«7rco-ei', irdXiv 1 eiirev avTOL<;, the punctuation of W.H. txt 
 would connect irdXiv with elvrev, "said to them a second time." But 
 W.H. marg. ave-rrerrev TrdXiv "lay down in his place again" is far more 
 in accordance with Johannine usage and is probably supported by 
 Origen (ad loc. to o-xvt' a T0V Senrvovvros dvaXaftwv, "resuming the 
 appearance of one at a meal "), by Chrysostom (dveXafie rd ifxaria 
 
 avrov kcll KaTexXlOr]), and by Nonnus (7raAu'oporos £Ous evSvve ^irwras 
 Kai 7raAa/u7ys dyKtuva TraAiroYi'-^TOV epciaas. . .€i7rei'. . .). This punctuation 
 
 is also supported by a and b (e and/ leave the connexion doubtful). 
 
 490 
 
APPENDIX II 
 
 READINGS OF CODEX VATICANUS 
 NOT ADOPTED BY WESTCOTT AND HORT 
 
 [2650] Where W.H. deviate from B, the following list reproduces 
 B's text 1 . Adjacent to each reading of B is placed W.H.'s text in 
 round brackets together with W.H.'s signs ( r n and [ ]) of doubtful 
 readings. Where readings agreeing with B are placed by W.H. at 
 the foot of their page, the fact is indicated by " marg. as B." The 
 context is given in some cases rather fully, because it often supplies 
 manifest evidence as to the reasons for W.H.'s deviation. For 
 example, the reader will soon discover that the scribe's error of 
 repeating c twice, or of inserting o after c, or after e, occurs so often 
 as to make him in some cases an unsafe guide as to the article. The 
 list was compiled from Tischendorf's edition of B (Leipsic, 1867). 
 
 [2651] Since the compilation, I have compared Tischendorf's 
 edition, in a few instances, with Danesi's photograph of B. The 
 results indicate some apparent errors in the text (or omissions in the 
 notes) of the former, given below. It must be premised that the 
 original writing of B has been coarsely inked over by a subsequent 
 scribe, who has sometimes altered the text. For example, in i. 18, the 
 photograph shews eoo at the end of a line as part of eoopAKeN, but the 
 oo shews signs of having been originally 0, and Tischendorf prints 
 eopAKeN and calls attention to the 00 as a correction. This he also 
 does elsewhere, not only in ix. 37 where 00 is written above o, but in 
 cases where (occasionally) the correction, if it exists, is not visible to 
 
 1 [2650 a] The list does not give all the peculiarities of B's spelling 
 rejected by W.H., e.g. the frequent use of ei for long ' — much more rarely (2654/') 
 for short I — nor insertions or omissions of -n ephelkustikon. But it gives B's 
 abbreviations, Tc (forT^cous), §c (for 8e6s), i<c (for /cvpios), \c (for X/kotos). 
 
 491 
 
[2652] READINGS OF CODEX VATICANUS 
 
 a non-expert. This being the case, readers of Tischendorf and of 
 the photograph naturally assume that the former will either reproduce 
 in his pages the exact text of the latter with all its errors or else, in 
 his notes, will call attention to the reading shewn by the photo- 
 graphic text as a correction of the original text. We are all the 
 more entitled to expect this because Tischendorf, as a rule, agrees 
 exactly with the photograph even where the text contains a palpable 
 error, as in Jn v. 7 npoc for npo and Mk vi. 48 nepiTTANTooN for 
 rrepinATooN. 
 
 [2652] In these circumstances I have thought it worth while to 
 call attention to the following discrepancies between the photograph 
 and Tischendorf, as to which Tischendorf is silent. I have included 
 cases where the photograph shews a correction above the line, e.g. 
 BACiAeyei with c above, printed by Tischendorf fiacnXevo- ei without 
 note. Probably Tischendorf has commented on these and other 
 differences elsewhere, but it is important to the possessor of the 
 edition of Tischendorf above described that he should be aware of 
 its deficiencies. The omission of c before e, as in BACiAeycei, is a 
 common error of B, illustrating the tendency of the scribe to drop, 
 or repeat, such letters as 0, c, G, and e, as in Mk vi. 22 where 
 Tischendorf rightly gives B's error in his text eieAGoycHC, adding, in 
 a note, that the corrector has changed it to eiceAGoycHC This bears 
 upon the evidence of B in readings where the question turns on the 
 insertion or omission of the article, o, in juxtaposition with similar 
 letters. There may be other deviations in Tischendorf. These are 
 merely what came under my notice in examining a few passages in 
 the Fourth Gospel. 
 [2653] Tischendorf Photograph 
 
 i. 45 o irpo<f>r]Tat OinpO(pHTAI 
 
 c 
 i. 49 <jv fiacriXeva- ei cyBAClAeyei 
 
 iii. 27 Xa/x/3ai'€iv AamBainpin 
 
 v. 15 avOpwTroa ANGptonoo 
 
 v. 35 ayaWuMrOyrou ArAAAlAGHNAI 
 
 v '- x 5' ef>x e(T 8' u epxecGe 
 
 viii. 39 e-rrouiTe 6 noi6IT6 (2078 — 9) 
 
 1 [ 2653,/] Tisch. corrects this error in a note, [ntrod. p. xli. "Alfordus 
 testatur epx^ffOe pro epxeaOai, id quod 110s fugit." 
 
 492 
 
NOT ADOPTED BY WESTCOTT AND HORT [2654] 
 
 TlSCHENDORF 
 ix. 2 f] ot yoveto" 
 
 ix. 7 epfxrjvtveTai 
 X. 6 1 Ttra 7/ 
 
 xii. 2 7 8 TTOLTep . . . TTdTCp 
 
 xii. 43 vTTt.p 
 xviii. 1 7 ow tod 
 
 xix. 31 eiret 7rapao-Keu7? 
 xx. 20 TOV IV 
 
 Photograph 
 
 HOIOIfONeiC 
 Al 
 
 epMHNeyeTe 
 
 TINAHN 
 TTATep...TTATHp 
 
 unep 
 
 N 
 
 oyToa 
 enmApACKeyH 
 
 TONKN 
 
 § 3. Zw/ 1 of Readings 
 
 [2654] 2 Chap. i. 4 to ^ws Kai (f. to <pa>s twv dv^pw7rwc Kat) T 
 9 aA.?/#eu'Ov 3 (f. aAriflivdv), 12 eAa/3av (f. ekaftov), 13 av6po)Tra)v 
 (f. aipaTtov), ouSe ek 6e\r]p.a.TO<; trap/cos aAA 4 (f. ouSe e*c 0. o - . ou8e e/c 
 PeA^paTOS dvSpds dAA ), cyei'rjOrjcrav (f. iyevinjOrjaav), 14 ^aptros aAry^eias 
 (f. ^. /cat d.), 18 copaKev (Tisch.) (f. eojpa/<ev), 2 1 cru ouv ti HAcias ei 
 (f. Ti r ouv; [o"u] 'HXeias' el;, marg. Ti ovv otj; 'HAeias el;), 23 e<pei 
 (Tisch.) (f. €(£17), 27 ovk eipi cyw aftos (f. d. €. [«'yw] dfios), 35 eioTT/Kei 
 (f. lo-TT^Ket), 41 evpeaKei (f. evpio-Kti), 48 7rpo tou (rat (f. 7r. t. ere). 
 
 Chap, ii. 1 it) Tpnrj -q/jcepa (f. T77 r yjfxipa rfj rpirg 1 , marg. as B), 
 6 Tpi? (f. rpets), 17 ecrnv ytypappevov (f. yeyp. co-rtv), 19 Kat Tpicrtv 
 
 1 [2653$] Tisch. has no footnote, but says in Introd. p. xii. "rtw 77 ut M 2 ; 
 male M 1 rtca jjv." The photograph has clearly TINAHN. 
 
 2 [2654a] Om. = "omits"; f. = "for," *.£-. "e\a.pav (f. AapV)" means that B 
 has e\a(3ai> for W. H. e\a/3oe. This Appendix does not, as a rule, include the 
 corrections of B mentioned by Tisch. as made by subsequent scribes. In some 
 cases where Tisch. has been found to differ from the photograph and may be 
 presumed to have differed because he thought he detected the original lettering 
 under the coarse "inking over" of a secondary scribe, "Tisch." is inserted to 
 indicate the fact. 
 
 3 [2654$] 'A\r)dt.i>6s is spelt without e always later on (iv. 23, 37, vi. 32 etc.). 
 Conversely, Xik65t?,uos occurs in iii. 1, but Nei/coSr/jUos in iii. 4, 9, vii. 50, xix. 39. 
 
 4 [2654 c] Alford explains this omission by " homoeotel." But if the eye of the 
 copyist had passed from the end of the first deX-rj/j-aros to the end of the second, 
 overlooking the intervening words, he would have written oi»5e ck 6e\r])j.aTos 
 avdpos a\\. Homoeoteleuton, therefore, does not explain the omission. And 
 the change (in the same sentence) of at/jLaruv to avdpwiruv indicates that other 
 than mere transcriptional causes have been at work. 
 
 493 
 
[2655] READINGS OF CODEX VATICANUS 
 
 rypepais (f. kcu [<=V] rp. rjp.), 23 cv toj 7ra<r^a ttj eopTT/ 1 (f. ev t. 7racr^a eV 
 tt? I.). 
 
 Chap. iii. 4 Acyci 7rpos auroj/ Ncik. (f. A. Trp. a. [6] N.), 5 aireKpLOr] 
 o is (f. a. [6] T770-.), 8 aAAa ovk (f. dAA' ovk), 23 ?ii/ S« Kat o Ia>. (f. 97V Se 
 /cat [6] Iw.), 27 ouSc €1/ av (f. oiioec eaV), 28 enrov cyw ovk etfju eyto o vs 
 (f. ei7roi' [eyw] Ovk i. i. 6 \P-)> 34 ov 7 a P €/< (J-tTpov SiSwaiv' 2 (f. ou y. €k 
 p.. 8. to Trvevfxa). 
 
 [2655] Chap. iv. I is TrAeiovas p.a#?iTas...Kai /3a— n£ei IwaiTis 
 
 (f. T770-. 7tA. p.a# /3a?rTi£ei [?/] 'Iioai'Tis" 1 ), 3 a-n~i)\6ei' eis ttiv I\ :! 
 
 (f. d7r7/A#ei' 7raAti/ €is r. I\), 5 o e8(UKei' Ia/cco/3 tw Iwarjcf) (f. o IS, 'I. [tw] 
 I.), 6 oirrw €7rt (f. ovtws €7rt), 9 ou yap o-w^pwi'Tat IouSaiois 4 2apaperrais 
 (f. [01) yap cr. 'IouSaioi 2.]), 1 5 p-riSe Sicp^opai (f. p,. Siep^wpai), 17 cittcv 
 aurw (f. c. [aiircp]), 40 avvr]X0ov (Tisch.) 5 ovv 7rpos aurov 01 2. rjpoiTwv 
 (f. (Js ovv rjXOov 7rpos airj-ov 01 2. 77.), 42 cAeyov (f. cAeyov [on]), -njv 
 AaAiav don (f. tt]v r uyjv AaAiav 1 , marg. as B), 46 rjXOev ovv 7raXiv ev 
 Kava t??s r. (f. i^Af?. ow 7r. cis ttjv K. tt/s I\), 51 Aeyovrais 6 (f. -res), 
 52 T7/i' tapav tKtLViqv (f. t. wpav 7rap' avTwv), enrov (f. ei7rai/), wpav 
 €f38op.r]v acf>r}Kev avTfjv 7 o 7rup€ros (f. ojpai' €. a. atToi' 6 7r.), 54 tovto Se 
 7raAu/ (f. touto [Sej 77-.). 
 
 Chap. v. 2 Bvi&raiSa (f. r BTi#£a#d 1 , marg. as B), 5 rpiaKoi'Ta oktw 
 (f. Tp. [*ai] oktoj), 7 7rpos 8 epou (f. ?rpo ip,ov), 14 aurov 9 is (f. a. [6] 
 'Ir/o-.), 15 aj/r?yyeiAev (f. r elTrev~^, marg. as B), 19 aireKpaaTO ovv kw 
 
 1 [2654 </] Comp. vi. 4 (B) to wacrxo- V eoprr] twv Iov5at.wi> which might mean 
 "the passover, [that is to say, not the Paschal offering but] the feast so called." 
 If that is the meaning of the scribe in ii. 23, tt? eoprrj is appositional, not 
 temporal, dative. But see 2715 c. 
 
 ■ In iii. 34, after diowaiv, a space is left sufficient for more than one letter, and 
 the margin adds roirva. The next words are owarr^p. 
 
 :i B marg. ins. TraAie (see 2635 (i)). 
 
 4 B has repeated the first c of c&M&peiTAic as the last c of toyA&ioiC 
 (sec 26521. 
 
 ' The phot, shews oynhA6on (with small superlinear 00c before oyN and 
 cyN after it), which might easily be confused witli cynhAGon. See Tisch. 
 Introd. p. xl. 
 
 8 ( omp. i. 4.S aat. for <re (where, however, <rai comes just above another <rai and 
 might have been copied from the latter) and vi. 24. 
 
 7 Did the scribe take avrrjv as agreeing witli upav "the seventh hour 
 precisely"? 
 
 H npoc arises from the corrupt addition of c between the two similar letters O 
 and e. In iv. 6 1: was omitted through the juxtaposition of e. 
 
 8 \vt6v coming at the end of a line is written AyTO, and may have 
 been omitted after it owing to the identity of the two letters. 
 
 494 
 
NOT ADOPTED BY WESTCOTT AND HORT [2656] 
 
 eXeyev (f. oareKp. ovv [6 'I^crows] k. eXeyev), 35 a.ya\kiaa6r}vai l (Tisch.) 
 (f. ayaXXiadrjvai), 44 tou fjiovov ov 2 (f. T. /xovou [#eoS] ov), 45 wtu' o 
 KaTr/yopwv upcov Trpos toi/ irarepa 3 Mwucn/s (f. ecr-riv 6 k. v/xdJv M.), 
 47 7rt(TTeueTe 4 (f. r 7rio-T€do-€T€ n , marg. as B). 
 
 12656] Chap. vi. 12 7repio-fxeuovTa (t. TrepuxcrfiKravTa), 15 €p;(£o-#e 
 (2653 rt) (f. epxeadat), 17 ou7rw 7rpos aurous eXrjXvdei o Is (f. ou7rw eA. r 7r. 
 a. d. 'Ivycr.^ marg. ou7ra> iX. Tt/o\ 7r. avTov's), 1 9 w 5 o-TaSious (f. tos ctt.), 
 2 2 7rcpa' ; rr/s (f. Trepav tt/s), 23 €« TT7S 7 TiySepiaSos (f. ex T.), 24 £171-0 wtcus 11 
 (f. ^to?vt€s), 25 Kai pvy 9 evpovres clvtov ircpav tyjs 8aXacr(rr)<; (f. »cai 
 cupdi'Tes a. 7T. t. #. ), 30 tva ei8wp.ev (f. t'ra <.'btop,ev), 36 ewpaKare pt 
 (f. e. [p«]), 43 pera 10 aAA.77A.wi' (f. per' dAA^Xwi/), 44 7rpos n ep€ (f. r 7rpds 
 pV, marg. as B), 46 topaKe (Tisch.) (2651) (f. ew'pa/cct/), 7rapa 0v V2 
 (f. 77. [rot)] 6(.ov), eopa/cei' (Tisch.) (f. ewpa/cev), 50 cpayr] Kai p.r\ 
 a.Tro6vr)<TK7) hi (f. <£. *c. p. r aTroOdvr] , marg. as B), 5 1 £770-6701 ets (f. £,7]<rei 
 ets), 52 TT/f aapKa avrov cpayeiv (f. t. cr. [auTOi>] </>.), 53 aurots is 14 
 (f. a. [d] 'I770-.), <payr]Tai (f. cpayijre), 60 €i7rov (f. €t7rai/), 64 aAA €crtv 
 (f. aAAa etcrtv). 
 
 I [2655 a] The phot, clearly shews &r&AAlc\0HN7M. Codex L has dya\- 
 Xiatrdrjvai., which may have arisen from a supposed analogy in dyaWidadwaav 
 (freq. in LXX). But dyaWiaadTJpai. belongs of right to dyctXXidfw, which means 
 (Steph.) "I reproach or revile." Clem. Alex. 815 quotes Ps. cxviii. 24 (LXX 
 dya\\Laad)/j.e0a) dyaWiaduJuev. 
 
 - Qeov being written 6y might be inserted by some mss. and omitted by others, 
 between -oy and oy- (See also 1895 and 2664.) 
 
 :) [2655 1$] Perh. rep. by B from what precedes (firj 8oKe?T€ iin e'yw Karyiyoprjau} 
 vfiQiv 7T. tov warepa). SS omits tt. t. it. in both clauses. 
 
 4 The variation might arise from c inserted or omitted before e. 
 
 5 C is dropped before C. 
 
 II [2656 a] nepAT in a MS. that used abbreviations might be easily copied 
 as nep&T in a ms. that did not use them. Conversely (2651) in Mk vi. 48 
 B has rrepiTT&NTOoN for nepin^TooN. 
 
 7 This is the first mention of Tiberias. On the article with names, see 1967 foil. 
 
 8 See above, i. 48, iv. 51. 
 
 9 [2656/5] Perhaps the scribe meant "and because they had not found him on 
 the east side of the sea, they now ask him how he had come from the east to the 
 west." In xv. 7, yJ] is ins. where it is very difficult to make sense of it 
 (see 2660.4). 
 
 10 Comp. iii. 8 dXXd ovk. 
 
 11 B has c and e together. 
 
 12 An error might arise from the similarity of TOY an ^ ©Y- 
 
 13 On this, see 2530. 
 
 14 [2656 6] B has &Y"TOic7c, where o might easily have been dropped, or 
 inserted. 
 
 495 
 
[2657] READINGS OF CODEX VATICANUS 
 
 Chap. vii. I 7re/3i£7raT£i is (f. it. [d] 'Ir^o-.), 3 aov ra epya a 7roici9 
 (f. r [crov] to. epya? a 7roicis, marg. to. epya aov a ttoicis), 4 £>7T€i at,ro ' cv/ 
 7rapT]ata aval (f. C^tci r avrds n (marg. atiro) e'v irappiqaia civai), 6 irapecrTLV 2 
 croipos (f. cittiv croiyaos), 12 aAAoi 8c (f. aAAoi [8c]), 22 odk oti (f. ov'X 
 on), kcu crafiflaToy (f. k. [cv] 3 aafifiaTU)), 23 a TTf.ptrop.-qv \ap.f3ai>ei o 4 
 av6pw7To<; (f. ci 7r. A. [d] av#pu>7ros), ^oXarai 5 (f. ^oAStc), 28 8i8ao-Kwv o 
 is (f. 8. [d] 'Itjo-.), 37 ciottikci 6 (f. iott/kci), 7rpos cpc (f. -rrpos pe), 38 ct 7 
 cp.e (f. cis c/xe), 39 tov 7rvcv/xaTos o (f. t. 77. r au , marg. o), oi>7rw yap iqv 
 7ri'(vp.a ayiov 8c§opcvov (f. d. y. i?v 7ri'ci)/xa), 40 cAcyov otl (f. c. [ort]), 
 42 ovk t] (f. ovx v)' 43 ^X^" (f- a X^ (r r la )y 47 UTCKp. ovv 01 4>. (f. a-rreKp. 
 ovv [at>Tois] 01 4>.). 
 
 [2657] Chap. viil. 12 cXaX?;o-cv is (f. e. [d] 'I.), 14 77 p.aprvpia p.ov 
 a\r)6r)<; ecrriv (f. r aA. e. 77 p.. p-ov 1 , marg. as B), 1 5 Karam 8 tt?v aapKa 
 (f. Kara t. o\), 16 cyw Kai o 7T(.p\pa% /xc TraTrjp (f. e. k. d 7r. pc [7raT?7p])> 
 25 ei7rci' avrois is 9 (f. c. a. [d] 'I.), 28 ei7rcv ovv o is on oTav 10 (f. c. ovv o 
 'I., "Orav), o iraT-qp pcov (f. d TraTrjp), 34 avTOis is 11 (f. a- [d] 'I.), 8ovAos 
 co-tiv T77S a/xaprias 12 (f. 8. eo-nv [T77S dpapn'as]), 39 avrois is 13 (f. avrois 
 
 [d] 'I.), cTToiciTc (Tisch.) (2653) (f. VoieiYc 1 , marg. as B), 41 cittov 
 
 (f. ci7rav), 42 annus K 14 (f. a. [d] 'I.), ci o 0s o 15 7raT?7p upwv 771' (f. ci d 
 #cos 7T. v. rjv), 52 €i7rov (f. ci7rav), #avarov ou p.rj Oeiap-qcrr] cis tov aiwva ls 
 
 I [2656 flf] D and Syr (Burk.) also read aiir6 (but SS clvt6s), Alford says that E 
 has avrdv. It is a case where &YTOC if genuine would precede e. 
 
 a Perh. repeated from (vii. 6) oinrui irapeoTiv. 
 
 3 "&v, temporal, is omitted by B in ii. 19, 23 and xviii. 39 (2715 c). 
 
 4 See 1961. 
 
 5 See above i. 48, iv. 51, vi. 24, 53. 
 
 6 Comp. above, i. 35, and see 2661 c. 
 
 7 c dropped from eic before e in e/v\6. 
 
 s 1 2657 rz] .Meaningless rep. of syll., comp. below, (xi. 11) ravravra and the 
 instances quoted by W.H. ii. 234, Mk ix. 25 tyu eyio eiriracrcru (f. eyw eviraacrw). 
 
 Acts XViii. 17 T0VTWVTU3V TU) (for TotiTUV TO)). 
 
 a This is written &YTOIC at the end of a line and IC at the beginning of the 
 next. See 2656 c. 
 
 10 "On "recitativum" is inserted here, as in vii. 40. But here the archetype 
 may have written OT twice (2657 a), OTOT&N, corrected by B to otiotan. 
 
 II aytoicTc as usual. 
 
 '-' A^ above (v. 45), B repeated 7r/>6s rbv irartpa from a preceding clause, 
 so here it perh. repeats rrjs ditaprtas from the preceding Tras 6 ttoiQiv tt)v anapriav. 
 i:j The facts are as in viii. 25 above. 
 
 " aytoicTc. 1B eco. 
 
 "' [2657/'] In viii. 51 Jesus had said Oavarov ov ti?j dcwprjcri] 4. t. a., and the 
 Jews in viii. =: repeat what He had sail. According to W.H. they repeal 
 
 496 
 
NOT ADOPTED BY WESTCOTT AND HORT [2658] 
 
 (f. ov fxi] ytvo-rjTai da.va.rov €ts tov aidh'a), 56 tva etS?7 (f. tVa 1877), 57 efzrov 
 (f. ei7rar), eopaKes (Tisch.) (f. r ewpctKas n , marg. iiopaxev ere) 1 , 59 is 
 €Kpv/3rj 2 (f. 'I. Se ixpvfir]). 
 
 Chap. ix. 2 r] 01 ol yovets (2653) (f. /} ot yo^ets), 4 7/jLias Set epya£eo-#e 3 
 (f. 77 8. epya£eo-#at), 7 ep/JLijvevcTe 4 (f. kpp.rjveveTat), aTrr]X6ev fiXeiriov 
 (f. a.TTYJ\8ev ovv Kol ivtyaro koX rjXOev /3A€7rwv°), 9 aAA o/xotos (f. aAAa 
 opoto?), 10 7rws r}vewx&W av (f- 7 ™ ? [ow] 77.), 16 aAAot 8e (f. aAAot [Se]), 
 2 2 €i7rov (f. ei7rav), 26 €t7rov (f. €t7rav), 27 ti ow 7raAtv ^eAere a/couetv 
 (f. ti WAiv 0. a., marg. as B), 28 €t7rov (f. et7rav), Mutrtais 6 (f. Mwuo-e'w?), 
 31 a\Aa cav (f. aAA' lav), 36 /cat Tts eariv, €(f>rj, Kvpt€ (spelt kc) 7 
 (f. r a.TT€Kpt6ri cKetvos [/cat et7rev] Kat rts ecrTtv n , KiJpte, marg. as B), 
 37 (2651) copaKas (f. cwpaKas), 40 ct7rov (f. et7rav), 41 auTots is 8 (f. a. 
 
 [2658] Chap. X. I a/J.rjv a/xrjv vp.LV Acyto (f. a. a. A. vplv), 6 (Tisch.) 
 TLVa r] v a eAaAet avTois (f. rtva 77V a. e. a.), 7 ei^ey ow 7raAti' ts ap.rjv 
 ap.rjv vpuv Aeyw (f. €i7r€F ow 7T. [o] 'I., a. a. Aeyoj vplv), 1 8 Tavrr)v M 
 
 it inexactly, but, according to B, exactly. SS has viii. 51 — 2 "...death he shall 
 not taste for ever... dost thou say, 'He that keepeth my word shall not taste 
 death?'" Apparently these two high authorities both err by conforming incon- 
 sistent passages, but B conforms the second to the first, SS the first to the second. 
 On misquotations in this Gospel, see 2544 foil. 
 
 1 Comp. xvii. 7 (B) eSwKes: SS has "Fifty years old thou art not and A. hath 
 seen thee?" S has euipaKeu ae. 
 
 2 This is written as parts of two lines, thus: ICG KpyBlH. 
 
 3 In vii. 23 xoXarcu was for x°^& T€ , an d here -e is generally taken as 
 a late inaccuracy for -at, but see 2428 b foil. 
 
 4 Tisch. prints ep/MTji/everai, but the photogr. clearly has -T6 with superlinear 
 Al. See 2653 and note on ix. 4 above. 
 
 5 [2657 r] SS has " 'Go, wash thy face with a baptism of Shiloah'; and when 
 he washed his face his eyes were opened." In the words of Christ, a and b omit 
 "wash," e om. "wash" after "go," but has "...Siloam quod interpretatur missus 
 et lava oculos tuos." Apparently B's omission is caused by homoeoteleuton. It 
 is not corrected in the margin. 
 
 6 But correctly spelt Mwvtret afterwards in the same verse. 
 
 7 [2657 d~\ Nonnus has avrjp 8' TjpevyeTO cf>wvr]v, Koipave, tLs 7re'\ep ovtos, 
 indicating that he had before him Ke (for icai) Hi eariv; and that he read K€ 
 as K6 i.e. Kvpie : H actually has eiirev Ke tls ecrri with k added above the line . 
 Possibly the misunderstanding of kclL, as requiring an additional verb, caused the 
 addition of elirev ("answered and [said]"). 
 
 8 aytoicTc. 
 
 u [2658 a] Inserted above, because, if true, the reading might be of great 
 importance. But the photograph has clearly hn (2653). 
 
 10 [2658 3] B om. tt\v next to rt\v, comp. below xiii. 7 pe for pera before ra, 
 xiv. 10 Xeyco om. after eyu. 
 
 A. VI. 497 32 
 
[2659] READINGS OF CODEX VATICANUS 
 
 cvtoAtiv (f. ravrrjv tt> c.), 23 TrcpieTra-rci 19 (f. it. [o] 'I.), 24 CKUKAeurxav 
 (f. '"cKwAwo-av 1 , marg. as B), cirrc 1 r/pnv (f. ei7rd»/ 77/t.), 25 aireKpiOr/ avroi<s 
 is" (f. oV. ai.'T. [6] 'I.), Et7rov upty «ai ovk €7riCTT€uo-aTC (f. e. v. k. ov 
 ttio-tci'ctc), 34 aireKpiOrj aurois is (f. aV. adr. [d] *L), 39 e£i7Touv 7raA.11/ 
 aurov TTiaaai (f. l£ [ouv] r auV. ird\iv -rndaai, marg. e£. [ouV] [7raA.1v] auV. 
 7riac7-ai). 
 
 Chap. xi. 11 ...ev o.vtu> Tavravra eurev (f. iv avrw. ravra eiirev), 
 12 cmtov ow (f. ei7rav ow), 1 5 aAA ayujxev (f. dAAu. ay.), 20 Mapia Se 
 (f. r Map ( dp~' Sc, marg. as B), 2 1 Ei r?s wSc (f. r Kdpie, ei 1 r;s wSe, marg. 
 as B), 24 avao-Trjaerat cv T7/ avaaTr/aet 3 ev j-q (f. d. e. r. dvaaTacrei 
 e. t.), 27 eyw Trio-reuw 4 on (f. e. 7re7rio-T€i>/<a on), 37 ei7rov (f. et7rai/), 
 38 ci</3pcipwpcvos (f. ep/^pipwpcios), 39 Tcrapreos 5 (f. TCTapraios), 
 44 Aeyci is aurois (f. Ac'yei [6] 'I. air.), 46 ewrov (f. etTrav), 52 aAAa 
 iva (f. aAA iva), 54 irapiq<Tia. (f. Trapprjcria). 
 
 [2659] Chap. xii. 3 rj\cu[/ev tows 7ro8as Iv (f. >;. t. tt. [tov] 'I.), 
 77 8c 01/aa eirXrjcrOr] €k tyjs 007x775 (f. r;. 8. d. iirXrjpwOrj e/c t. d.), 4 Aeyci 
 8c Iov8as (f. Aeyci [Se] 'I.), 9 v/A^ov (f. rjkOav), 10 e/3ouAci;o-ai'TO 8c *ai 
 01 ap^. tva xai (f. e. Se 01 dp^. Iva ko\), 12 aKouo-avTes on ep^rai o is 
 (f. d. oti epxerai 'Ir;o-.), 13 (Tisch.) CKpauyao-av ti Ocrai/va (f. c/cpadya£ov 
 'i2a\), 18 Sia rouro virrjvTrjo-ev aura) Kai o o^Aos (f. 8ld TOVTO KCLL 
 vtttivtt](T€v aura) d d^Aos), 21 TTpoo~qkdov (f. irpoo-rj\dav), 28 7raTep 7 , 
 
 1 [2658 r] Comp. xiii. 24 ei7re\ On aor. imp. in -ov see 2437 — 9. Comp. 
 Mt. iv. 3 elirbv (Tisch. eiire), Lk. iv. 3 ei'Tre" : but Mt. viii. 8, Lk. vii. 7 (a humble 
 request) eiire". Mk xiii. 4 eiirov i]p.iv wore ravra Harai is par. to Mt. xxiv. 3 «7rdj/ 
 (Tisch. eiiri) i]/j.?v. Lk. xxii. 67 el uv el 6 XP- eiirbv rj/xiv is exactly parall. to 
 the present passage, and prob. the original had euro (for eiirbv) copied by B 
 as eiire. 
 
 2 From this point the reader will not be reminded that B's omission of 
 between aiirois and TtjuoDs may be connected with the abbrev. spelling of the 
 latter, giving &YTOIC IC, as here and ix. 41, x. 34 etc. In x. 7, 23 the omission 
 of 6 before 'ItjctoDs cannot be thus explained. 
 
 :i Mechanical repetition of avao-Trj- for avaara-. 
 
 4 [2658(/J The phot, has niCTeyKA, but there are traces of 10 under ka. 
 Tisch. prints iriarevu} and adds note "pro wiVTevw ipse *substituit iremo-TevKa.." 
 
 6 [2658 e] On the interchange of e and <M see i. 48, iv. 51, vi. 24, •>$, vii. 23, 
 ix. 4, xiv. 13, xv. 1 6. 
 
 ''• [2659 ^ I The photograph has €KpAYr*ZON, with slight indications of 
 erasure under z, and Tisch. says "ex eKpavyaaav B s fecit eKpavyai'ov." 
 
 7 [2659/'] The phot, clearly has TTATHp here with the accent on H though 
 it has TT&Tep in the previous verse with the accent on &. On the possible 
 difference between the two when used as vocativeSj see 2052 -3. There is no trace 
 of correction or erasure in the photograph; and Tisch.'s silence indicates that 
 he lias printed rr<\THp as irarep by error. 
 
 498 
 
NOT ADOPTED BY WESTCOTT AND HORT [2659] 
 
 So^aaov fxov 1 to ovofxa (f. v. 8. crov to o.), 29 o o^Ao? o ccttws (f. 6 [owl 
 o. 6 e.), 43 yu.aXA.ov virep Ti)v 8o$av (f. //.. r ^7rcp n t. 8., marg. as B) 
 46 ira o 7rto-TCU(oi' (f. Iva 7ra? 6 7r.). 
 
 Chap. xiii. 7 yvwo-r; Se /xe 2 Tavra (f. y. 8. fiera Tavra), 9 Aeyei 
 avrw Ilei-pos Si/x-wv' 1 (f. A. a. 2. II.), IO ou/c e^ci ^petav ei /u.77 tovs 7roSas 
 vnf/aoSai (f. ovk e. ^- [ £ i j"-^ T - 7r -] 4 vtKf/aa-dat.), 1 4 B repeats twice €i ow 
 €y<D ej'ii/'a v/xwv tous TroSas o ks kcu o SiSao-KaAos, 18 eTrrjpev 5 e/u.6 rr;v 
 
 1 [2659 r] The photograph has, at the end of the line (which terminates with 
 abbreviated letters), 11 for M (as freq.), O (small) above 11, and, below the H, 
 the tail of a y, making the usual abbreviation of /xov, thus: AoS&CON-iJi. If the 
 original was Aol&cocoy with the last letters written small, the mistake might 
 easily be made by mechanical copyists, first writing Ao^ACONOy an & then reading 
 this as AoI&coMoy. 
 
 2 ta dropped next to ta. and supplied by corrector above the line, comp. above, 
 x. 18 ttjv om. next to ttjv. 
 
 3 [2659 a'] A noticeable variation of the usual order. The corrector has not 
 rectified the error. In xiii. 21 there is also an unusual order in &/jlt)i> dpLTjv 
 v iJ.lv \. 
 
 4 [2659 e] X omits (as R.V. marg.) the words bracketed by W.H. "save the 
 feet." But the omission may be thus explained. The context is: — 
 
 oyKexixpei&NNi 
 y<5kC6M. 
 
 Now ei "if" in this MS. (X) is sometimes written 1 (Mt. vi. 30, 2 Cor. ii. 2 corr. 
 p.m., Lk. xii. 28). Suppose it to have been written so here in the archetype 
 of X thus:— 
 
 oyKexixpe'^Ni 
 
 mhtoycttoa&cni 
 
 YacGai. 
 The ordinary error of homoeoteleuton would explain how the scribe mistook 
 the final n i in the second line for the final N 1 in the first, and omitted the second 
 line. Then it would be natural to divide the words as XP eiA Niy<\C0<M taking 
 the former as XP ei &> *•'■ XP €Lav - The spelling of eiMH as imh would facilitate 
 the corruptions H and HMH which some MSS. present. If "save the feet" is 
 inserted, there is perhaps an allusion to the Levitical "washing (vItttoi)" of 
 the hands and feet of the priests (Ex. xxx. 19, 20, 21) following the "bathing" 
 (Ex. xxix. 4) by which they had been consecrated. And, in the context, the 
 expression "ye are clean, but not all" suggests a parallelism between Jn and 
 Ezr. vi. 20 " all oj them were clean as one [wan]." Jn is describing a preparation 
 for the New Passover, and Ezra a preparation for the old one. It must be 
 admitted, however, that Origen not only twice omits et /xrj rovs 7r65as but argues 
 on the omission (ad loc, Lomm. ii. 406 — 7). He inserts the clause in his (Latin 
 transl. ) coram, on Lev. (Lomm. ix. 181) but nothing in the context is based on the 
 insertions, comp. 2079 c. 
 
 8 [2659/] The omission of err following, at a little distance, a previous err, 
 seems to be a fault of the same kind as the omission of t& next to T& (xiii. 7) 
 
 499 32—2 
 
[2660] READINGS OF CODEX VATICANUS 
 
 irrepvav (f. lirrjpev eV ip.e t. 7r.), 21 ap.r\v aprjv vp.iv Aeyw on (f. d. d. 
 Ae'yaj i'/xtv on), 23 ov 7;ya7ra 19 (f. 6V rj. [6] 'I.), 26 airoKpLveraL ovv 7s... 
 
 (3aij/a<; ovv {poijxiov (f. airoKp. ovv [6] '1 /3. 00 [to] y>.), 28 roirro ovSets 
 
 eyva> (f. toDto [8e] ouS. e.), 37 Aeyei auTu> o IleT/jos (f. A. a. [o] II.). 
 
 [2660] Chap. XIV. 6 Aeyei avrw o 1 19 (f. Ae'yei aura) 'Itjct. ), 9 Aeyei 
 aurco o 19 (f. Ae'yei aurw [o] '1-qa.), 10 ov 7rio-reucrei9 2 on (f. ov 7no-Teuei9 
 on), ra prjp.ara a eya) 3 u/xiv a7r ep.avrov ov XaXoj (f. t. p. a eya> Ae'ya> 
 u/xiv U7r. e. ov A.), II Sia ra epya aurou 7rio-r€U€T6 /x.ot (f. 8. t. I. r aurd n tt., 
 marg. as B), 13 on av aiT^rai 4 ev to) ovopari fxov (f. on dv ^myo-Trre 1 
 (marg. alrfJTe) iv t<3 6. /aou), 14 eav n atr^o-^T£ p.e ei/ to> o. ju.ov (f. idv tl 
 d. [jae] ev t. o. /x. ), 16 iva pceO v/xwv €19 tov aiaiva rj (f. iva r ^ //,€$' ifj,. eis 
 t. d" 1 ., marg. as B). 
 
 Chap. XV. 5 X <x) P i ^ e H- ov ov 8uvacr#e 7roieiv ou8e ev 5 eav... (f. ^. p.. ov 
 8. 7r. ou8ev. eav...), 7 Eav yu.?; 6 yueiv^Te ev e//.oi... o av 6eXr]Te anrjaacrOe 
 (f. edv /xeiv^re iv i[JLOi...o eav ^eA. air.), 9 e (f. ev) 7 , 13 /xei£ova Taur>79 
 ayairrjv ov8e ei? s e^ei (f. /a. t. a'. ot>8e(9 e^et), 16 e£eAe£ao-#ai 9 aAA 
 (f. e^eAefao^e dAA ), on av aiT^Te tov 7rarepa (f. on dv r alTrjo-qTeP 
 
 tov 7r., marg. as B). 
 
 and to be one of a group of errors (xiii. 7 — 21) shewing the scribe in an unusually 
 careless mood. But carelessness would not explain the insertion of et p.t\ tovs 
 ttoocls in xiii. 10, as to which B is probably correct. 
 
 1 [2660 a] Here, and in xiv. 9, xviii. 37, B ins. o (where W.H. om. or 
 bracket it) before ic. In xx. 21 B has o 7c where W.H. have [6 '1t)<t.~\. 
 
 2 Perhaps C was inserted as redupl. of e (2650). 
 
 3 Aerco om. after erco (2658$). 
 
 4 -Ai for -€, see 2658 e. 
 
 5 Ovde 'iv at the end of the sentence would resemble oiide ev adopted by W.H. 
 in i. 3, where XD have ovdiv. Comp. oi>8e eh in xv. 13 (B). 
 
 ,! [2660$] Comp. vi. 25 where )xi\ is ins. Here, if the archetype spelt ei as 1, 
 confusion might be caused by eanminhte with mi repeated by clerical error 
 e&NMi/VWNHTe. In the same verse (xv. 7) B, alone of the uncials, reads an 
 for CAN. If CAN is right, this (and perh. xxi. 25) would be an instance, 
 exceptional in John though frequent in the Synoptists, of idv, for dv, with 
 relative. But the reading is doubtful, for X reads oaa. idv, A 5 iav 6i\ere, 
 e "quod vultis." "Ocra dv is read by XC as 6Va idv in xi. 22, and 6'cra itself 
 is elsewhere confused with a or o. Perhaps here the original was OCAN or OCAAN, 
 corrected by B to oan, by X to oca€AN, and by others to ogan. The tendency 
 to read oaa idv would be increased by its frequency in Mt. (vii. 12, xviii. 18 {6is), 
 xxiii. 3 etc.). [In 1 Jn iii. 24, W.H. print 8 dv atru/nev (with B) without alternative.] 
 
 7 This is Dot a mistake of i for e at the end of a line: e is in the middle of the 
 line and N added by a corrector above the line. 
 
 8 Comp. ovde ev in xv. 5 (15). 
 
 On the interchange of -Al and -e, see 2658 f. 
 
 500 
 
NOT ADOPTED BY WESTCOTT AND HORT [2661] 
 
 Chap. xvi. 2 7ras o a.TroKT€Lva<; 1 8o£r) (f. ir. 6 a. [i>;u,ds] So^), 13 ocra 
 a.KOV(TeL 2 XaX-qaet (f. ocra r d/<oi>a AaA/r/crei, marg. as B), 18 ovk oiSa/xev 
 (f. ovk oiSajuef [ti AaAti]) 3 , 25 waprjo-ia (f. 7r apprjcr xa). 
 
 [2661] Chap. xvii. 7 — 8 TravTa ocra cSwk-es 4 p.oi...ra p-qpara a 
 eSw/ces itoc (f. 7r. 6'cra r eScoKas 1 (marg. SeStu/vds) jxoL...ra p. d r e'SojKCi? n 
 (marg. SeSco/oxs) ^ot), II IIaT?7p 5 ayie (f. ndrep ayie), iva cocriv €F Ka9o>s 
 «ai 7j/xets (f. 11/a wcrtv ev Kates Tracts), 1 2 ot€ r)p,ev 6 p,er auTtoe (f. ore 
 77x071' /xct' a.), 15 ovk epcoro) iva apr]<; airrou? €K tov 7 irovrjpov (f. ovk ep. 
 iVa dp. aiV. €K tou Kocrpou dAA' ira rrjpijar]^ avrovs €K t. 7r.), 17 ayiacrov 
 at>TOX>5 ev aXrjOeia. (f. dy. aiV. ev rfj dA.), o Aoyos o cros 7; aXrjOcLa 8 eariy 
 
 1 Y MAC could be supplied from what precedes; but it has prob. been omitted 
 by B owing to the similarity of N&C, which begins a line, to the last three letters 
 
 of YMAC 
 
 - [2660 c] 'Afco&ret is confirmed by SS, a, and f "audierit" (d has "audierit" 
 = D oiKovcrei). The act. fut. (instead of mid.) is non-classical and has been corrupted 
 by scribes in 2 S. xiv. 16, Is. vi. 9, Mt. xii. 19; but it is read by B in Jn v. 25, 28, 
 x. 16 (where W.H. adopt it, in spite of variations) and is prob. correct here. 
 
 [2660 d] Winer-Moulton (p. 99) recognises aKoucrw in Mt. xii. 19, xiii. 14, 
 Rom. x. 14 {Ret.), Jn xvi. 13, but adds, "'AkoiVo/xcu, however, is the more 
 common future in the N.T. especially in Luke, see Acts iii. 22 (vii. 37), xvii. 32. 
 xxv. 22, xxviii. 28 (Jn v. 28)." But Acts iii. 22 is a quotation from Deut. xviii. 15, 
 and Acts vii. 37 is an interpolation from Acts iii. 22. Acts xvii. 32 and xxv. 22 
 contain the words of Athenian philosophers and a Roman Governor — whom Luke 
 could hardly represent as using the active future. It is antecedently probable that 
 Luke would generally prefer the middle future, when writing in his own person or 
 in that of St Paul (Acts xxviii. 28) ; but Acts xxviii. 26 reproduces aKovaere from 
 Is. vi. 9. Mt. xii. 19 has aKouaei ris, where Is. xlii. 2 (LXX) has aKovadrjcreraL, 
 indicating a preference for the active fut., even against LXX. If we follow B as 
 to the text of Jn it will not be true to say that " aKov<rop.ai. is the more common 
 future in the N.T." The truth seems to be that Matthew and John prefer the 
 active whereas Luke prefers the middle. 
 
 3 [2660,?] In xvi. 18, some auth. om. ZXeyov ovv, some om. 5 \4yei, SS has, after 
 "unto my Father," simply "What is then this 'A little' that he saith?" 
 
 4 Comp. edpaices in viii. 57. 
 
 5 [2661a] Contrast xvii. 5 (B) uv irarep, D <sv ira.T-r)p with xvii. n (B) trarqp 
 a.yu, (D) irarep ayie, and see 2052 — 3, also 2659 b. 
 
 6 In xi. 15, B has fi^y\v correctly. 
 
 7 Error of homoeoteleuton, caused by repetition of £k tov. 
 
 8 [2661 b] B's (probable) errors both come at the end of lines — where the 
 letters might have been originally small and obscure in the archetype. 'Ev 
 d\7)8eia, "in truth," might mean little more than "truly." 'H dX. as a predicate, 
 "thy name is the truth,'''' would be contrary to the usage of Ps. cxix. 142 6 \6yos 
 <rov dXrjdeia, ib. 151 iraoai ai 6S0I <rov d\r}det.a. B's txt would contain a kind of 
 play on "truth": "Sanctify them not in mere name and not with mere external 
 purifications but in truth. Thy word is the truth [of which I speak]." 
 
 50I 
 
[2662] READINGS OF CODEX VATICANUS 
 
 (f. d A. d o"ds aA. e'o-riv), 18 B repeats twice Kayw a7rc<TT€tXa avTOVS £ts 
 tov koct/xov, 19 Kai V7T6/3 avruv eyw ayia£w €/i.avrov (f. Kat £. a. [fyw] ay. 
 £/x. ), 24 r»7v So^av tt^ €fjL7]v r]v tSw/<as /xot (f. ttjv 8. tt)v €. 7/y r 8e'8wKas 
 /xot, marg. as B). 
 
 Chap, xviii. 2 crvvrj^Or) is jutTa twv ixaOrjTdiv avrov ckei 1 (f. cr. I. 
 €K€i /xera twv p.. avroxP, marg. as B), 3 €K tw^ ap^. «ai twv <J>. (f. e/c 
 twv ap)(. Kal [£k] tujv <£.), 5 eyui ei/xi ts 2 10-rqKet. Se (f. eyw et/xi (marg. 
 + Irjcrov^ io-t^kci Se'...), 7 et7rov (f. €t7rav), 1 5 yj/cocrTOS tjv (f. r ^v 
 yrwords^, marg. as B), 17 ov tw 3 (f. ovv to), 20 irap-qcna. (f. Trappr](ria), 
 36 Tyywit^ovro iva 4 (f. ^y. av iva), 37 aweKpiOri o 5 ts (f. oltt. [d] 'I.), 
 
 39 a7ToAu(TW vp.IV TCO 6 7TaO"^a (f. a7T. Vfl. [cv] TOJ 7T.). 
 
 [2662] Chap. xix. 5 e£rj\6tv ovv ts (f. e£. ovv [d] 'I.), i8ou 7 avOpwrros 
 (f. toou o avdp.), 12 Acyovrcs av toutov (f. A. 'Ear toutov), 1 7 o Aeyere* 
 
 1 On the position of e'/cet see 1527. 
 
 2 [2661c] Hitherto B has had eiCTHKGI (i. 35, vii. 37) not iCTHKei (as also in 
 xx. 11), but here (xviii. 5) and in xviii. 16, 18, xix. 25 the text has had ICTHK6I 
 and a corrector has prefixed e. In consequence of the initial ic here, the original 
 scribe, by an error of repetition, has probably added ic, and it has been taken to 
 mean ic i.e. TtjctoOs. B's habit of repeating syllables makes its testimony for'lT/crous 
 (against almost every authority, but a has "Jesus autem") of very little value. 
 Moreover there is some antecedent probability that iyw eip.1 might be intended to 
 convey a double meaning (2220—8) which would be destroyed by inserting 
 'Itjctovs. 
 
 8 [2661 d] B has, at the beginning of a line, oyTto with part of a very small 
 N above the line. Tisch. is silent. If the n was added by the original scribe, it 
 might be explained by his copying from a MS. that had oy. See 2656 a. 
 
 4 [2661c] The 1 (faintly written) of ina comes at the end of a line and the NA 
 at the beginning of the next : AN may have dropped before in A. Above the faint 
 I at the end of the line there is written a small an, and the 1 is rewritten before 
 the beginning of the next line, in the margin. Alford places av earlier after 
 viryptrai (oi vinjpiTcu av ol f/xol 7)ywvi$ovTO '(.va). In B, yTTHpeTAI comes at the 
 end of the line with some indistinctness in the Ai, suggesting that it might be easily 
 reduplicated as an. 
 
 5 [2661/"] Contrast awtHpldri'l. in xviii. 8, 34, 36 and air. at'/ry T. in xviii. 20, 
 23, xix. 11. There is a blank space here (enough for a letter or a little more) 
 after aireKpiOrj. Perh. an obscure oy was in B's archetype. 
 
 6 For the omission of iv before the dative of lime, see above, ii. 19, 23, 
 vii. 22, and 2715 c. 
 
 7 [2662 a I The omission of o between y and a cannot easily be explained — 
 unless indeed the scribe felt that the article implied contempt (1960). Read 
 in the light of prophecy, the phrase "Behold a man" might suggest Zech. vi. 12 
 t'5oi> dvrjp, referring to the future Builder of the Temple. 
 
 8 -6 for -Al, see 2658 c. 
 
 502 
 
NOT ADOPTED BY WESTCOTT AND HORT [2663] 
 
 efSpaiart ToXyod' ottov (f. o Aeycrai 'E/3p. r Yo\yo$d n (marg. Tokyod) 
 o7rov), 23 reacrapa (f. reaaepa), appa<£os (f. apa</>os), 24 enrov (f. €i7rav), 
 
 28 is eiSws (f. r €i8ws o 'I. -1 , marg. as B), 30 ore ovv eXafiev to o£os Is 
 (f. ore d. «. to otos [d] 'I.), 31 rj rjfxepa cKetvr) tov aaj3(3arov (f. ij dp.. 
 r e«civou n tov o\, marg. as B), 38 a>v pa^vjTr/s iv (f. a>v p.. [tov] 'I.). 
 
 Chap. XX. 1 1 Mapia Se eio-TT]Kei (f. M. Se io-T^'/cet), 13 ti KAaieis xai Aeyei 
 avTOis (f. tl K^ateis ; Atyei avTois), 1 7 p?7 a7rrov p.ov (f. r p-d pov d.Trrov y 
 marg. as B), 20 iSovres tov iv (Tisch.) 1 (f. iSo'vtcs tov Kvpwv), 21 ewrev 
 ovv avTOis o is 2 7raAiv (f. eiTrev ovv avTO?s [d 'It/o-ovs] 7rdAiv), 23 av Tiros 
 a<pr]Te Tas ap.apTias a<£eiovTai avTOis av tivos Kparrjre KiKparrjVTai (f. av 
 r Ttvwv (marg. tii^os) a(£. Tas dp. r d(f>e<i)VTai ] (marg. dtfatovTai) avTOis' dv 
 r Tivajv (marg. tivos) KpaTr/Te KtKpaTvp'Tai), 25 eopaKapev (f. kmpd.Kap.tv), 
 
 29 Aeyei auTw is (f. A., a. [d] 'I.). 
 
 Chap. xxi. 3 €$r]X6ov (f. i£r}\$av), IO and 12 Aeyei avTOis is (f. X. a. 
 [d] 'I.), 12 ovSeis evToAp,a (Tisch.) 3 (f. ovSeis eToApa), 17 *ai «7T€v Kvpie 
 (spelt Kt) 7ravTa av oiSas (f. Kai. ewrcv avr<S Kvpie Trdvra av 6.), 24 ovtos 
 co-tiv o p.a.6. o Kat fxaprvpwv (f. ovtos e. d p. d (marg. ins. Kai) papTvpcov). 
 
 § 4. Pause-spaces in B 
 
 [2663] Pauses in B are often represented by spaces of varying 
 size. W.H. frequently disagree from these, e.g. they make no pause 
 
 before i. 15 !• p-aprvpei, i. 18 6ebv ovSeis 6wpaK€v, ii. 19 direKpiOr] 'I., 
 li. 20 ei7rav ovv 01 'IovS., iv. 28 d<f>rji<ev ovv ttjv vSpiav, iv. 45 6Ve ovV 
 rj\6ev eis tt;v TaA., v. 5 rjv Se tis dv#pco7ros, V. I 7 d Se aVe/<pivaTO avTOis, 
 vi. 3 dvrjXOtv 81 eis to dpos, vi. 7 direKpLdrj avYai <&iA., vi. 1 5 'I. ovv yvovs, 
 vi. 47 dp?}v dp.7;v Ae'yco vpiv, vi. 51 eyw eipi d dpros 6 £w, vii. 6 Aeyei 
 ovv avrots o I., vii. ^^ €i7rev ovv d I., vii. 43 cr^io-p,a ovv evevero, 
 Vlii. 13 et7rov ovv avVa) 01 <£ap., viii. 17 Kat iv tw vdp.a> Se t<3 vp-erepco, 
 viii. 18 €yw eipi d p.apTvpd)v, viii. 51 a'p-T^v dp/»v Xcyco vp.iv. In all 
 these (except ii. 20, vi. 47, vii. 43, viii. 17, 18, 51, where space is 
 left for only one letter) space is left for one and a half or more 
 
 3 [2662/'] The phot, clearly shews kn, i.e. KvpLov. If Tisch. regarded the 
 bent part of the K as a later addition, he would (no doubt) have stated his view 
 in a footnote. He seems to have overlooked the matter, or else it is a misprint 
 (like o irpo(p7)T<u in i. 45 (2653)). 
 
 2 In B, 01c is almost certainly an erroneous reduplication of 01c in aytoic 
 
 3 [2662 c] The photograph shews eToA at the end of a line and ma at the 
 beginning of the next. The m is curtailed at the beginning: but there is no 
 sign of N before t. 
 
 503 
 
[2663] READINGS OF CODEX VATICANUS 
 
 letters. The scribe seems to have used pause-spaces for two 
 purposes, (i) to call special attention to some of Christ's weightier 
 sayings, (2) to indicate that the evangelist is passing to a new aspect 
 of an old subject — often after some parenthesis or digression. In 
 particular the scribe is fond of making pauses before an ovv clause, 
 and he does this (where W.H. have none) not only in the cases 
 indicated above (iv. 28, 45 etc.) but also before viii. 24 ei7rov ovv 
 VfJLiv, ix. 24 i<fm)vrjaav ovv, xii. 19 01 ovv &ap., xii. 28 r)\6e.v ovv (j>wv7], 
 xiii. 6 epx^Tai ovv, xix. 5 i£r}\8ev ovv, xix. 6 ot€ ovv el8ov, xx. 6 ep^crai 
 
 ovv. Perhaps the scribe regarded ovv in some of these cases as 
 similar in meaning to fxkv ovv, "Well, then," "And now, to proceed" 
 etc., so that it came well at the beginning of a new section. 
 
 504 
 
NOTES 
 ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 505 
 
SUMMARY 
 
 [2664] On p W (1895) 
 
 [2665—7] „ tt P S>t6s fiov (1896—1901) 
 
 [2668] „ the emphasis of adverbs (1902) 
 
 [2669] „ fBaaiXeis and 6 paaiXevs (1966) 
 
 [2670] „ the article with 'iepocroXi^a (1970) 
 
 [2671—4] „ the article with KeApooN (1970) 
 
 [2675-7] „ o'XXor and ?re P o S (1972) 
 
 [2678] „ the accusative of time (2013) 
 
 [2679-82] „ the article used vocatively (2051) 
 
 [2683] „ ix. 30 iv rourw yap (2068) 
 
 [2684] „ 6 84, -? 8e' (2071) 
 
 [2685] „ rjnep (2092) 
 
 [2686—7] „ ha (2093) 
 
 [2688—9] „ viii. 56 ^yaWiaaaro "iva (2097) 
 
 [2690] „ Iva with indicative (2114) 
 
 [2691] „ St Paul's autograph (2114) 
 
 [2692] „ iv. 45 <ai atToi yap (2167) 
 
 [2693] „ Sttos &v (2173) 
 
 [2694] „ 8ti=<Sot€ (2186) 
 
 [2695] „ on rf (2187) 
 
 [2696] „ ,5> s (2201) 
 
 [2697] „ iii. 16 ovr as ...<S<rre (2203) 
 
 [2698] „ liv with indicative (2213) 
 
 [2699 700] „ Lk. xxiv. 39 iy£> dpi avros (2224) 
 
 [2701 3] „ xxi. 5 naidia prj ti -rrpoa^xiyiov (X (T( (2235) 
 
 [2704] „ x. 12 6...ovk &v noipr'pj (2253—4) 
 
 [2705] „ fS dta at (2297) 
 
 [2706 13] „ various meanings of ds (2305—8) 
 
 [2714] „ iii. 34 ( K ptrpov (2324) 
 
 506 
 
SUMMARY 
 
 [2715] 
 
 [2716—7] 
 
 [2718—22] 
 
 [2723] 
 
 [2724-6] 
 [2727] 
 [2728] 
 [2729] 
 [2730] 
 [2731] 
 [2732] 
 
 [2733—7] 
 [2738] 
 [2739] 
 
 [2740—4] 
 
 [2745-6] 
 [2747—53] 
 
 [2754-5] 
 [2756] 
 [2757] 
 [2758] 
 [2759] 
 
 [2760—6] 
 
 [2766 (i)] 
 
 [2767] 
 
 [2768-70] 
 
 [2771] 
 
 [2772—5] 
 [2776—84] 
 [2785-90] 
 
 [2791-7] 
 
 [2798—9] 
 
 On 8td with genitive applied to time (2331) 
 vi. 21 7J6 f \ov oZv Xapdv (2346) 
 
 i. 3° virep avrov (2369) 
 
 ix. 21 avros nepl eavrov (2374) 
 
 vi. 15 avros fiovos (2375) 
 
 £777-61 avros (marg. avr6)...€tvai (2375 a) 
 
 viii. 44 en ra>v I8ia>v XaXd (2378) 
 
 eKelvos (2381—5) 
 
 v. 32 dXXos...6 paprvpoiv (2384) 
 
 xix. 35 kol eK.el.vos oi8ev (2384) 
 
 vii. 1 1 tcov io~Tiv enelvos (2385) 
 
 xix. 9 TTodev et (TV (2403) 
 
 xix. 17 Kpavlov Tottov o...(2412) 
 
 av and edv interchanged (2414) 
 
 xvii. 2 Trav o 8e8a»cas (2422) 
 
 vi. 5 rroQev dyopdo-copev (2428) 
 
 the non-use of some active perfects (2441 a) 
 
 the "gnomic" aorist (2445 a) 
 
 xii. 14 evpa>v ovdpiov (2461) 
 
 xii. 16 kol ravra eTroirjo-av (2469) 
 
 vi. 25 irore d>8e yeyovas (2478) 
 
 viii. 14 Koi nod inrdya>...r) nov virdyai (2490) 
 
 xiv. 7 ott' apri ywd>aK€T€ avrdv (2491) 
 
 xi. 47 tL TTOiovpev (2493) 
 
 x. 29 ov8els 8vvarai apnd^eiv (2496 b) 
 
 xii. 28 irdrep 86^aadv o~ov to ovopa (2512 c) 
 
 idv with indicative (2515 (i)) 
 
 iota subscript (2515 (i) b) 
 
 the possessive genitive (2558 — 69) 
 
 the "epistolary" aorist (2691c/) 
 
 dXXos in Epictetus and John (2730) 
 
 "authority" in Epictetus (2740—4) 
 
 SO/ 
 
NOTES 
 
 ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 On monoc (1895) 
 
 [2664] On V. 44 tt/v So£av tt/v irapa tov p.6vov [#€o0], Origen's 
 Greek comment (correctly given by Huet's (i. 392) text and Lom- 
 matzsch's footnote) omits Oeov, though the Latin translator inserts it. 
 Origen De Orat. 19 (Lomm. vol. xvii. 162) quotes the text fully 71-0)5 
 
 SvvacrOe irapd tov jjlovov Oeov ov £T/T€iTe, With Oeov, but proceeds 
 
 to comment on it without Oeov, as tt/v Kvpiav o"o'£av kou a\r)0r) tt/v d-iro 
 
 [reading oltto for wapd, as also in the quotation above mentioned] tov 
 
 p.ovov tov tt/s So£t/s a£iov So£a£ovTos, which rather suggests that 
 
 Oeov may have been added in the quotation by the scribe. Codex D, 
 though it has 0y at the end of a line, has a little interval between it 
 and the preceding word. Euseb. P. E. 653 b has, kcu 6 o-wTr/pios 8e 
 
 Aoyos <pyjo-L- Ad£av tt/v 7rapa dvOpombiv ^t/tcitc kcu tt/v 86£av rrp' trapd 
 p.ovov tov evo? ov ^r/TttTe'. See also 2724 — 6 on (ivtos uo'vos. 
 
 1 [2664 rt] As regards xvii. 3 rbv jxbvov dXr/Oivov Oeov (comp. Rom. xvi. 27 ptbvip 
 oo<t><4> deu>, Jude 25 p.bvu> 0e<2 aurripi., Rev. xv. 4 p.bvos oaios) it seems in accordance 
 with the Gk usage in Herod, i. 25 /xovvos di)...ei;edpev, Judith xi. 8 p.bvos dyaObs 
 (sc. el), and it is paraphr. by Nonnus, "0<ppa ere yivwo-Kwcri Oeov pbvov eXviba k6o-/j.ov, 
 i.e. 6ti /jl6vos et "that thou alone art the hope of the world." The Heb. "only," 
 applied to God, is a declinable phrase, adverbial in meaning, but adjectival in 
 form, meaning "by himself, herself, themselves" etc. When applied to God, it is 
 rendered by adj., /mbvos, in LXX. Mbvov in 1 Chr. xviii. 30 ciXX' 77 t6v pacr. 'lap. 
 p.bvov, Esth. i. 16 ov rbv (3a<r. p.bvov, may theoretically be adv., but it may be 
 adjectival, "the king alone" as when applied to God. There is no instance 
 where this Heb. word can be safely said to be rendered in LXX adverbially ; exc. 
 < ren. xlvii. 26 x w P^ T V S yv* T ^> v ieptijiv p-bvov : and even here A has /xbvwv 
 corresponding to the Heb. "<>f the priests by themselves." In l.XX, p.bvos, when 
 applied to God in prayer, mostly comes at the end ..I its clause : K. \ix. i^crdel 
 b Oebs p.6vos, ib. 19 av Kvpios 6 Oebs p.bvos, comp. I's. lxxxvi. 10, Is. xxxvii. 20 etc., 
 
 508 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2665] 
 
 On np(OToc moy (1896—1901) 
 
 [2665] On i. 15 TrpwTos /mov (1900) comp. Philo ii. 366 — 7 onep 
 
 yap TToXeios /3acriAeus, tovto /cat /cwp^s 6 7rpwTOS, /cat ot/aas 6 Secr7rdT7/s, 
 kcu vocrovvrutv larpos, /cat CTTpaTOTre8ov pev (rrpaTryyo?, vauap^os o 
 
 iTTLfiaTiKov..., also Inscr. Gr. 5754 A(ou'/aos) I7r7rei>s 'PcopaiW, 
 
 TrpwTos 1 MeXiraiwv Ka! 7raVpojv. .., and Acts xxviii. 7 (referring, like the 
 inscription, to Malta) t<5 7rpwTa> t^s vijcrov. These facts shew that, in 
 the first century, " the headman," or " patron," of a village or district 
 might be officially known as the " First." And the extract from 
 Philo indicates that, as a soldier or sailor might say " my general " or 
 " my captain," so a provincial villager might say " my First " meaning 
 " my Patron," or " Patronus." All these terms might be used meta- 
 phorically. The context in Philo deals with true and false sovereignty 
 (like the Johannine Parable of the Shepherd) and likens the village 
 chief, or " First," not only to a King but also to a Physician. This 
 
 but note Dan. iii. 45 Theod. cu el Kipios Otbs p.bvos /cat eVSoijos, LXX aii el p.bvos 
 Kvpios 6 debs /cat eV5o£os. It probably combined the notions of (1) unity, (2) un- 
 approachableness or uniqueness. Nonnus, in v. 44, has MoiVou ivayyeveTao deov. 
 
 [2664/5] xi. 52 oi'x virep rod edvovs p.bvov is paraphr. by Nonnus ov irepl p.ovvov 
 Zdveos, adjectivally. This late position of adverbial fibvov (though Steph. gives 
 only Lycurg. p. 151, 7 as an instance) is freq. in Epictetus, comp. i. 6. 17, i. 9. 4, 
 i. 19. 17 etc., and even i. 28. 13 &iro\u)\ei r\ 'IXtds ov fxbvov dXXd kolI t) 'Odvaaeia 
 (? ov fxdvop dt). It occurs also in Mk vi. 8 el /mt) pafidov p,bvov (not p.bvy]v), Mt. v. 47 
 tovs adeXcpovs vp.£>v p.bvov, xxi. 19 el /jltj <pv\\a p.bvov (where Mk om. p.bvov). Lk. 
 nowhere uses the adv. \xbvov exc. in viii. 50 fibvov irLoTevaov : but a bracketed 
 passage in Lk. xxiv. 12 has ret bObvia fxbva, where (1804) the parall. Jn xx. 3 — 11 
 speaks of "linen cloths," with "apart " in the context. Schweig. Index to Epict. 
 says about p.bvov " Saepe adverbium hoc ponitur ubi adjectivum expectasses : 
 verbi causa, p.bvov ravra, non jxbva. i. 9. 511.: ecp' r]p.Qv p.bvov dant MSS. i. 6. 12 
 ubi vulgo pbvwv." 
 
 1 [2665 a] The omission of the article meets the very natural objection that we 
 should expect the article before TrpQros meaning "the first man," or "Mt" chief." 
 Comp. Ox. Pap. 299. 4 (late 1st cent.) Aiovvo-'up irpoo-(T)&Tr) 'Nep.epwv, and edd. n. 
 " cf. 239. 11, 290. 21. The irpoo-Td.TT]s Kwp.ri's was probably the village 'sheikh' 
 and chief of the -n-pea^vrepoi or council of elders." Comp. Tebtun. Pap. 120, 
 122, 129 (B.C. 97 or 64). In the 6th cent., we find Ox. Pap. 155. 11 "to my 
 master, John, the all-magnificent comes and my patron (vpoaTdTy) from 
 Theophilus, citizen." In all these instances the article is omitted before Trpocrrdri??. 
 
 [2665 /•>] In Mk xii. 2S Trpwrr] tt&vtwv, the text varies greatly, and the genitive 
 is generally taken as partitive. In Aristoph. Av. 468, ip.ov irpwrov means "[kings 
 over] me in the first place. " The way for irptDros Kdip.r]s would be prepared by 
 such expressions as Aristoph. Eq. 6 Trpuiros Ha<p\aybvuv (with a play on the phrase), 
 ib. 130 8s irpQros e£et rijs wb\ews r<x irpdyp-ara, ib. 325 wp&Tos wv. Polyb. has the 
 pi. i. 31. 5 e^iirep.\pav aiiruv robs Trpwrovs avdpas. 
 
 509 
 
[2666] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 increases the probability that the Fourth Gospel might use the phrase 
 to represent in vernacular Greek the Baptist's recognition of Jesus as 
 his Rabbi, or Superior, or Head. 
 
 [2666] The words Trpwros or 7rpajTio-Tos were Hebraized. Levy 
 quotes a saying that an earthly ruler, differing from God, puts his 
 name first and then his title : " N. N. the Augustulus, N. N. the 
 Protata" which Levy renders " der Prior." Also, in connexion with 
 Mordecai and Haman, a proclamation uses the phrase " Prote of the 
 Jews," "der Vornehmste der Juden 1 ." Origen, Josh. Horn. i. 5 
 (Lomm. xi. 16) quotes xv. 18 " odit vos hie mundus quia me priorem 
 vestrum odio habuit," which may mean " your prior, primate, or chief \" 
 and, at all events, does not mean "before it hated you." Nonnus 
 paraphrases 7rpcoTos fj.ov rjv in i. 15 as /xev rjv irpwTia-To<;, but omits 
 it in i. 30. In xv. 18, Nonnus has 'Y/xe<W on p.aX\ov l-n-e.(rj3o\l.y(Ttv 
 iXcyXwv TipwTov e'/xe vTvyeecrKe, which seems to combine (1) " Hated 
 me above you, or, more than you" (2) "Hated me. first." 
 
 [2667] In favour of the rendering 7rpwros tivos "before anyone" 
 there has been urged the occurrence of aov 7rpwTo? ciiu in an ancient 
 papyrus 2 . But the phrase is not used independently there. It 
 occurs in a " magical " papyrus containing the name lao and 
 describing a contest between two /Eons, lao is mentioned by 
 Irenaeus and Origen 3 in connexion with very early heresies, and it 
 is described by the former as a magic word the pronouncing of which 
 plays a prominent part in the Valentinian system ; but, more 
 particularly, " the little lao " is connected in the Pistis Sophia with 
 the birth of John the Baptist which was (according to the Pistis 
 Sophia) brought about by Christ 4 . In the contest described by the 
 Papyrus, the Gospel comparison between the Baptist and Christ is 
 transmuted into a conflict between a lesser and a greater yEon, with 
 
 1 Levy iv. 112a. The latter word is also used {ib.) to mean " of superior 
 quality." Krauss refers to many other passages. 
 
 2 See the Classical Review xv. 437, a paper by Dr J. H. Moulton who adds (in 
 the Expositor x. 133) " The phrase <rou 7rpu)r6s eifit (second or third century) shews 
 that in this word [viz. 7rp<2>Tos] it was the superlative which ousted the comparative 
 and not vice-versa as elsewhere." 
 
 h< 11. i. 4. 1, Orig. Cels. vi. 31. 
 •' Pist. Soph. ch. 12 " 1 implanted in her |ihe mother of John the Baptist] the 
 power that I received from the little Too" comp. ib. ch. 371 "the great lao." 
 The Papyrus {Leyden Pap. ed. Leemans, Lugduni, 1885, Pap. W. pag. 12a) 
 mentions "a great god" appearing after the pronunciation of lao. 
 
 510 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2668] 
 
 a curious confusion of the Synoptic lcrx v P° T *P°s P™ an d the Johannine 
 7T/3WT09 fj.ov, only with (tov for /xov 1 : — " Having seen that he was 
 mightier than himself he withstood him saying, / am [porn~\ (?) before 
 thee (o-ov TTpwros €(/xt) 2 ." Another reminiscence (apparent in the 
 Papyrus) of John the Baptist seems to point to the Johannine 
 distinction between Christ as the Word and the Baptist as " a Voice." 
 The Papyrus describes the begetting of these two .'Eons by God 
 through various sounds, and then God decides the superiority of the 
 rivals not according to the date of birth but according to the sound 
 from which they were born : " Thou art from sound (^xoSs) : but he 
 is from utterance (<j>86yyov) s . So utterance is better than sound." 
 The writer may take o-ov irpwros to mean " / was born before thee" 
 or " / am thy eider brother [a/id therefore thy better]*" But whatever 
 his meaning might be, he could but help us as an interpreter, and 
 not a very intelligent one, writing about a century and a half after 
 the evangelists. Similarly, but much more intelligently, Theobald or 
 Pope might help us to interpret Shakespeare ; but they would not be 
 independent witnesses testifying to Elizabethan usage. The indices 
 of the Egyptian Papyri (1898 — 1904) indicate no instance of irpwros 
 with genitive. 
 On the emphasis of adverbs (1902) 
 
 [2668] The initial adverbial phrase in iv. 31 iv ™ /xera^v rjpwTwv 
 avrov 01 /xaO-qrai is emphatic, not only because of its position but also 
 because of its extreme rarity. Mera^v is almost non-existent in LXX. 
 In the Gospels elsewhere it occurs only as a preposition (4). Here 
 Syr. (Burk.) and SS have "now" or "and," b " postmodum antetn" 
 d, e, " inter haec," f " inter haec autem." Hesychius explains /xera^v as 
 i$ai<pvr)<; (conj. c^s), /u.«t' SXtyov, dva f^eaov, and fx. means "after- 
 wards " in Acts xiii. 42 eis to /x. adfifiaTov, Clem. Rom. 44 (bis), 
 
 1 Mk i. 7, Mt. iii. 1 1, Lk. iii. 16, Jn i. 15. 
 
 2 Another version (pag. 5 a) says Tjpicrev airtfi 6 irporepos \eywv, eyio tovtov 
 
 3 Then follow the words 'lore {i.e. larai) 5e i% dfuporepiov i] bvvap.is, <rov varepov 
 <pwvovp.kvov. The other version (p. 5 a) says 6 Qebs <t<$>r\ t£ Urxypq, vb fJ.lv dirb 
 Troinrva p.ov rvyxdveis, ovtos Se e£ i7Xo0s- iaeade dp.<poTepoi eiri irdarjs dvdyaip 
 (having previously said iyevpTjOr) debs eK rod i}9ovs (for tjxovs) Ss ttixvtwv earlp 
 Kvpios). 
 
 4 Comp. As You Like It\. 1 "I know you are my eldest brother... the courtesy 
 of nations allows you 7?iy better in that you are the firstborn." 
 
 511 
 
[2669] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 Barn. 13 etc. 1 But Jn appears to use the phrase in its classical sense 
 "in the intervening [time]," namely, between the departure of the 
 Samaritan woman (iv. 28 dirrj\6ev) and the anticipated arrival of the 
 Samaritan men, who "were coming" (iv. 30 Z&}\6ov <?k rr}<s Tro'Aetos 
 Kal rjpxovTo). The appropriateness of the phrase will not be under- 
 stood till we perceive that the context deals with the thought of " inter- 
 vening time:' Jesus has just sown the seed of the Gospel in Samaria. 
 The Samaritans, who are speedily to bring forth the harvest — con- 
 fessing (iv. 42) "This is of a truth the Saviour of the world" — are on 
 their way to the Saviour. "During the interval" Jesus utters His 
 doctrine about the interval between the sowing and the harvest : — 
 " Say ye not, ' it is four months ' ? Nay, the harvest is ready." 
 On BaciAcyc and o BACiAeyc (1966) 
 
 [2669] On the difference between i. 49 "King of Israel" and 
 xii. 13 "the King of Israel" see 2233—4, where it is shewn that all 
 the Gospels agree that Pilate asked Christ whether He was "the 
 king of the Jews," but the fourth Gospel alone implies that Christ 
 refused this title, while accepting that of "king." The LXX has 
 /3ao-tAei;s 'Io-pco/A predicatively in 1 K. xxii. 32 <patWcu /3. 'I. outos, ib. 
 33 ovk co-tlv (3. 'I. outos (and 2 Chr. xviii. 31 — 2), but the absence of 
 the article is not distinctive there, for the context contains 1 K. 
 xxii. 31 kol /SacriAevs Suptas cveTciAaTo. Jn does not shrink from 
 using the article with a predicate concer?zing Christ: but in all such 
 cases the article implies uniqueness in the universe (not like Mk vi. 3 
 ovx ovtos io-TLv 6 TtKTwv ,-), as " the light of men," " the light of the 
 world," "the good shepherd," "the way," "the truth" etc. In x. 2- 
 " He that entereth through the door is shepherd (-n-oLfjajv cVtij/) of the 
 sheep," R.V. has txt "the shepherd," marg. "a shepherd" But "the 
 good shepherd " comes later, and the intention here seems to be to 
 prepare the way for it by something intermediate between "a 
 
 1 [2668 a] Xen. Conviv. i. 14 iv ti2 /xera^v TravadLi.evos...(rvyKCL\v\paiJ.evos 
 <o.t{k€ito looks, at first sight, like another instance of "afterwards" : but I think 
 the writer has in his mind i. 16 dveKaXv^aro, so that iv t. fi. means "for the time." 
 The passage at all events shews how the meaning "afterwards" might naturally 
 arise. Origen explains twice {ad loc.) iv t. fi., as meaning that the disciples did 
 not like to ask their Master to eat in the presence of the woman or before 
 the Samaritans — not a very satisfactory explanation, but one that at all events 
 recognises that the insertion of so unusual a phrase needs to be explained. 
 Nonnus has'Ej'^a xpt> vov peaariyv, wpiv dareos turodi fiaiveiv ZTeivo/xivuv ve<pe\i]5bv 
 iirrjTpifia Kv^xara \aCiv. 
 
 512 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2671] 
 
 shepherd " (which might suggest "one of many shepherds") and "the 
 [ideal'] good shepherd " presently to be mentioned. 
 On the article with 'lepocoAyMA (1970) 
 
 [2670] John is the only writer in N.T. that uses the article with 
 the declinable name 'lepoaoXv/xa, ii. 23, v. 2 (where it may be 
 intended to " carry the reader back " to Jerusalem mentioned in 
 v. 1, and may be explained as "anaphoric" 1 ), x. 22 iyevero tote to. 
 
 Ivnaivia. iv rots 'I. (v.r. eyeVe-ro Se to. €., and iv I.), xi. 18 rjv 8k T5r)8avia 
 
 cyyus twv 'I. In the last of these passages the article perhaps em- 
 phasizes the local meaning: — "near the city walls" "near the [city 
 of] Jerusalem." Similarly, in the first two books of Maccabees, 
 "Jerusalem," though used without the article more than 20 times, 
 is used with it in 2 Mace. xi. 8 7rpos tchs 'I. " hard by the [avails of] 
 Jerusalem," and xii. 9 " so that the flashes of the light were visible 
 up to the [walls of] Jerusalem (eis to. 'I.), two hundred and forty 
 furlongs." In John, the context is local in v. 2 ("near the sheep 
 pool") and in x. 22 (which mentions "Solomon's porch"). In 
 ii. 23 the name cannot very well be "anaphoric" to ii. 13 which 
 seems rather too far off for that hypothesis. Perhaps the meaning 
 is " When he was [with the multitude of the pilgrims assembled] 
 inside the [walls of] Jerusalem at the Passover, many believed on 
 him 3 ." 
 On the article with KeAptoN (1970) 
 
 [2671] The article (™z/) in xviii. 1 (R.V. txt) "He went forth... 
 over the brook Kidron" (marg. "ravine of the (rwv) cedars") — on 
 
 1 [2670 a] ' Aua<popiK6v is used (Steph.) by the Greek Grammarians to denote 
 the '■'■relative" pronoun, but it is applied by Blass p. 153 to the definite article in 
 v. 2 ; and " anaphoric " is a very convenient term to denote 6 when meaning " the 
 above-mentioned.'" 
 
 2 [2670 b] Along with Jn's peculiar use of ra 'lepoaSXvfia may be mentioned 
 his use of rr]v y9jp in iii. 22 (comp. iv. 3 (D and latt.)) et's tt)v 'lovSalav yr\v, 
 where it would be unreasonable to suppose that he meant the same thing as 
 the ordinary T7)v'Iov8aiav (vii. 3, xi. 7). The context indicates that Jesus came 
 
 from Jerusalem so that He could not be said to come "into Judcea" : but He 
 comes from the Judsean capital "into the Judaean land," i.e. into the country 
 round about Jerusalem, comp. Mk i. 5 17 'lovdala x^P a ( 334 ) distinguished from 
 "the men of Jerusalem." Mt. ii. 6 yrj ToucJa seems to be an error for Mic. v. 2 
 " Ephrathah," and the meaning of it is doubtful. In 2 S. xv. 23 ko.1 iracra. 17 yrj 
 %K\at.ep...Kal ttoLs 6 Xabs wapeTroptvovro, the Heb. "land" is rendered by the Targ. 
 (Walton) " habitatores terrae," but the Targum word mostly means "sojourners" 
 (Levy Ch. i. 173 a). It might suggest "countryfolk," peasants, called in Hebrew 
 " people of the land." 
 
 A. vi. 513 33 
 
[2672] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 which Blass (p. 315) says that the text is "in xBCD etc. stupidly 
 corrupted 1 " — may certainly be explained, and possibly justified, by 
 the following considerations. The exact meaning of the Hebrew 
 name "Kidron" is unknown; but it is generally connected with 
 Kedar "dark" — an epithet that might easily be given, from natural 
 causes, to a ravine or to the torrent in it. According to Hor. Heb. 
 i. 85 (and ib. on Jn xviii. 1) the ravine had come to be used as an 
 open sewer, and, in the Talmud, Kedar signifies "dung." These two 
 facts might suggest for the name an unsavoury origin against which 
 some might be glad to protest by deriving it from the Greek KeSpos, 
 which was adopted as a late Hebrew word 2 . Accordingly a Talmudic 
 tradition describes two "cedars" of portentous size on the neigh- 
 bouring mount of Olives. This hill ran down to the Kidron, and 
 cedars on the slope might be supposed to give the name to the 
 ravine 3 . 
 
 [2672] In the mss. of the LXX the accent of the word varies, 
 and (being of little authority) will be omitted in the following 
 quotations (as also all distinctions between k and K) ; but it is 
 important to note that the LXX always spells the name with e. The 
 first place where it occurs describes the passage of David across 
 Kidron, and the mss. vary as follows, 2 S. xv. 23 (lit. Heb.) "and 
 all the people passing and the king, passing in the torrent Kidron 
 and all the people passing on the face of the way of the wilderness," 
 B KO.L 7Ttt? o Aaos 7raptTropevovTo iv rw x«ipappa) rwv xeSpoiv kou o 
 ySarrtXevs hiefir) rov ^ei fiappovv KeSpojV. .. 4 , A k. tt. o A. TraptTroptvovTO 
 /cat o /SaaiXevs 7rapep^o/xcvos iv tw ^ei/nappio twv KeSpwv. .., Luc. k. it. 
 6 X. huTropzvero «cu 6 /3. Sit7ropeveTO iv tw ^et/xappw KeSpojv... 5 . There 
 
 1 W.II. follow BC tuv Kedpwv, XD have rov Kebpou with a and /'. 
 
 - [2671 a] Levy Ch. ii. 347 a has nedpos, and Levy iv. 249 a has niSpivov. 
 
 :i [2671/;] J. Taanith. iv. 6 (Schwab vol. vi. p. 191). Under one of these 
 cedars were "four shops" selling things needed for purification, and under the 
 other were sold " pigeons sufficing for the sacrifices of all Israel." Cedars of such 
 immense size could almost certainly not have grown on Mount Olivet. If they 
 had grown there, they would almost certainly have found some other mention 
 in Jewish tradition. 
 
 4 [2672^] Swete prints the first Kedpwv as a paroxyton plural noun, t&v KiSpwv, 
 the second as an oxyton sing, name, Ktbpwv, i.e. (1) "the ravine of tlic cedars" 
 (2) "the ravine Kedron, or Cedar-grove.' 1 '' He prints tCjv Kibpwv " of the cedars" 
 in 1 K. xv. 13. (Jmip. Euseb. Onotnast. p. 273 x e 'M- % (papayij Kebpwv, but p. 303 
 Xfi/U. K^Spu>i>. 
 
 '' [2672/'] Luc, at the end, has 2674,/) Kara tt)v 65di> tt)s Aoias rijs et> rrj 
 ifrfiny. 
 
 5'4 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2673] 
 
 is no v. r. in i K. xv. 13 eVrw \ eilx - T< ^ v K£ Spwi' (but Luc. om. tiCv). 
 Elsewhere Tt3r is omitted before KeSpwv (1 K. ii. 37, 2 K. xxiii. 6 
 etc.) as it is also before "Arnon," " Kishon " etc. when they are 
 preceded by the word "torrent" or "ravine" (xei^appous) 1 . It looks 
 as though some tradition connecting " Kidron " with " cedars " has 
 left its influence on one or two passages where that ravine is 
 mentioned, and especially the one in which David is described as 
 passing over it in sorrow*, so that it is described by some as "the 
 ravine of the cedars." 
 
 [2673] In Josephus, KcSpwv (which occurs nine times) is never 
 clearly an indeclinable noun and is sometimes clearly declinable 3 . 
 This proves nothing as to the sense he attached to the name, for 
 it is in accordance with his custom of making "Arnon" and "Sihon," 
 etc. as well as "Simon," declinable. But it is significant that he 
 often attaches to Kt&pwv the word "called." Now it is the custom of 
 this historian to speak of " the mountain called of Olives," " the 
 tomb called the Potter's," " the camp called of the Assyrians," in such 
 a way as to suggest that the Greek word connected with "called" is to 
 he translated, as explaining the origin of the place-name. This leads to 
 the conclusion that according to analogy he intends his readers to 
 translate KeSpwv by " cedars " and not to transliterate it as " Kedron." 
 It may mean KeSpwv "of cedars" or KeSpwV "cedar-grove": but in 
 either case, it must be translated 4 . It may be noted also that 
 
 1 [2672^] The article is ins. between "the torrent" and " Bosor " ("the 
 torrent the Bosor") by LXX in 1 S. xxx. 10, 21 (r. x- T - Bo<r6/3, or Beavd) and 
 by Luc. in 1 S. xxx. 9; but that is because the Heb. has "the Bosor" quite 
 exceptionally. The Heb. has not "the Kidron." 
 
 2 [2672 </] Jerome (Onomasl. p. 53) has " Cedron, tristis maeror siue 
 dolor." 
 
 3 [2673 a] In the following, eXaiuiv as well as Kedpuv will be left unaccented : 
 Atit. viii. 1. 5. SiafSaiv etc tov xeip-dppow Ktopwva (v.r. nedpwvos, and so Hudson), 
 ix. 7. 3 eis tt)v (papayya tt)v Kedpwvos, Bell. v. 2. 3 Kara to eXaiwv KaXovp.evov opos... 
 (pdpayyi padeia 5uipy6pevov -q xedpwv ihvbpaaTaL, v. 4. 2 Kara to tov Vva(pews 
 Trpoaayopevd/J-evov p.vr}p.a...eis tt\v Kedpuva KaXovpev-qv (papayya, v. 6. 1 &xpi tov 
 Kedpojvos...Kal ttjv Kedpuva KaXovpitvyv (papayya, v. 7. 3 Kara tt\v 'Aacrvpiuv 
 irapeppoXyv KaXovpJvqv iwio-xuv tcLv to /xeTafii p.ixP L T °v feSpweos, v. \i. 2 dwb Trjs 
 ' Ao-avpiuv irapeppoXr)s..Jvdev 5:d tov Kedpuvos eirl to eXaiuv opos, vi. 3. 2 t?)s 
 xedpwvos KaXov/j.ev7]s (pdpayyos. 
 
 4 [2673 £] Contrast Ant. iv. 5. \ ewi tov iroTap.bv (Niese) 'ApvQv' Ss etc t&v... 
 (v.r. dpvQvos, dpvwva, dpvuv, dpvwv) iv. 5. 2 TpiQv woTapuv . . .tov p.ev 'Apvuvos... 
 (without KaXovpevov etc.) where the name has nothing to do with "lambs" and is 
 not to be translated. Scribes might well be perplexed by the various ways 
 
 515 S3— 2 
 
[2674] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 Josephus — when describing the flight of David from Jerusalem — 
 though he does not mention xe&pwv, uses iXacwv as a declinable 
 noun (Ant. vii. 9, 2) Sia tov 'EAaiwyos opous " through the mountain 
 [called the] place of olives^-." Blass (pp. 32, 64, 85) would emend 
 'EAatwvos both here and in Acts i. 12. But there is good reason to 
 think that 'EAutwv, the Latin Olivetum, or Olive-grove, might be a 
 form that recommended itself both to Josephus and to Luke, 
 when writing in an elevated style, in preference to the more 
 popular name " mount of olives.''' 
 
 [2674] If John had written tov x €i l x - KeSpwv, meaning " the brook 
 Kidron" without explaining it as he explains " Siloam." " Gabbatha," 
 "Golgotha" etc., (1) he would have gone contrary to his usage by 
 introducing a place-name with the definite article without explaining 
 it ; (2) he would have adopted a Hebraic construction contrary to 
 his usage ; (3) he would have gone the way to mislead Greek readers 
 (who would naturally suppose it to mean " cedars "). But by writing 
 twv KcSpwv without explanation (1) he writes intelligibly for Greeks, 
 (2) he adopts the exact language of the LXX describing the exile of 
 David from Jerusalem, (3) he falls in with a seemly tradition (possibly 
 Jewish as well as Greek) that the name meant " the torrent, or 
 
 of representing the names of places with the meanings of their names e.g. Gen. 
 xxvi. 33 indXcaev to ovo/xa ai/Tov "OpKos, Josh. v. 3 iirl tov KaXov/nfrov t6wov 
 Bowbs twu dxpofivGTiwv. See 2680 c. 
 
 1 [2673 c] In Ant., the only other mention is xx. 8. 6 7rpos opos to wpoaayopevb- 
 ixivov iXaMv tpxeo-Oat where Niese om. fpxeo-dai but adds that two Mss. insert it. 
 Hudson inserts it without comment, and it is needed to complete the sense. 
 Hence we may read eXaiQv tpxeadai as Niese reads in iv. 5. 1 ' \pvGiv 8s 
 (2673 />). But Joseph. Bell. ii. 13. 5 and v. 2. 3 has t6 eXaiwu KaXovfitvov opos, v. 3. 5 
 iirl tov iXaiwv 8povs (v.r. Ka\ovp.euov 8povs), v. 12. 2, vi. 2. 8 to e\cuwv 8pos — 
 agreeing with the use of the LXX and of Mk-Mt., who all say "mount of Olives." 
 It may be taken as certain that Josephus never regards i\aiwv as an indeclinable 
 noun, for he dislikes and avoids such nouns as far as possible — as may be seen from 
 his use of ~Zivolov opos (never Stvci), Ya\d5r]s or ra\a8rjvri (never FaXadd exc. as 
 a personal name), and from his avoidance (or mention as declinable nouns) of 
 the names "Canaan," " Hor," " Horeb," and " Seir." Note also the way in 
 which he introduces Gerizim (Ant. iv. 8. 44) Svotv opdlv, Vpifalov (with v.r.) /j.tv 
 tov..., only by degrees falling into the use of the indeclinable form. These facts 
 illustrate the divergence between Acts i. 12 dirb opovs r. Ka.Xovfj.frov eXaiuvos 
 (a declinable noun) and Lk. xix. 29, xxi. 37 irpbs (or els) t6 opos to KaXovixevov 
 (Xaiwv, where a declinable noun is out of the question, as il would have to be accus. 
 (Xatuva. The formei is Luke's own use, the latter is that of Synoptic Tradition. 
 
 516 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2676] 
 
 ravine, of the cedars." This reading is also supported by the 
 
 best mss. 1 
 
 On aAAoc and eVepoc (1972) 
 
 [2675] On v. 32 dAAos eVriv 6 fxapTvpuJv (1972) Blass (p. 180) 
 most appropriately quotes Aesch. Suppl. 230 f. kciku 8tKa'^et...Z€t's 
 dAAos. See Lightf. (Gal. i. 6 — 7) "uAAos adds, while erepos distin- 
 guishes," and "eVepov implies a difference of kind, which is not 
 involved in dAAo," "dAAos is another as 'one besides,' erepos another 
 as ' one of two ' " ; and from this notion of " two," often implying 
 contrast, erepos sometimes comes to mean " different." If dAAos 
 means " another of the same kind " here, it has a bearing on the 
 relation between the Speaker and God, who is the "other." But there 
 is some difficulty in proving that John observes the distinction, as 
 he uses erepos only once, xix. 37 "another (trepa) scripture saith." 
 He has previously quoted one scripture from the Law (Ex. xii. 46 
 " not a bone shall be broken ") and he may mean that " a second and 
 independent scripture " from Prophecy predicted the " piercing." Heb. 
 v. 6 KaOuv; k. iv irepoi Aeyei is not a certain parallel (R.V. "as he saith 
 also in another [place] ") for Westc. ad toe. alleges no instance of toVw 
 omitted, and Clem. Rom. viii. iv Irip^ toVq) (" in another [or, second] 
 passage ") suggests that toVcu would have been inserted had that been 
 the meaning ; moreover Chrys. ad loc. (tis c'o-ti Kara tt)v rd^iv MeA^. ; 
 oiSets €T€po5...ow8eVa av e^ 01 Tts ^Tcpov Sei^ai) rather suggests that he 
 took tripos to mean " other [than Christ].'''' The use of erepos and 
 aAAos is different in different authors ; e.g. in Dan., LXX freq. has 
 d'AAos and erepos whereas Theod. has eVepos freq., dAAos never. In 
 Is. lxv. 15 "another name," i.e. different, LXX has /catvdv, Aq. and 
 Sym. htpov. In N.T., the Petrine and Johannine Epistles never use 
 4'T£pos, and Jude only uses it once (verse 7) in the phrase "strange 
 flesh," according to the LXX use of the word in "strange gods" etc. 
 
 [2676] The Pauline Epistles observe the distinction pointed out 
 
 1 [2674«] In the description of David's flight (2 S. xv. 23 foil.), the Bible 
 mentions both " Kidron " and " Olivet." Josephus mentions only Olivet. Luc. 
 in 2 S. xv. 23 adds (2672 b) " of the olive," beside mentioning "the ascent of the 
 Olives" in ib. 30. In the Gospels, where Mk-Mt. mention "Mount of Olives" 
 and "Gethsemane," Lk. has " Mount of Olives" alone, Jn KeSpwv alone, but SS 
 in Jn has "the torrent of Cedron, a hill where..." and so Diatess. It is almost 
 certain that at a very early time a parallel must have been perceived between the 
 going forth of David and that of Christ ; and the parallel may have influenced 
 the latest of the Gospels most. 
 
 517 
 
[2677] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 by Lightf. on Gal. i. 6 eh erepov evayyekiov, 6 ovk eo-riv aAAo, " to 
 a different Gospel, which is not another [of the same kind]...." So 
 Rom. ii. i "thou judgest thy neighbour (tov erepov)," ii. 21 "thou 
 that teachest some otie else (erepov without toV)," vii. 3 " if she become 
 [wedded] to a new husband (dv8pl I.)," 4 " that you should become 
 [wedded] to a new [husband] (eh to yeveaOai v/jloLs erepw)" vii. 23 
 " But I note a new-and-strange (erepov) law in my members," 
 viii. 38 — 9 "nor [evil] angels, nor principalities, nor powers, ...nor 
 any other \however new and strange] created thing (ktlo-l<; erepa)." 
 There is perhaps a play on erepos in xiii. 8 — 9 " he that loveth his 
 neighbour (rov erepov) hath fulfilled Torah ; for the [command], Thou 
 shalt not commit adultery... and every other {however separate and 
 distinct] (erepa) commandment is summed up in this," where perhaps 
 there is also an allusion to the fact that the second half of the 
 Decalogue (which deals with man's duty to man) was recognised as 
 (Philo ii. 189, 201 etc.) rj erepa 7T€iTas, "the second and distinct 
 Pentad." And perhaps Chrysostom is right here in saying that the 
 Apostle means that the love of man includes the love of God. It 
 would be possible similarly to go through the other Pauline Epistles 
 (excluding the pastoral ones) and to shew that erepos always 
 has a shade of difference from aAAos, e.g. in 2 Cor. xi. 4 SXKov 
 'lr)o-ovv...Trvev/xa erepov ... evayyeXiov erepov " another Jesus., .a different 
 [Holy] Spirit... a different Gospel." Even in 1 Cor. xii. 8 — 10 
 where irepia twice intervenes between uAAw, the writer means " one 
 .. .another. ..some one else... another... someone else" and he omits 8i 
 after erepu> to gain emphasis by abruptness. 
 
 [2677] These details support Lightfoot's view of Gal. i. 6 against 
 that of Blass, who sees (p. 318) "no distinction." They also shew 
 that each author must be judged by himself. Perhaps in Lk. and 
 Acts the use varies according to the documents compiled by the 
 author. In Lk. xvi. 18 yajxwv erepav means (as in Rom. viii. 3) 
 "marrying a nav wife," but the parall. Mk x. n, Mt. xix. 9 have 
 aXk-qv. John, being a peculiarly discriminative writer, probably means 
 (xix. 37) "a different and independent prophecy" or a "second 
 prophecy" (not "another of the same kind"). In Jn v. 43 eav 
 dAA.09 e\6rj, we might have expected erepos as in Mt. xi. 3, Lk. vii. 19 
 "Are we to expect a different [deliverer]?" but Jn means " If another 
 come {professing to be of the same hind as niysc/f]^ like the Pauline 
 (2 Cor. xi. 4) rlAA.oi' 'Ir/irofr. ( )n I,k. vii. 19 erepov Trpoan'oKiop.ev peril. 
 
 softened to Lk. vii. 20 aXkov TrporrHoKw/xev see 1856. 
 
 518 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2679] 
 On the accusative of time (2013) 
 
 [2678] In Mk xiii. 35 oi/'e rj /x€(Toi'vktlov (v. r. -lov) rj dXeKTopo- 
 tfxuvias, it is usual (Swete ad loc. and Blass p. 311) to take \x.. as 
 accus. But it would be difficult to explain the abrupt change from 
 accus. to genit. More probably /x. is adverbial. See Wetst. ad loc. 
 who first quotes Phrynichus as saying that /xecrovvKTiov is " poetic," 
 and then Theocr. xiii. 69, xxiv. n, in both of which passages the 
 word is adverbial (/xeaovvKTim>, in the latter, being illustrated by 
 Kiessling from Anacr. iii. 1 fieaowKTiOLs ttoO' wpaLs). This adverbial 
 use distinguishes Mk from Lk., who (like Lucian and Plutarch) 
 uses /m. as a noun, Lk. xi. 5, Acts xvi. 25, xx. 7 1 . 
 On the article used vocatively (2051) 
 
 [2679] As regards xx. 28 'O /a'pios fiov (in the confession of 
 Thomas) it must be noted that the vocative with 6 in idiomatic Greek 
 differs in tone and usage from the vocative with the Hebrew article. 
 The latter is frequently solemn and addressed to God ; the former is 
 often vernacular and imperious as being addressed to a slave, or to 
 a policeman, or to a nameless person in a crowd, or to some one 
 whose name the speaker humorously affects to have forgotten 2 . 
 
 1 [2678 a] For a curious phrase, prob. indicating point of time, see Berl. Pap. 
 i. no. 69 (a.D. 120) d/iaxfJ-ds...as Kai airoSwo-w aoi tG> tvyioTa b~ody)cro^vip oxpwv'nc. 
 This is rendered in Class. Rev. (1901) vol. xv. p. 438 "with your next wages," 
 as meaning accompaniment ; but the document is an I. O. U. given by Valerius 
 Longus LTTirevs to Julius Agrippianus iinrevs, of the same Tvp/xr), as follows : opioXoyQ 
 iX LV TrcLpd gov xpr\o-LV Ivtokov dpyvpiov ae^ao-Tov vo/xlf/jLaros dpax/nas eKarov rejcrepa- 
 kovtcl, as Kai dwodccad} <xoi ru> 'ivyiaTa dodTjcroue'vw oipuviui. We cannot suppose that 
 one soldier would say to another in the same squadron " I will pay you so-and-so 
 ■with your next wages." Perhaps — as in English we say "at the next prize- 
 distribution," "at the next feast" (where ''at" means "at the time of" or 
 "when it comes round") — so these military men were in the habit of saying 
 among themselves "at next pay" meaning "at next pay [day]." 
 
 2 [2679(7] Aristoph. Ach. 54 "the police [there, off with him]," oi ro^SraL, 
 Ran. 40 6 7ra(s, and 521, 6 7ra7s, &Ko\ovdei lit. "the boy [in attendance]," Xen. 
 Anab. i. 5. 16 (in a hasty and unceremonious speech dispensing with the usual 
 &v5pes) KXeapxe Kai Ilpo^eve Kai oi d'XXot oi irapovres "EW^es, ovk 'Care o,ti irote'iTe. 
 Perh. too we should follow Steph. in reading 6 (not with Stalb. w) in Plato Symp. 
 172 "Mr Pha'lcrian (6 <i>.), said he, you there (euros), Apollodorus ! '" Athen. 
 xiii. 580 T> ~M.eipa.Kioi>, 6 KaXos, (p-qai, addressed to a young butcher with a play on 
 the word koK6s (sometimes written up in the streets as a sign of affection). Blass 
 p. 86 quotes Aristoph. Acharn. 1^1 irpb'Cd' et's to -KpbaQiv okiyov y\ Kavr\<pbpos which 
 sounds better than the regular and formal (Dind.) wpoiru 's to irpbaOev... : but 
 something would depend on the degree of respect attached to the young lady. 
 This idiom is of a piece with the appellative ovtos, the French " chose," and 
 English slang equivalents. 
 
 519 
 
[2680] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 When Mark uses this vocative in the Hebrew sense, he is careful to 
 prefix the Aramaic original 1 . When he uses it imperiously, he does 
 not insert the Aramaic 2 . In expressing the solemn vocative of 
 " Father," divergences would naturally arise in Greek. The Aramaic 
 is Abba, the article, or vocative case, being in the suffix. This might 
 be expressed by (i) TraVep, (2) 6 iraryp, or (3) -n-aTT/p (setting aside 
 Hebraic w as meaning in LXX something different from the Greek 
 <S). The first of these (supplemented by 77'pwv in Mt.) has been 
 adopted in the Lord's Prayer, the second (supplemented by 'A/?/3J) 
 in Mk; John, as we have seen (2052 — 3), uses both (1) and (3) and 
 appears to distinguish between them. 
 
 [2680] These facts should keep the reader's mind open to the 
 possibility of exceptional Johannine usage as to the vocative of Kx'pios. 
 The vocative Kvpu occurs repeatedly in the Egyptian papyri, and 
 it is also used in Talmudic Hebrew and Aramaic, meaning "my 
 lord" or '-sir," besides being applied (2049 foil.) to God in the LXX 
 and elsewhere. It might, therefore, imply no special reverence ; and 
 Mark puts pafifii, but never Kvpu, into the mouths of the disciples 
 addressing Jesus 3 . In the healing of the leper, where Matthew and 
 Luke have /ojpie, Mark omits it 4 . The Matthew-Luke tradition repre- 
 sents Christ as condemning those who say to Him Kupie, Kv'pte, without 
 doing His commandments 5 . Origen, in a comment on Jn xiii. 13 -upas 
 (pwyetri pe 'O SiSao-KaAos ko.1 'O KvpLos, remarks on the uselessness of 
 
 1 [2679/;] Mk v. 41 TaXeidd Kovfj. 6 iariv pLedep/j.r]vev6p.evov To Kopdatov, <roi 
 \eyio, lyeipe, Mt. ix. 25 om., Lk. viii. 54 t/ wals Zyeipe, and Mk xiv. 36 'A/3/3d, 
 6 irarrip, Mt. xxvi. 39 irdrep /jlov, Lk. xxii. 42 wdrep. 
 
 [2679 r] Mk ix. 25 to &\a\ov kolI tcuxpov wvevp.a (Mt.-Lk. om.), Delitzsch does 
 not ins. the Heb. article. Lk. has the vocative article in xii. 32 fxri <poj3ov rb 
 fuxpbv -Kolp.vi.ov, and a quasi-vocative article in vi. 25 oval Vfiiv, oi ep.Trew\r](r/j.(voi, 
 but xi. 39 vvv v/xels oi <P....Ka8apii i ~eTe seems rather appositional than vocative. 
 MaKapioL oi tttuix ol ' s followed in Mt. V. 3 by avrQv but in Lk. vi. 20 by 
 vuerdpa, as though vocative ; and a corresponding difference continues in the 
 contexts. 
 
 ■' [2680 a] Ki'ipu, in Mk, is uttered only by the Syrophcenician woman (Mk vii. 
 28). The disciples, including Judas, use pappi thrice, Mk ix. 5; xi. zi, xiv. 45. 
 
 4 Mk i. 40, Mt. viii. 2, Lk. v. 12. 
 [2680 /'| Ml. vii. 21 oil irds 6 \tywv p.01 KOpie, Krpie, Lk. vi. 46 ri 84 p.e 
 KaXeire Kvpu, Kvpic; On the latter of these A 1 1 . makes no remark, but Sieph. 
 gives nothing like the constr. ; D has Xtyerai, i.e. Xtyere, and so have Clem. Alex 
 and Iren. (dicitis) ; SS and Diatess. have "Not all that say unto me, ' My Lord, 
 my Lord." Mt. vii. 22 3 describes the rejection of some, who cry Ktfptc, Kvpie. 
 The parall. Lk. xiii. 25 describes the rejection of some, who cry Kvpu. 
 
 520 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2682] 
 some utterances of Kvpie, Kvpte, and he adduces i Cor. xii. 3 eiirelv 
 
 Kupios , lrj(TOv<;, and speaks of to KaAws eiTreiv tw HoiTrjpi to 'O 8iSa(TKttAos. 
 
 He leaves on us the impression that he does not regard 6 SiSao-/caAos 
 as a Hebraic vocative, but as a title used in the nominative : " Ye 
 address me [using] the [title] Teacher and the [title] Lord 1 ," and 
 that this seems to him more weighty than the ordinary vocative Kvpie, 
 which might mean merely "Sir." He is, of course, writing not about 
 the difference of cases but about the difference of spirit : yet he seems 
 to assume that the Johannine 6 Kvpios, though not predicatively used, 
 implies a confession of lordship. 
 
 [2681] In the Apocalypse, Kvpie, 6 deos is thrice used 2 vocatively. 
 In Rev. iv. 11 afios «, 6 Kvpws koi 6 6e6s rjpajyv — where A.V. follows 
 an inferior text with simply Kvpie — the rendering (in view of the non- 
 existence of 6 Kvpios as a vocative anywhere and the threefold Kvpie 
 6 #eo's in this very book) seems to be " Thou, [being] our Lord and 
 our God, art worthy " ; but it differs very little from a vocative. 
 
 [2682] Returning to the confession of Thomas, most readers will 
 feel that the ordinary vocative Kvpie p:ov would have been com- 
 paratively common-place, and that it would also have almost required 
 to be followed by some appeal for help, or some ascription of praise. 
 Thomas's silence is far more effective. We have also to consider 
 that the Saviour has previously approved of the appellation 6 
 Sioao-KaAos km. 6 Kvpto% : and there is an appropriateness in His 
 leading them on from that to the still higher o' Kupios kcu o' Oeos. 
 It has been noted above (2680 b) that, where Matthew has o' Xiywv 
 pot, Kvpie, Luke has the rare or unique /xe KaXeire, Kvpie, apparently 
 meaning KaXelre Xeyovres. Similarly, John might use elirev aira in 
 the sense of e'/caAeo-e or et^e (pwvtZv. These facts favour the view of 
 R. V. (against the one suggested in 2051) that xai means " and " (not 
 " also ") and that the meaning is " Thomas said to him [the words] 
 4 My lord— and my God 3 .'" 
 
 1 [2680 c] Lobeck p. 517 quotes Dio Cass. lvii. 14. 860, Pausan. viii. 41. 479 
 and ix. 25. 76, Aesch. De fals. I. p. 275, Plutarch, De Garrulitate ch. xxii. to 
 shew that the nominative may follow the phrases ivwvviulav \aj3eiv etc. 
 ( = Ka\e~iadai). More remarkable are (iV>.) Phot. Bibl. lxxx. p. 192 a; KKijaiv 'iQtvTO 
 4>a\evTiviav6s, Dio Cass, xliii. 13. 349 (3if3\Lov ypa\pas 8 ' Avtiko.twi' eK&\ecre. In 
 xiii. 13 Nonnus has accus. Koipavov and di8d(TKa\oi>. 
 
 2 Rev. xi. 17, xv. 3, xvi. 7. 
 
 3 [2682 a] Origen (on xiii. 13) has eiirdv ry Scur^pt to '0 diddoKaXos. Having 
 regard to the frequent interchange of and w in the first century, it is quite 
 
 521 
 
[2683] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 On ix. 30 In TOYTcp r^'p (2068) 
 
 [2683] In ix. 30 ev tovtw yap to OavpaaTov... a, b, and SS omit 
 ydp. D, e and Walton's Syriac have ovv. A and others have iv yap 
 tovtw. Also e must have read tovto for iv tovtw (and Scrivener's 
 Adversaria mentions tovto as a Gk reading). To before 6avp.ao-Tov 
 is omitted by AD and others. Diatess. has " From this is the wonder." 
 Blass (p. 275) remarks that the words are " equivalent to an interroga- 
 tive ov yap iv tovtw." This suggests that oi interrogative may have 
 been dropped by most mss. but may have been read by D and e as 
 ovv supplanting yap. But ov yap interrogative, though good classical 
 Greek, does not occur in John, who frequently uses it in statement 
 (iii. 17, 34, iv. 9, xii. 47 etc.). Nonnus has Tovto ydp io-Ti to 6avp.a 
 ttoXv TrXeov otti irep vpuv ' Ouros i.r}v ayvwaTos, shewing that he read 
 yap 1 . Did he also read tovto with e, and, if so, iv as ev meaning 
 "unique," "preeminent"? Comp. Epict. i. 17. 13 S.p' ovv tovto eon 
 to /Ae'ya «at to 6avp.acn6v . . . ; "Is this, then, the great [object], the 
 wonderful [idea/] ...?" 
 On 6 Ae, h Ae' (2071) 
 
 [2684] In John, o' 6V, r; Se etc. is far rarer than in any other 
 Gospel and almost always occurs in the phrase "and, or but, he said." 
 
 possible that in xx. 28 the original was eirreN&YTOTOOKYpioc and that the second 
 TO has been omitted. T6, when thus or similarly used, and also when prefixed to 
 interrogations, is very liable to corruption, as in Mk ix. 23, Mt. xix. 18, Lk. i. 62, 
 xix. 48, Gal. iv. 25, 1 Thess. iv. 1 etc. 
 
 [2682 />] Nonnus has 0co^as 5' v<TTepbp.7)TLs d/j.oi(3&5a p-q^aTO (puji>r)v, KoLpavos 
 Jlfxtrepos Kai tubs 8 e6s, where the change of pron. {"oin-...my") is rather startling. 
 But perhaps he felt that "my Lord" was liable to be confused with "my lord," 
 which means little more than " Sir." "My God" could not be thus misunderstood: 
 and the sing, "my" was preferable here as it expressed Thomas's personal con- 
 viction that his "lord" was also "God." I do not however think that Nonnus 
 means "our Lord [is] also my God" as suggested in 2051. 
 
 1 [2683 a] Comp. J-'ayfini Pap. 123 (Edd.) "Having been molested I was 
 unable to come down... let us get from him the rest of the oil if you agree, [/say, 
 ' molested?] for Teuphilus the Jew has come (e\r)\vdev yap T. 'lovdaios) saying 'I 
 have been pressed in as a cultivator, and I want to go to Sabinus.' [This is 
 strange"] for he did not ask me to be released at the time that he was impressed 
 (uC/Te yap eip^x e V^)" dydfievos 'iva air oXvdrj), but has suddenly told me to-day 
 (a\\a al<puioi[. ]ws ilprjxiv i}puv ar)fxepov). [You need take no at present] for 
 
 J will find out whether he is speaking the truth [yvuaonai ->dp ei dXijdQs Xeyi)." 
 
 [2683A] The translation given above is that of the editor,, except that they 
 omitted a rendering of yap in each case, and 1 have inserted it together with 
 
 a conjectural additii 1 the ellipsis implied. Note also (i) ttprjxev {sic) used for 
 
 direv once at least, if nol twice, (a) the use of oflre...dXAd. 
 
 5 2 2 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2687] 
 
 In iv. 32, v. 17, vi. 20, R.V. has "But he [Jesus] said," in vii. 41 
 " But some said," in xx. 25 "But he [Thomas] said " —because in all 
 these cases there is adversativeness. Besides iv. 32, v. 17, vi. 20, it 
 is used once more (xxi. 6 R.V. "and he said ") of Jesus, in His reply 
 to the saying of the disciples that they have taken no fish. Perhaps 
 it would be best to render it "but," so as to suggest adversativeness : 
 " They said, We have taken nothing [and were on the point of desisting 
 from fishing], but he said, 'Cast the net. ..and ye shall find fish." 
 Then all the four passages where John uses o 8e concerning Jesus 
 will represent Him as correcting or comforting the disciples or 
 opposing the Jews. 
 On Hnep (2092) 
 
 [2685] "H-n-ep occurs emphatically with //.SAA01/ in Xen. Conv. i. 15 
 
 ovre yap eycoye airovSarrai av &vi>ai/xrjv p.aXXov rjirep a6dvaTO<; yevecrOai, 
 "I could no more be serious than become immortal," implying 
 "I could not possibly become immortal." Comp. Orig. Comm. 
 Joann. Lorara. i. 262 cvSokovvtos toi) Ocov ptaXXov rjpas avahe^acrBat... 
 aiKias. . .rjirep airaXXayrjiaL twv tchtovtwi' vo/ju^o/xevuiv kclkwv, and lb. 
 ii. 252 crvvapir a'Qeiv p.a\\.ov kcu crofpL^eaOaL SvvaraL... 'qirep irel0e.Lv (v.r. 
 
 eiirep ireidei). For Eustathius on Iliad i. 117 see Steph. rjirep. 
 On ina (2093) 
 
 [2686] John's predilection for Iva does not appear to be sufficiently 
 recognised in Blass's remarks (p. 223) (a) "John, Matthew, and Mark 
 employ it very freely. Luke much more rarely especially in the 
 Acts," (p. 321) (b) "Probably even in the Gospels its insertion is 
 often the work of scholiasts " : (c) " in Jo. v. 36 read reXetQaai with 
 Tert.," (d) "in xi. 31 KXavaat (without eKct) with Syr. Lew. and 
 Chrys.," (e) "[in] xi. 55 [read] ctyi/to-cu with Chrys.," (/) "[in] xii. 20 
 [read] irpoo-Kwrjo-ai with Syr. Lew. and Chrys." 
 
 [2687] To begin with (a). Since John employs Iva about (1726) 
 as often as Mk, Mt. and Lk. all together 1 , it is reasonable to expect, 
 in him, many uses of it that would seem suspicious in the other 
 evangelists but (b) are not to be suspected, in his Gospel, of being 
 " the work of scholiasts." (c) As regards Tertullian's rendering of 
 v. 36 ha TtXenxxTto (Prax. 31) " consummare," it should be noted 
 
 1 [2687 a] Jn abt 150, Mk 65, Mt. 40, Lk. 50. These figures are hardly 
 compatible with the inference suggested above that Luke uses 'iva "much more 
 rarely" than the other evangelists, including Matthew. It would be less 
 misleading to say that Lk. uses iva more freq. than Mt. in his Gospel, but less 
 freely in the Acts (12 times). 
 
 523 
 
[2687J NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 that whereas the Latin versions agree with the Greek order, Ter- 
 tullian disagrees; and it is quite possible that he wrote " dedit ut 
 consummare," and that the dropping of " ut " after " -it " has led to 
 the reading "consummare 1 ." Chrysostom twice quotes the verse 
 with <W 2 , Nonnus paraphrases it as ocppa TeAe'o-o-w. The ancient 
 Latin translations have "ut." John himself repeats this very phrase 
 with Iva. Why should all these witnesses weigh less than a possibly 
 corrupt text in Tertullian? (d) In xi. 31, it is true that SS renders 
 cis to (jLvrj/xeiov iva KXava-r/ kutl. 1} ovv M. "to the grave... to weep: and 
 she Mary"; but this, besides being slight evidence, may be the 
 result of textual corruption 3 . In any case Chrys. does not quote this 
 passage without ira, but merely refers to it in a paraphrase, " all 
 began to follow her as though she were going away to weep (ws 
 KXavaai aTrep^op-evrj)." Nonnus has 6'<£pa. (<?) In xi. 55 dveftrjaav... 
 Iva ayvio-iDo-Lv eavrovs it is true that Mrs Lewis renders SS freely by 
 "to," but SS has "[in order] that" and Mr Burkitt has "that" 
 Chrysostom condenses and paraphrases three verses thus (xi. 55 — 7) 
 7toAAoi ok ck rrjs ^copas di€J3rjO'av ayvicrai eavrovs. kol kbwKai' irapay- 
 yeAi'as o'l apx«.epeis" kol 01 $. Iva Tnacrwatv avrov. Nonnus has ocppa. 
 (_/") In Xli. 20 rjaav 8e "EAAi/vc's tivcs Ik tmv aiaj3aivovT<i>v iva irpocr- 
 Kwrjaixxriv iv rfj eopT-fj, SS has " to," and Chrysostom has 770-0.1/ 8e tivcs 
 twv 'EWrjviov avaf3ai'T€<5 TrpocrKvvrjcrai; ei? rqv koprrjv. This is the 
 nearest approach to evidence of an original infinitive. But it is quite 
 unconvincing. It simply shews that Chrysostom would himself prefer 
 the inf. to Iva after verbs of motion and that he sometimes lapses 
 into it when he quotes freely or paraphrases. As regards SS, or any 
 
 1 [2687/'] Both here and in xvii. 4 oe5w\-ds /xoi 'iva iroL-qaw, I) reads the aorist 
 (iduKev or e"5wKas). Translators with this reading would naturally use the imperf. 
 subjunct. " consummarem," and indeed in xvii. 4 the Latin versions have " ut 
 facerem." To go further into the question would require an examination of 
 Tertullian's general rendering of iVa clauses and of the instances in which he allows 
 himself to use the infin. after "dedit." Even in the absence of such evidence, it 
 is safe to say that error is more likely to be in Tertullian's present text than in 
 the general consent of all the Greek texts and commentators. 
 
 - [2687 r] Chrys. also thrice quote- the passage with Z8u)Kev for 5e5aM-ee, — which 
 favours the view that Tertullian may have written '•dedit" as an aorist. Cramer 
 print- a quotation oi the words as iva iroiGi (for 'iva TfXauxrw). 
 
 : [2687//] It is pretty certain that SS has read exem as though it were eKCIH 
 i.e. " This explains its omission <>f "there" Reading the context thus 
 
 i rectly, the translator may have dropped INA after ION and taken kAaych as 
 
 kAaycai to make sense. 
 
 524 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2689] 
 
 translation, its evidence, on this point, may be very slight. Comp. 
 i. 27 a£ios tva kvau) (2104 a) where there is no suspicion of any 
 various reading. The Latin versions mostly have " dignus solvere" 
 Vulg. u ut solvam," mm "ut solvere" (sic) ; but it would be absurd to 
 deny that John wrote Iva, although the parallel Synoptists have 
 i«avo's with infinitive. 
 On viii. 56 htaAAia'cato i'na (2097) 
 
 [2688] On viii. 56 7jya.XX1do-a.To iVa i8yj, Blass (p. 225) says "the 
 meaning can only be ' to long with ecstasy ' ' to rejoice that he should 
 see'": and he compares Herm. Vis. iii. 8. 1 (misprinted iii. 8. 7) 
 
 TrepL^aprji; iyevo/X7]v tov t'Setv, and iii. IO. 6 7repi tovtwv 7reptAu7ros rjprjv 
 
 Xlav tov yixZvau, also (p. 321) Libanius (a.d. 350) Apol. Socr. § 68 
 Tepwoiro ISe'iv ' in the prospect of seeing.' But, according to this 
 view, Herm. Vis. iii. 10. 6 ought to mean " I was very sorrowful 
 that I should know" or " in the prospect of knowing" which is the 
 opposite of what is meant. In both passages of Hennas, TrepLxaprjs 
 and 7r€pi'Av7ros appear to be used like 7roXXr)v x a pai' (or Xvttyjv) <lx wv 
 followed by a genitive governed by the implied noun. Comp. 
 (if the text is correct) Joseph. Ant. xix. 2. 3 7r€pi^apr)<; k. cAttc'So? 
 k. <ppoi'TJp.a.To<;. In any case, these instances afford little guidance 
 as to the way in which John would use dyaXXiao-6at <W. Nonnus 
 has ISelv yjydXXero 1 , which Steph. (162 c) quotes, in about seven 
 columns of instances, as the sole instance of an inf. with this 
 verb. Steph. also gives (id.) one instance of the accus., but in 
 that and in every other case the verb refers to past or present 
 causes of joy and never means "look forward with joy to the future." 
 In John, some reference to the future is needed, because of the 
 following words, "and he saw." We can hardly suppose that John 
 meant " Rejoiced because he saw, and he sa?e>." 
 
 [2689] The probable explanation is that ijyaXXidaaTo — which 
 
 1 [2688a] ' AydWofiai mostly means "I am proud of," but Irenaeus i. 2. 1 says 
 "And according to them [the Valentinians] Nous alone took pleasure (iripweTo) 
 [in] contemplating the Father, and exulted (-qyaWero) [in] considering His im- 
 measurable greatness." Nonnus could not use ^aXXidcraro in a hexameter : and 
 the aorist 17777X11x0 appears (Steph.) to have been rare: b has "laetabatur," 
 e "exultatus est" (as also in v. 35). The Latin renderings of Origen vary as 
 follows (Lomm. vi. 38, viii. 216 "desideravit tit videret," vi. 279 " exsultavit ut 
 videret" ix. 145 " concupivit viderc" xiv. 425 "quia desideraverit videre"). 
 They afford a useful warning against the danger of inferring a Johannine infin. 
 from an infin. in a Latin translation. 
 
 525 
 
[2689] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 may be here conveniently rendered "exulted" to distinguish it from 
 i\o-PV "rejoiced" — expresses the Jewish tradition that Abraham was 
 filled with a divine "strength 1 " and "joy in believing 2 ," in order 
 that, in accordance with the divine decree, he might receive the 
 reward of the vision of the Day of the Lord 3 . Origen expressly 
 
 1 [2689a] Comp. Rom. iv. 20 "he (i.e. Abraham) was strengthened (eveowa- 
 /j.u>d7)) in, or by, faith (tt? jrfcrrei)," Heb. xi. 1 1 " By faith also Sarah herself received 
 strength (otW/ue)." 
 
 2 [2689/;] Comp. Rom. xv. 13 "Now may the God of hope fill you with all 
 joy and peace in believing." 
 
 3 [2689 e] Comp. I Pet. i. 6—9 "In whom ye exult (ayaWiacrde), though now 
 for a little while ye have been put to grief.. .that the proof of your faith. ..might be 
 found unto praise and glory... at the revelation of Jesus Christ : whom, not having 
 seen, ye love ; [looking] to whom, though now ye see not, yet believing, ye exult 
 (ayaWiare ? -aade) with joy unspeakable..., receiving the aid of your faith the 
 salvation of your souls." The context here implies that the "exultant'' faith 
 itself — as well as the "proof" of their faith — is ordained to lead the believers to 
 the "end," namely "salvation." 
 
 [2689 d] The thought runs through the whole of the Bible that "exultant joy" 
 in God is a gift from God, or a virtue to be practised : but the word (which 
 Steph. does not quote from any source but LXX or Christian writings) does not 
 occur (in any form) in the LXX till 2 S. i. 20 R.V. "lest the daughters of the 
 uncircumcised triumph" (LXX dyaWidawfTai, but Aq. and the rest, yavpiaawai). 
 When dyaWidopLai occurs as rendering Hebrew, it is restricted (with six excep- 
 tions) to the Psalms (about 50) and Isaiah (10). In 3 Mace. ii. 17, as in 2 S. i. 20, 
 it is used in a bad sense, being peril, used like dyd\\op.at "plume myself," "boast." 
 It represents 7 (not 8, as Oxf. Cone.) Hebrew words including "sing," "boast," 
 etc., but Aq. appears to have restricted it to "exultation" in a good sense. In 
 N.T. the verb (with the exc. of Mt. v. 1 2 dyaWidade, parall. Lk. vi. 23 (TKipT-qvaTe) 
 is restricted to Lk., Jn, Acts, 1 Pet. and Rev. Consequently, although the Pauline 
 Epistles emphatically inculcate the virtue or duty of "rejoicing" we might easily 
 miss the connexion between this and the "exultation" of Abraham: but the 
 Apostle certainly regards "joy" or "rejoicing" as a gift— like "faith" and 
 "hope"— to be used with a view to the ultimate seeing of the truth "face to 
 face." Paul, like John, would maintain that we are to "exult" that we may 
 "see" Christ's "day." 
 
 [2689 ^ 1 The non-use of dya.Widop.ai. in the Pentateuch perhaps prevented 
 Philo from using the word largely (if at all); but he (i. 602— 3) dwells on the 
 "laughter" of Abraham (Gen. xvii. 17) "Then Abraham fell upon his face and 
 laughed " reminding us that "Isaac" means "laughter," that the soul, so to 
 speak, "rejoices before joy," and that '-hope anticipates the coming good and 
 indicates il to the soul that is to be its permanent possessor." Philo's Quaest. 
 in Gen. (on Gen. xvii. 17) says that the "falling on the face" implied "an 
 act of adoration and an excess of divine ecstasy" and also an act of confession, 
 and adds "jure autem risk exsultans de promissione magna spe adimpletus." 
 ( ompare Rom. iv. 18 — 21 iv iXwlSt iirlffTevaw th rbytvicdai avrbv waripa iroWtLv 
 i0vCiv...8ovs 56^ai> rip 0((p nai TrXiipotpoprjOds. 
 
 526 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2689] 
 
 says that Abraham was not one of those who "desired to see" the 
 Day of the Lord — and he adds that Abraham "rejoiced" in offering 
 up his son Isaac — a sacrifice universally recognised as a type of the 
 crucifixion 1 . Irenaeus also couples the ayaAAiWis of Abraham with 
 that of Mary the Lord's mother 2 : and probably it is implied that in 
 
 1 [2689/] See Origen Lomm. i. 17S quoting Jn viii. 36 and saying ol rere- 
 Xetiop.e'voi /cat Sia(pipovT(.s (sc. 7rpo$>7?rai) ovk eTreOv/uLTjaav i5ew a etdov ol dw6aTo\oi 
 (referring to Mt. xiii. 17) TedewpyKacrL yap avrd (taking (Tredv ixyaav to mean 
 "desired in vain''). His words in Lomm. ii. 300 dcp' ov iolou ttjv 'Irjaov r\p.epa.v 
 ■fiyaWidcraTo ko.1 exapy< give at first the impression that he took tva. idy to mean 
 on eldev : but a comparison of all his quotations indicates that the 'tva i'dy is so 
 overshadowed in his mind by eldev that he scarcely touches on the former. In 
 his commentary on Rom. iv. 24 (Lomm. vi. 279) he mentions the " exultation " of 
 Abraham after saying that the patriarch "offered up his only son rejoicing 
 (gaudens)," and on Gen. xxi. 8 (Lomm. viii. 215) he treats the "joy" of Abraham 
 as equivalent to "Isaac" so that "Isaac crescebat " = il gaudium crescebat 
 Abrahamo." Before his first quotation of the passage, Origen (Lomm. i. 152 — 3) 
 maintains at great length that, as Christian apostles and martyrs were "adorned" 
 or "prepared" (Koafj.ov/j.evoi, eKoo-/xi)d7]o-av tlc /adpTvpes elvai) so patriarchs and 
 prophets "have received as a gift [given] by God the [task of] preannouncing 
 Christ, having perceived Him [in the mind] (to irpoKarayyelXai XpiffTbv, vorjcravTes 
 
 avror, 8&pov into ffeov ei'X??</>acn), teaching As now 'he that hath not known the 
 
 Son hath not the Father (1 Jn ii. 23),' so also we must perceive that it was of old. 
 Wherefore (SioTrep) Abraham ' exulted [with exultation given from God] in order 
 that he might see the day of Christ'...." A gloss quoted in the notes to Hesychius 
 on dYaXXtctuct quotes ay&Wu as meaning kolt/jlQ, and possibly Origen may have in 
 his mind some allusion to this meaning of the kindred word. In fine, we cannot 
 be certain that Origen took iW as meaning "in order that," but it is certain that 
 he regarded the c^yaMiWts as something more than a subjective " longing." 
 
 2 [2689^] Irenaeus iv. 5. 3 — 4 has " ...' exultavii ut videret..., et gavisus est.' 
 Quid enim? 'Credidit Abraham Deo. ..(Rom. iv. 3, Gen. xv. 6),'" and "Propheta 
 ergo cum esset A. et videret in Spiritu diem adventus Domini et passionis dis- 
 \>os\i\ox\z\\\ . . .exultavit vehementer. Non incognitus igitur erat Dominus Abrahae 
 cuius diem cojicupivit videre." Either this is inconsistently translated or Irenaeus 
 halted between two meanings, "exultare," and "concupiscere. " The translator 
 also renders exo-pr] first "gavisus est" and then "exultavit vehementer" — or else 
 Irenaeus interchanged exdp-rj and yy a\\i da aro. The context speaks of Abraham as 
 "following the Logos... in order that (h>a) he might find his abiding city (woXiTevdrj) 
 with the Logos " and as " willingly (Trpodv/xcos) " giving up his son as a sacrifice to 
 God, " in order that (i'ca) God also might be pleased to give His son as a sacrifice 
 for us." There is a suggestion (though no more) that Irenaeus took Iva. lorj to mean 
 " in order that [Abraham] might see [the Incarnation and the Sacrifice of Christ 
 typified in the sacrifice of Isaac]." 
 
 [2689/?] Elsewhere Irenaeus paraphrases thus, iv. 7. 1 " Abraham... concupivit 
 earn diem videre, uti et ipse complecteretur Christum : et per Spiritual prophetiae 
 earn videns exultavit" where the last word seems to confuse TryaWido-aro and 
 exdp-q. He passes at once to Simeon's utterance (" viderunt oculi mei salutare 
 
 527 
 
[2689] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 both cases this exultant and ecstatic belief was a gift from God with 
 a view to (Iva) the fulfilment of divine purpose. The Epistle to the 
 Romans (iv. 18) says the same thing in different words, when it 
 declares that Abraham "believed to the intent that [in accorda?ice 
 with God's wilf\ he might become («/!s to yeviaOat avroV) the father 
 of many nations 1 ." John elsewhere uses the very exceptional passive 
 form (dyaXXtadyvat) concerning the Pharisees, who were willing (?) 
 "to be gladdened," for a season, in the light of John the Baptist 2 . 
 
 tuum *") and that of Mary, " Magnificat. ..et exultavit," and concludes "Bene igitur 
 Dominus noster...dicens, Abraham pater vester exultavit ut videret diem meum 
 et vidit, et gavisus est" (quoted similarly in ii. 22. 6). 
 
 [2689?] This mention of the Magnificat (Lk. i. 47) -qyaWLaffev to irvevp.d fiov 
 raises the question whether riyaWiaa-ev (or -ere), read by all mss. there, means some- 
 thing different from riyaWtdaaTo. The active is not found in LXX anywhere, nor 
 in N.T. elsewhere exc. in 1 Pet. i. 8 (where B has preserved it), and Rev. xix. 7 
 Xaipup-ev Kal dya\\iQp.ev (where several authorities have dya\\iwp.e6a). 1 Pet. and 
 Rev. may have used the active in a special sense as will be seen below (2689/). 
 But that Lk. should use it thus is improbable, as he has the middle thrice (in Lk. 
 and Acts together) and applies it once to Christ Himself. A Greek tradition 
 printed as Origen's in connexion with his Latin comment on Lk. i. 47, says to 
 di irvev/J.a avTijs r)ya\\iaaa.To ...dTa rjya\\td<ra.To to irvevp-a avTrjs, and Cramer 
 prints a comment, 5(6 /ecu rjyaWidaaTo to irvevfj-d p.ov. This may be the true reading. 
 If rjyaWiao-a came at the end of a line and toto irvevixa at the beginning of the 
 next, it would be very natural that the first to should be dropped, and a changed 
 to e for sense. 
 
 1 [2689 j] Ets to in the Pauline Epistles almost always expresses, not result 
 alone, but aim — the aim of God, underlying and controlling the motions of men. 
 This is especially the case in the Epistle to the Romans (i. 11, iii. 26, iv. 11 
 els to di>ai...eis to Xoyiffd^vai, iv. 16, vii. 4 etc.). Of course where els t6 is 
 connected with a special phrase like e-mdv/xiav i?x w " (Phil, i- 23) it may mean 
 "pointing towards"' without this notion of divine control. But the whole 
 atmosphere of the Epistle to the Romans is full of the thought of God's pre- 
 ordinance; and iv. iS els to yivtodai, both from a literary and from a grammatical 
 point of view, must be regarded as implying that thought. 
 
 - [2689/t] On v. 35 rjdeXTjaaTe dyaWiadrjvai irpbs wpav iv rep (purl avrov, 
 Chrysostom says "they merely admired (iOavp.aaav) for a season," Cramer has 
 direo^avTo irpbs uipav, SS "ye wished to make your boast for the hour in 
 his light," Nonnus (<f>ai5pvvaffd€...dya\\6fj.evoi. Clem. Alex. (815) substitutes 
 dyaWiaOwfiev for dyaWiaau/neda. in quoting Ps. cxviii. 24. In many Christian 
 writers (e.g. Chrys. on Gal. vi. 17 dydWerai. Tpa.up.aTa. irepupipiov, but Vulg. 
 dyaWidfeTai) there is much confusion between dyd\\op.ai "boast [of what is my 
 own)," and dya\\idop.ai " rejoice, or, sing praises [to the glory of God]." Field 
 (on Ps. xxxiii. i ) has iravraxou Tb,dya\\ida0e, 6 p.iv 'AicvXas, aiveiTt, 6 5<? Zvp.p.axos, 
 (i)<pT)p.riTe, ijpurivtvcTev : and it is true that Aq. substitutes "praise" for the LXX 
 d-yaXX. when the word means "jubilare," A£l Ps. v. ii, xx. 5, xxxiii. 1. This 
 shews that, in the second century at all events, students of the Bible gave thought 
 
 528 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2689] 
 
 Here he uses the middle, probably with some general allusion (as 
 Chrysostom says) 1 to the "day" of the Lord's sacrifice, and, if so, 
 with a special allusion to the Psalmist's words, " This is the day that 
 the Lord hath made, Let us exult and be glad in it"." But the 
 principal allusion seems to be to the "laughing" of Abraham before 
 the birth of "Laughter" i.e. Isaac, when he lay prostrate, adoring 
 the goodness of God, abased (as Philo says) in the flesh, but lifted 
 up in the spirit, rapt into the seventh heaven, in order that he might 
 
 to this particular word, and prepares us to believe that some, without going with 
 Aquila so far as to change the word, might change its form, representing the mere 
 passive feeling of joy by dyaWiadrjvai or other passive forms, but the active 
 outburst of ecstatic joy — expressing itself in responsive praise and magnifying of 
 God for His mercies — by active or middle forms. 
 
 [2689 /] This may explain i Pet. i. 6 — 9, which should perhaps be punctuated 
 thus, ev tp dyaWidcrde — 6\lyov apri, el dtov, \vTrr)de'vTes...iva. to r 8oKip.iov 1 ...ev 
 a.TTOKa.\v^/€L lrjffov \piarou — 8v ovk Idovres ayairdre, els 8v apri p.7] bpwvres irto'Tev- 
 ovres 5e ayaWiare (so B and Orig.) x a P9- dveK\a\r)T(p Kal deoo^aa/nevrj, KOfxi^opievoi 
 to re\os rijs irlaTeus, awrrjpiav if/vx&v. Here sense requires (1) a marked 
 difference between ev cp dyaWidcrde and els dv irio-TevovTes ayaWiare, (2) a climax 
 in the latter. " Some Latin fathers and inferior Vulg. MSS.," says Hort, take the 
 former (dyaWidade) as fut. "exultabitis." But a better meaning may be expressed 
 in the foil, paraphrase, "In whom ye are wade to rejoice — in spite of your 
 momentary sufferings, which shall result to your good in 'the day of the final 
 revealing of Jesus Christ — whom, I say, not having seen, ye love, to whom even 
 now, though not seeing, yet believing, your hearts go out in ecstasy with a joy 
 ineffable ami divinely g/orijied." The Apostle speaks of the " rejoicing" of the 
 Christian first from a passive, then from an active, point of view. The active joy 
 is called "glorified" because it is purified from all thought of self, as the rejoicer 
 merges himself in God — like Abraham (Rom. iv. 20) " giving glory to God." 
 
 1 [2689 w] Chrys. ' ' He seems to me to speak here of the day of the Cross, 
 which day he typically predicted (TrpodieTvwwae) in the sacrifice of the ram and of 
 Isaac," Cramer diff. and adds " He praises Abraham as having been filled with 
 joy because of the cross (cos evcppavdevra 81a. tov aravpbv) wishing to shew that he 
 does not unwillingly come to the suffering (5«i;cu 6i\uiv 6tl ovk 6.kwv iwl to irddos 
 ipxerai) " — which last words might apply to Abraham or to the Saviour. 
 
 2 [2689 n] Clem. Alex. (815) quotes "This is the day etc." with a general 
 reference to rrjv di vlov ive"pyeia.v in the creation of the world, not in its redemption. 
 But Origen (Ps. cxviii. 24) ad loc. " For what could possibly equal this day in 
 which the reconciliation of God came to men. ..and paradise was opened and we 
 received again our ancient country and the curse was blotted out and sin destroyed 
 ...wherefore let us too exult (dya\\iaaLb/j.e6a) and be glad in it." 
 
 [2689 0] Clem. Alex. 973 gives a Valentinian quotation of viii. 56 stopping at 
 ttjv rip.e'pa.v tt]v efi-qv, and continuing thus, ttjc iv o-apKi irapovo-lav. odev dvacrras 6 
 KVpLos evrjyyeXLcraTO rovs SiKaiovs tovs ev rrj avcnra.vo'ei Kal fMere'eTrjaev avrovs... 
 apparently referring it to Abraham in Hades waiting to be liberated by the 
 Saviour. 
 
 A. vi. 529 34 
 
[2690] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 see — and help all mankind to see — the vision of the Father sacrificing 
 Himself in the sacrifice of the Son 1 . 
 On i'ima with indicative (2114) 
 
 [2690] The instances of ha with fut. in John are so few that no 
 safe inference is possible as to any difference of meaning. In vii. 3 
 lva....6tu>pr}crovcriv (v.r. -rjawo-iv) there may be an intention to blend 
 purpose with assured result. In xvii. 2 <W...Swo-ei (v. r. 800-77, Swaui 
 etc.) compared with Lk. xx. 10 iva Swaovaw and 1 Cor. ix. 18 Iva 
 8r]ao>, it is possible that the use of the future may have been 
 facilitated by the tendency to substitute for forms of the 2nd aorist 
 active (see Blass, p. 43) forms of the 1st aorist active in -era, which 
 resembled forms of the future. It would be an anachronism to 
 suppose in N.T. the late Gk aorists eowcra 2 and W-qaa: but, long 
 before these forms came into use, there might be a tendency to avoid 
 the 2nd aorists of verbs in -/u, because of their perplexing irregularity 
 and erroneous use as in Ox. Pap. eclxix. col. ii. 8 — 12 (a.d. 57) 
 
 lav (Tol 8i> (for 8u)) to dpyvpiov 8us (for 80s) oi'tw airo^v, na\ lav evlphjs 
 da(pa\r)v (sic) Si's (for Sos) avrw to dpyvptuv IvivKat fxoi, and Favitni 
 cix. 4 tovs Tpets (JTUTrjpes (stc) ous elp-qxe aoL SeAeuKOs Swvcu (for oovvai) 
 [xol 7/8ri 86? KXcWi. It is probable that Iva with particular futures 
 that had an aorist subjunctive sound would co?ne into use long before 
 Iva became customary with the future in general. But the future 
 after Iva would also displace, at a comparatively early date, irregular 
 and rare forms of the subjunctive. 
 On St Paul's autograph (2114) 
 
 [2691] As regards the interchange of o and co in a passage 
 written or partly written by St Paul's own hand, compare the 
 Fayum Papyri no foil., which gives several letters from one 
 
 1 [2689/] Lk. x. 2i -fiyaWidaaTO, applied to Christ, and parall. to Mt. xi. 25 
 diroKpiOels, precedes an utterance of "confession"' (i^o/xoXoyovfjiai 001.) to the 
 Father. The relation between Lk. and Mt. is too difficult a question to be 
 discussed Ikic. Bui it may be noted that elsewhere in N.T. (exc. Jn v. 35) 
 both the verb and the noun almost always describe ecstatic joy in man tending hi 
 the glorifying of God. 
 
 - [2690 </] In Mk vi. 37 Swete reads Owaw/mv (with XB1) 33 etc., v.r. 5w<rop.ei> 
 and Supev), but YY.II. has owffofj.cv. Possibly, the original was dwaw/xtv, with w 
 for 0, intended as a fut., ami the scribes of KB and D retained w because of the 
 preceding ayopaauifiev, taking both words as delib. subjunct., whereas the meaning 
 was "Are we to buy. ..and shall we give?" Hesychius explains wpotp-evos as 
 ■rrpoouoas, and Lobeck's Phrynichus (p. 719—20) gives many instances of 
 corruptions arising from a preference of debased first aorist forms. 
 
 530 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2691] 
 Gemellus 1 . The first of these is dated a.d. 94. In this the spelling 
 
 1 [2691 a] How much was written by the Apostle himself cannot be decided 
 apart from the meaning of the aorist in Gal. vi. 1 1 idere r Trr)\iKots~ [ (marg. tjXIkois) 
 v/mv ypafifxafftv gypa\pa rfi e'/x^ x el Ph R.V. " See with how large letters I have 
 written unto you with mine own hand," marg. " write." Lightf. renders this 
 " ' / write,' the epistolary aorist conveniently translated by a present"; and he 
 quotes Mart. Polyc. § i eypa.tpa.ixiv vpuv, ade\<poi . . . , at the very beginning of the 
 epistle, to shew that the "epistolary aorist" may refer to words that follow. But 
 that epistle, having been written in compliance with a request from the brethren 
 addressed (id. § 20), might naturally begin thus, " We have written, brethren [as 
 you desired]" — especially if (as is very likely) the facts of the martyrdom were 
 written first and the introduction added afterwards. Lightfoot quotes no other 
 instance outside N.T. 
 
 [2691/'] As regards N.T., in Philem. 18 — 19 " If hc.oweth thee aught, put 
 thai to mine account ; I Paul have written (R.V. write) it (fypaij/a.) with mine own 
 hand, I will repay it," the aorist probably refers to " put... account " (repeated, in 
 effect, in " I will repay it ") ; and ib. 21 'iypa.^6. <tol refers to all that precedes. In 
 Rom. xv. 15, Zypaipa refers (Fritzsche) to previous portions of the letter. In 
 1 Cor. v. 9 — 11 typaipa. vp.lv iv t-q €TnaTo\fj...vvv de eypaipa vpuv, both aorists 
 — however 7-77 eir. may be explained — appear to refer to something previously 
 written; and this is certainly true of 1 Cor. ix. 15 (ovk fypaxpo, 8e ravra, which 
 refers to ib. 3 — 14), 2 Cor. ii. 3, 4, 9, vii. 12. The past meaning of the aorist is 
 made all the more probable because St Paul frequently uses yp&tpu or ypa<pop.ev 
 (1 Cor. xiv. 37, 2 Cor. i. 13, xiii. 10, Gal. i. 20, 2 Thess. iii. 17, 1 Tim. iii. 14) 
 when he really means the present " I am writing." In 1 Pet. v. 12, £ypa\pa 
 comes at the close of the epistle and means (as R.V.) "/ have written.'''' In 
 1 Jn ii. 13, 14 (bis), 21, 26, v. 13, eypa^a. is to be distinguished from ib. i. 4 
 ypd<poLiev and ii. 1, 7, 8, 12, 13 (bis), yi^acpw, and Westcott — who rightly regards 
 iypaipo. as a true aorist — supposes, between the two tenses in ii. 13, "a pause in 
 thought if not a break in the composition of the letter." Even without that 
 hypothesis, the aorist causes no difficulty, " I write (pres.) unto you, children, 
 because... [Another reason why] I wrote (aor.) unto you, children, [was] because...." 
 In any case, 'iypaipa in these Johannine passages means (R.V. txt) "have written" 
 or (R.V. marg.) "wrote." 'E7re<rrei\a (R.V. "I have written") occurs at the close 
 of the Epistle to the Hebrews (xiii. 22). 
 
 [2691c] Lightf. refers to the "epistolary" use of Zirepwpa.. This aorist, in 
 Acts xxiii. 30, occurs at the end of a letter in which Claudius Lysias says, in 
 effect, to Felix, "Along with this letter / have sent you a prisoner." It occurs 
 also in 2 Cor. viii. 18, 22, ix. 3, Eph. vi. 22, Col. iv. 8 about sending "brethren" 
 or friends, who, in all cases, bring the Apostle's letter with them. Similarly, in an 
 English letter, many would prefer to say " I have enclosed, or, enclose, a cheque " 
 (though strict logic would require " I shall enclose") meaning " you will find that 
 I have enclosed." If we were to say " I shall enclose, or, shall send, a cheque," it 
 might often lead the reader to suppose that a cheque would be sent later on. The 
 same objection would apply to Trtp.ipw in a Greek letter. We cannot argue from 
 this obviously convenient use of iirep.\f/a that letter-writers would adopt an 
 obviously incomenient use of fypa\}/o. — inconvenient, because it would merely 
 
 53i 34—2 
 
[2691] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 is excellent. In the second we have <JSo£> for 68ov, [k^o/xyj for ko>//?? 
 and Ae'yov for \4yo>v, in five consecutive lines, and similar substitu- 
 tions occur in later letters. The reason for the difference is that 
 tin first letter ivas written for Gemellus by a scribe, but the second and 
 following ones by Gemellus himself : and he himself regularly confused 
 o and o). In the LXX, comp. Gen. iv. 5 "his countenance fell," 
 
 EXX crure7r€(7€i' t<3 7rpoo"w7rw, Aq. €7T€0~€ to TrpoaoiTTOV avrov, Josh. 
 
 xv. 8 LXX eVl i'otov, A vwtov, Sir. xliii. 26 LXX evwSia for xC 
 euoSia etc. In Gal. vi. 8 — -12, beside the interchanges of o and to 
 mentioned in 2114, B clearly shews rjXixois for 77-77 Allots, a very 
 minute it being perhaps inserted above the line, and 7r€pn-e/Aeo-#cu 
 occurs at the beginning of the line for tt spire/Area 9ai. The photo- 
 represent the same thing as the epistolary ypd<f><i3, which is very frequent, whereas 
 the epistolary wefiww nowhere occurs in N.T. 
 
 [2691 tt] Chrys. on Gal. vi. 11 takes typaipa to refer to "the whole letter.* 
 He and a " vir...eruditus " mentioned by Jerome — but Wetst. and Migne give 
 Jerome's evidence very differently (2785 foil.) — regarded the "large letters" as 
 the uncouth handwriting of one unaccustomed to write Greek. Theodorus, on 
 the other hand, thinks that the Apostle, " being on the point of sharply attacking 
 (niWwv KadawTecrdai) his adversaries, used larger letters [than usual] emphasizing 
 [the fact] that he himself neither blushes nor denies what was being said (i/j.<paivwv 
 on ovre auTos ipvdpiq. oitre apvdrai to. Xeyd/xeva)." The " vir...eruditus" — about 
 whom Jerome adds (Migne) "miror quomodo rem ridiculam locutus sit" — was 
 not improbably Chrysostom himself, though Migne dissents from this conclusion. 
 In any case, Jerome's own explanation is quite unsatisfactory, as he translates 
 TnfXlicois as though it were iroiois. As to the view of Theodorus, favoured by 
 Lightfoot, that "large letters" might correspond to our underlining, no evidence 
 for it is alleged by Lightfoot, nor has any been (so far as I know) adduced from 
 the numerous papyri discovered since Lightfoot wrote. Lucian's two mentions of 
 "great letters" refer only to placards and public inscriptions (i. 750 Ilcrm. it, 
 ii. 903 De Gymnas. 22). 
 
 [2691^] A man writing, contrary to his custom, in " large letters," could not 
 reproduce the peculiarities of his handwriting in a natural manner. But St Paul 
 says " See with what large letters I have written with my own hand'" in such a 
 way as to suggest that they could recognise his handwriting, as in 2 Thess. iii. 17 
 "the salutation of me Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every 
 epistle, thus I -write." It is probable that this "token" was written in large 
 letters, and that St Paul, on the very rare occasions when he wrote Greek at all, 
 always wrote thus. But the special peculiarity about the autographic writing to 
 the Galatinns was that it extended to a passage of some length. Some of this 
 almost certainly preceded the word iSfre. Perhaps (as Chrysostom maintained) 
 it extended to the whole of the epistle. If so, we need not, of course, adopt 
 the view that the writer "gloried in his imperfecl knowledge" (2788) j he may be 
 referring to the laborious "large letters" as a proof that he loved the Galatians. 
 When forced to rebuke them mine bitterly than he had rebuked any oilier church, 
 he would not rebuke them through the hand of an amanuensis. 
 
 532 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2693] 
 
 graph also shews something wrong in the accentuation of x«p* and 
 perhaps in the following o, of XEIPIO. It may be urged that 
 Gemellus, though a man of means, was not highly educated, whereas 
 St Paul, as a youth, perhaps studied at Tarsus. But Augustus is 
 said by Suetonius to have been a bad speller (2790). And if a 
 Roman Emperor, why not a Jew — who probably had little practice 
 in Greek writing during his training under Gamaliel in Jerusalem, and 
 who certainly wrote Greek, for the most part, through an amanuensis? 
 On iv. 45 kai aytoi r<*p (2167) 
 
 [2692] In iv. 45 xal avrol yap rjXOov, why is special emphasis 
 apparently laid on avroi? Kai yap avW, "for they also," would 
 have emphasized the pronoun ; but Kal avrol yap seems to give a 
 special emphasis. Does it mean "even the despised Galilaeans"? 
 Chrys., in his comments, suggests this view, calling attention to the 
 contempt with which they were regarded by the Jews. But he omits 
 avroi (though Migne's Latin translation supplies it). Origen (ad loc), 
 besides quoting with avroi, appears to attempt to explain it thus, 
 
 IIA.t/1/ e^ecrri TaXiXalov ovra iopra^etv iv 'lepoaoXv/AOLS yiv6p.evov, ottov 
 6 vaos rov ©eoi', Kal Beoipelv irdvra ocra iiroUl £kcl o Irjcrovs... Apy^) 
 yap /) iv 'l€poo~oXv/AOi<; koprrj Tots TaXiXaiots iarl tot) Kal Se£acr#ai tov 
 
 vibv tov ®eov iXOovra irpbs avrovs. This seems to mean, " Though 
 the Galilaeans were at a distance from Jerusalem and somewhat 
 despised, it was quite lawful for them [as distinct from the Samaritans 
 mentioned in the preceding chapter] to keep the Feast in Jerusalem 
 and [hence possible for them] to behold Christ's works there... [And 
 this is essential to the narrative] for the Feast in Jerusalem was, in 
 effect, the beginning of the Gospel for them." He proceeds to argue 
 that the Galilaeans would not have received Jesus if they had not 
 gone up to the Feast in Jerusalem. Nonnus inserts avroi, calling 
 the Galilaeans iafx6<; Oeocrropywv and adding Kai yap es lepou rjp.ap 
 cTreo-TtxowvTo Kai avroi. Steph. 521 b — d gives freq. instances of koX 
 yap but none where the phrase is broken by an intervening noun 
 or pronoun. 
 On 6'ncoc an (2173) 
 
 [2693] "Ottws av, in the Psalms, is the regular equivalent of the 
 Heb. "in order that" "for the sake of" when used with verb, 
 Ps. ix. 14, xxx. 12, xlviii. 13, li. 4, Ix. 5> cviu - 6 etc - The same 
 Heb. is rendered by Aq. (fragm. ed. Taylor) in 2 K. xxiii. 24 oVws 
 where LXX has Iva (before (ava)o-r-qo-r,). In Proverbs, the same Heb. 
 (occurring thrice) is rendered once €i ya'p, twice 'iva, and in Job 
 
 533 
 
[2694] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 (occurring twice) once kcu tote, and once rj Iva. In Egypt. Pap. 
 Indices ottw? with subjunct. is mostly confined to petitions but 
 occurs twice (Oxyr. 532. 13, Fayum 121. 10) in private letters. 
 On oti = (Lct€ (2186) 
 
 [2694] "On is equivalent to wore, "so that" in xiv. 22 Kv'pie, 
 
 Tl yeyovev on i]plv yxe'AAti? Ip.cfravL&LV o-eavrbv kcu ou'x<. tw Koapw ; The 
 
 Diatessaron, it is true, renders this " What is the purpose of thy 
 intention to shew thyself...." But this indicates the reading n ioriv 
 on, the reading of D, SS (Chrys. has 1st tl on, and 2nd tl eo~nv 
 
 on;). Nonnus has Kotpave, 7rws reov cTSos 6po<f>poviwv ara^aiVfis 
 Mowois o-ots irdpoiai /cat ou O-qr/ropi Koo-pao; Theoretically, Tt ye'yovei> 
 oTt might be rendered, " /f% hath it come to pass that...?" But 
 on, "so that," is very common in O.T. in such phrases as "What is 
 man that...}" (Heb. ii. 6, qu. Ps. viii. 4), " What have I done that... 1 }" 
 and this is probably the meaning here: "Lord, what [new thing] 
 hath come to pass so that thou dost purpose...?" It is one of the 
 very few certain instances of on " so that," in N.T 2 The Thesaurus 
 quotes no instances of on meaning ware except from Scholiasts on 
 Theocritus 3 . This Johannine instance of on in interrogation is quite 
 distinct from the Byzantine and post-Christian use of it after -roo-orros 
 etc. (2697). 
 On on mh (2187) 
 
 [2695] On iii. 18 o pr) irio-Teviav yjSrj KeKpircu on py) Tre7rio~TevK€v 
 cts to ovopa tov povoyevovs vlov tov 6eov 4 , Blass says (p. 255) that it 
 
 1 [2694a] See Gen. xx. 9, 10, Judg. xiv. 3, 1 S. xx. r, 1 K. xviii. 9 etc. In 
 Gen. xx. 10 "What sawest thou that thou hast done?" LXX has ri ividwv 
 (Sym. I5wv) iiroir)<ras ; but Aq. rt etdes (Theod. ewparas) bri ewoirjaas; In Gen. 
 xl. 15 "I have done nothing that they should have placed me in the dungeon," 
 LXX has d\\d. In all these cases the Heb. conj. is '3, which may mean "but,' 1 '' 
 "for indeed," "since," as well as "that." 
 
 - [2694/'] In Mk iv. 41, Mt. viii. 27, Lk. viii. 25, on may have been used by 
 the writers to mean "such that," or " for indeed." In Lk. iv. 36 8rt (which has 
 caused v.r. in parall. Mk i. 27) prob. means "because" or "for indeed." 
 
 ■'■ [2694r] On Theocr. ix. 25 (idyas . . .togovtov &n...b'i{K.oipa, on id. x. 14 (s touov- 
 tov 8tl. Classical Greek might have used wan (itWeis here. But were with indie. 
 is almost non-existent in LXX, and (except as meaning initial "wherefore") 
 occurs in N.T. perh. only in Gal. ii. 13 and Jn iii. 16. This tradition about 
 "Judas not Iscariot" or "Judas Thomas" is perh. derived from some special 
 source. The indices of the Egyptian Papyri give no instance of Srt "so that." 
 1 [2695r^| Syr. Curet. (Burk.) "But he that believeth not is guilty, in that he 
 believed not in the name of the only Son of Cod," SS "and he that believeth not 
 in him is judged on [the ground] that he believed not in the name of the approved 
 Son [sic)." 
 
 534 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS L 2695 l 
 
 is the only exception to the rule of using ov — "unless indeed the late 
 form otl fxrj should be taken as an indication of the spuriousness of 
 the subordinate clause which is omitted by Chrys. and is very 
 tautological." But on \xiq is found in Joseph. Ap. i. 23 hi-qp-aprov 
 
 otl fir] rats iepai? qfjuov f3i[3\oL<; eveTV^oi', and Epict. iv. 4. 8 orav yap 
 
 iaOty;, a^A/ ° Tt M avaytvw(TK€L<; (besides later writers such as Justin 
 Martyr and Lucian), so that the construction, relatively to John, can 
 hardly be called "late." Chrys., it is true, omits the words, but the 
 context indicates that he merely omits them because they seemed to 
 him unnecessary for the purpose of his comment. Nonnus para- 
 phrases them fully. Origen appears to have read them, if we restore 
 a missing firj in a passage distinguishing between " believing in him " 
 and "believing in his name 1 ." Origen's argument is condensed, but 
 it seems to be this: "Christ says 'He that believeth in me is not 
 judged,' but not ' He that believeth in my name is not judged.' 
 He does not go on to say ' He that believeth not in me hath 
 been judged already' [He says simply 'he that believeth not,' 
 meaning ' believeth not in any way']: for perhaps 'he that believeth 
 in His name,' does at all events {p-ev) believe ; wherefore he does not 
 deserve to 'have been judged already,' though inferior to him that 
 '■believeth in Him." From this it appears probable that Origen 
 assumed in this context the existence of a negative clause about 
 "not believing in the name," though he does not quote it. He 
 actually quotes it in his commentary (Latin) on the Epistle to the 
 Romans 2 . In his commentary on the Psalms he stops short, as 
 Chrys. does, at the word icc'/coitou, but it is for brevity ; and there he 
 
 1 [2695/'] Orig. (on Jn ii. 23 — 5, Lomm. i. 371). •Prjai yap 6 xvpios, "'0 
 mcTTevuv els e/xe ov Kpiverai," oi>xi 8e "O -KLOTebuv els to ovo/nd /j.ov ov KpiveTai." 
 Ovkcti Hit (pr](ni> "0 [1U17] Tnarevcav els i/xe rib-q ne'Kpt.To.i- " raxa yap "6 vLarevcov els 
 to ovona. avrov " iriiXTeijei fiiv, li.6irep ovk H<ttlv a£ios " 17 5 17 KeKpLadai," i\a.TTuv 5£ 
 iaTL tov TTLGTevovTos eU aiiTov. For otl fir] in Epictetus, see also iv. 4. 1 1 KkaliQ... 
 8ti /jlt) l-i-co yvfivd^erai. and iv. 5. 8 — 9 (thrice) e\oi56pricre ce 6 belva. IIoXXt? x^P's 
 avTcp otl p.r j ZirX-q^ev . . . . 
 
 " [2695 c] Lomm. vi. 99 " Omnis qui credit in me non judicahitur. Qui autem 
 non credit, jam judicatus est quia non credit in nomine unigeniti Filii Dei." 
 Both in Gk and Latin, Origen has " He that believeth in me" (for "believeth in 
 Aim"). So has Irenaeus v. 27. 2. The reason is, that all three quotations are 
 preceded by " The Lord said" or words to that effect, and "The Lord said, 'He 
 that believeth in him' " would be liable to misunderstanding as meaning "He that 
 believeth in God." But the quotations afford an instructive illustration of the 
 manner in which a saying about "the Son of God" or "the Son of man" might 
 be altered to a saying in the first person. 
 
 535 
 
[2696] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 adds " But I understand the words ' he that believeth not ' to stand 
 for 'he that disbelieveth'.' " This may partly explain John's ex- 
 ceptional use of fj.1]. It may be taken as a sort of alpha privative. 
 " The disbeliever (o //.7)-7tio-t€vwv) " is condemned because " he has 
 disbelieved (p.T/-7r€7r«rrei,'Kev)." But the precedent p?) 7r<.o-TeiHov occurs 
 also in i Jn (2187) where on ov follows; so that it does not suffice 
 as a complete explanation. 
 On <bc (2201) 
 
 [2696] lis, "donee," is mentioned in Steph. (p. 2108 a) only as 
 an unsatisfactory rendering in Odyss. iii. 301 where cos "when," or cos 
 " thus," is to be preferred. It certainly seems to mean " while " (less 
 probably " as ") in Ignat. Smyrn. 9 cos [ere] Kaipbv eloper, 2 Clem. 
 Rom. 8 cus ovv kcrpikv eVi yjjs, 9 cos e^opey Kaipbv. But two of these 
 three passages appear to be quotations of Gal. vi. 10 cos Kaipbv 
 e^wfjLev (prob. a misspelling (2114, 2691) of e^opev) R.V. "as we have 
 opportunity"; and, even if the quoters regarded cos as equivalent to 
 ecos, it by no means follows that they were right. In the Indices of 
 the Egyptian Papyri ecos is fairly frequent, but not cos except once in 
 cos av. In Lk. xii. 58 cos yap Payees (R-V.) " as thou art going" 
 there is apparently no notion of "as long as" till Luke adds ev -rfj 6&w 
 (Mt. v. 25 ecos otov eT. .Av rfj oSco) — i.e. "[being still] in the way." 
 In modern Greek (Blass p. 332), toY is said to be used for ecos in 
 such a phrase as co's en £w, but in non-modern Greek, there appears 
 to be no evidence at present for such a usage of oU with indicative 
 except that given above. In Gal. vi. 10, there seems to be a 
 reference to the preceding words : " Let us not faint, for in its own 
 [i.e. the harvest's] appointed time (*aipcp yap I8iw) we [workmen] shall 
 reap the harvest if we faint not. Well then as we [workmen] have 
 
 an appointed time (upa ovv cos Kaipbv e^opei/, not -cop,ev) let us work " 
 
 In view of the exceptional misspellings in the context of Gal. vi. 10 
 the conclusion is uncertain, but probably cos is not used for ecos, and 
 the passage means either " as we have an appointed time 2 ," or 
 " according as we have opportunity." 
 
 1 [2695</| On I's. lxxii. 4 (Lomm. xiii. 2) 'A/cot'w 5e rod "6 fi-q irtaTevwv'' dvrl 
 toO "6 diria-Tuiv." Clem. Alex. 64I actually uses diriffreiv in quoting iii. 18, 
 6 a irioTr)cras , Kara tt\v crwrripiov (pwvr/v, ijdT) Kfupirai. 
 
 - [2696. i\ 'ite &v is prob. (Steph.) for e'eos de "as Ions; a> " in Soph. Ajax 1117 
 cl)s av 775 oUs Trep el in view "f Plato Phaedr. 243 E fwinrep av 77s 65 et, and comp. 
 Soph. /'/'iii. [330, (Ed. Col. 1361 ami ] ><>^sil>Iy (Steph.) Hippocr. 4 1 S. 5 p.r]5' u>s dv 
 
 53 r > 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2697] 
 On ofTo3c...a)CT6 (2203) 
 
 [26971 Concerning iii. l6 outws yap rjya.Trr]o-ev...o}aT€ tov vlov tov 
 
 fxovoyevrj coWcv Blass (p. 224) says "the correct reading in place of 
 wrrre is on, which is doubly attested by Chrys. (in many passages) 
 and Nonnus § 78, 6." Hut Chrysostom, while quoting the w/wle text 
 with on, comments thus, outws v/xas tfyaTrrjcrev w? uVep rail/ Sovkwv 
 8ovvcll tov vlov. Subsequently, he says dVep iinjyaye. Aeytov on to]/ 
 
 vlov avrov tov fjiovoyevrj eoWev. Here otl should prob. be printed 
 as " recitativum " ; but its use suggests how easily on tov vlov might 
 creep into the text in the place of oio-re tov vlov when the words were 
 quoted. Moreover this use of cm after outws, toowtos etc. does not 
 appear to exist till quite late. We must carefully distinguish between 
 (1) the LXX use of on "so that" (2694) after questions and 
 negations, and (2) the Byzantine or post-Christian use of on, " so 
 that," after too-oStos etc. 1 To impute to John the idiom oirrws... 
 otl may have been natural for Chrysostom or for a scribe of 
 Chrysostom's text, but for John himself (so far as evidence is 
 alleged) it would apparently have been an anachronism. Outws. ..ha 
 "so greatly... that" he might have written, along with Epictetus" : 
 
 v.r. /j.Tj de 10s. But these are all with pres. subjunct., and must be carefully 
 distinguished from Cos av with aorist subjunct. "whenever," or "when," which 
 occurs in Herodotus, Cebes (Steph.), Josh. ii. 14, iii. 8, 13 etc. Tcbl. Papyr. xxvi. 
 1. 2 (B.C. 114) Cos &v ava-yvCoTe, and in 1 Cor. xi. 34, Phil. ii. 23. Rom. xv. 24 Cos 
 b.v iropevoo/xou is either quite exceptional " when I am taking my proposed journey," 
 or '■'provided that I journey." In vernacular English, "as long as" sometimes 
 means "prozu'ded that.'" 
 
 [2696/'] fls in Mk ix. 21 (B ecos, al. e£ ou and so Lat. and Syr.) -rrbaos xpbvos 
 icTTiv Cos tovto yiyovev means " since." SS has " behold since," which is like Judg. 
 xvi. 13 "hitherto," B ^behold" idou (confusing the Heb.), A Cos vvv, al. (Field) 
 ews vvv. Ezr. ix. 7 Cos 77 r)p.ipa avrrj is corrupted in 1 Esdr. viii. 74 to p.ixp L r *7 s 
 cr\p.epov 7)/j.epas suggesting that Cos has been read as ews. Conversely Ezr. vi. 20 "as 
 one " is rendered ecos els, al. (Field) Cos efr. These facts (and others in Steph., and 
 see Herm. Vis. iii. 8 Cos, v.r. 6's and euis) indicate frequent scribal confusion of Cos 
 and ews, but they do not shew that early Christian writers used the former for the 
 latter. 
 
 [2696 (] In xii. 35 — 6 wepLTvaTelre Cos to (pCos ^x eT€ --- ^ s T0 <P& ?X eT€ T<-crTf.ijeTe, 
 the repetition, and the reversed order of the words accord (2554) with Johannine 
 usage. Blass's suggestion (p. 332) to read (with X) 1st 2cos and 2nd Cos would not 
 accord with it so well. 
 
 1 [2697 a] For the latter, Jannaris (p. 416) quotes only Theod., Apophth., 
 J Moschos, Leont. Neap., J Canan. 
 
 - [2697 b] Cc-mp. Epictet. ii. 2. 16 ovtu fioopos ??e 'iva /jltj idy... ; ii. 22. 9 
 craivovTa. . .d\\rj\ois tv' eiVgs (so as to make you say) Ovdev (piXiKwrepov, iii. 1. 12 tL 
 
 537 
 
[2698] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 but not cwTtos otl. As to Nonnus, Passow reads outu>...<W, with on 
 
 as a rejected reading. 
 
 On an with indicative (2213) 
 
 [2698] On av with indie, in hypothetical sentences Blass says 
 (205) "the insertion of dv is not obligatory," and he refers to viii. 39, 
 xv. 24, xix. 11 and Gal. iv. 15. But in viii. 39 it is maintained 
 (2079) that B has preserved the right reading, and that av is not 
 omitted. In xv. 24 ovk d\ocrav, xix. 11 ovk €?y/s — and, we may add, 
 xv. 22 ovk elx»<rav — the phrase is always of one kind and negative, 
 and does not afford a basis for a general statement that av is 
 not obligatory. In Gal. iv. 15 fiapTvpw yap vpuv otl, el rjvvaTov, tovs- 
 
 6(f>0aX/xov<; vfiiov i£opv£ai>Te<; iSwKare p.01, the Apostle describes 
 hyperbolically the past affection of the Galatians by a reference to 
 stories like that told by Lucian (ii. 548, Tox. 40) of friends cutting 
 out their eyes for friendship's sake. Perhaps av is omitted (though 
 the writer may have been combining in his mind (1) "If it had bee?v 
 possible, you would have cut out your eyes," (2) "If I may say so, you 
 did cut out your eyes "), but in any case the sentence is exceptional. 
 
 ddev iv e/uLoi 6 'E. 'iva.. irepudr) ; " what did E. see in me so as to make him neglect 
 me?"; iii. 12. 10 ovtw irpofS-qari tva...etw[is "you will make such progress as to- 
 be able to say" etc. But in i. 19. 13, ii. 3. 3, and iii. 22. 63, placed by Schenkl 
 under toiovtos iva with query, iva (see context) is probably not dependent on 
 toiovtos but means "in order that." In the Pauline Epistles, 'iva may possibly 
 mean "so that" in 1 Thess. v. 4 "ye are not in the darkness that (iva),'' but it is- 
 more in accordance with Pauline thought and usage to take it as meaning "it is not 
 ordained for you that." And in 1 Cor. ix. 24 oi'tws rpi\€T€ iva almost certainly 
 means " Thus, as I have described, must ye run in order that ye may attain." The 
 notion of an overruling Providence, or of an ordained conflict, is also probably 
 present in Gal. v. 1 7 ravra yap dXX^Xots avTiKetrai 'iva fj.rj a (av diXrjre ravra TroiyJTe, 
 where Chrys.'s paraphrase is iva /jlt) avyxupys rrj xj/vxrj iropeveadai iv rah iwtOpfxiats 
 aiir/js rats irov-qpah, shewing that he took iva to mean "in order that." But 
 Cramer prints a comment of "another," who says rb yap iva ovk iiri airlas direv 
 dXX' ojs o.k6\ov6ov Kara rb otKeiov idluifxa. 
 
 [2697;] In the Egypt. I'ap. ware tlvi occurs about money received by, 
 or given to, someone " as for someone else," in Oxy. vol. iii. 529, 582, Favum 
 xvii. 2, and ware with the innn., in wills and contracts, meaning "on condition 
 nl doing" (as in classical Gk). Other notable uses are Oxy. vol. iv. 743 (B.C. 2) 
 war av toutu ae 6i\w yavwffKeiv, "wherefore I should like you to understand," 
 Tebtun. Iviii. 35 (B.C. tri) iiiar av avv roh deois Karaaroxiji-aa/xev avTov "wAere/brt 
 (D.V.) we shall probably secure him " [This is quite distinct from war av in the 
 phrase "so thai the damage pighi be estimated at" (Tebt. xxxviii. 25, xxxix. h 
 etc.)], l-'ayuni xxiv. 15 (a.D. [58) (Tn<TTo\rjs...wcTTe avrovs ave'pxurdai, "a notice... 
 Ordering them to return." 
 
 53S 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2699] 
 
 Winer quotes ix. 33 ovk rjBvi'aro, but this is negative. In Rom. vii. 7 
 tt/i/ afidpriav ovk lyvuiv el fxrj 8ia vo/jlov, tiju t€ yap eTTiOvjxiav ovk y8ea' 
 el jxrj b vojxo'i eXeyev, the meaning of the first clause is " I did not 
 recognise sin except through Law..." and then the* second clause 
 says, in effect, " I did not know covetousness — except that the Law 
 [stepped in and] said, Thou shalt not covet." Similarly Acts xxvi. 32 
 ajroXeXvo- ft at l8vvo.ro o avOpwos ovtos el /xrj eTreKeKXyjTO Kaicrapa, is 
 
 equivalent to "It was possible [up to the moment of his appeal] for 
 this man to have been released at once — only he had appealed to 
 Caesar " ; but the last clause is changed into a protasis by using 
 " if not " instead of "only," "if he had not appealed (c7tcicc'kX^to)." 
 The facts indicate that in N.T. hypothetical aV is not omitted 
 except in special circumstances 1 . 
 On Lk. xxiv. 39 Ipco €imi ayto'c (2224) 
 
 [2699] In our discussion of eyoi el/xi, it was said that the 
 text of Lk. xxiv. 39 was "doubtful." W.H. print eyw el/xt avr6<; 
 without alternative, following XBL/?,/ But (1) SS has here the 
 same Syriac as in Mk vi. 50, Mt. xiv. 27, Jn vi. 20, where there is eyw 
 elfxt without curro's. (2) The Palestinian Lectionary also has the 
 same Hebrew in Lk. xxiv. 39 as in Mt. xiv. 27. (3) Epiphanius 
 twice (i. T002 A and ii. 95 d) quotes on e'yco etpt without auro? (once 
 with auT09 (i. 1003 b) but with kol tov? twtous t<2v tjXwv inserted). 
 (4) The treatise on the Resurrection attributed to Justin §9 (5940) 
 
 has elyrev uirrot? Ov-rrw e^ere tt'lo-tiv; <]yr)o~iv, TSere otl eyoj el/xi, and 
 continues KaTavorjo-avre<; on auro? eari koX iv tw crw/xaTt, implying that 
 the avTo? belonged to the inference of the disciples, not to the words 
 of Christ. (5) One of Epiphanius' quotations without avros (i. 1002 a) 
 
 1 [2698 a] "Av hypothetical is omitted in Ox. Pap. 526, and cent., a private 
 letter (" badly written and obscurely worded") el kclI /jlt] avtjieve iyCo top \6yoi> fiov 
 ov Trap4j3evoi>, "Even if he were not going I should not have broken my word" 
 (perh. "I was not going to break my word"), ib. 530, 2nd cent., — a very well 
 written letter — el irXe'tov 84 fiot irapeKei[To] Tr&Xiv aoi aTre<TTa\Ktiv (Edd.) " If I had 
 had more I would have forwarded a further sum," where "a further sum" 
 represents Trd\ii>. This seems rather harsh, and, if wd\ai occurred in the Indices 
 of the Papyri, I should venture to suggest rrdXcu av " If I had had more money at 
 home / should have sent [this] long ago." In 2 Cor. xii. 19 7rd\cu has been 
 corrupted into Trd\ii> so that A.V. has "again," and ird\cu av might be still more 
 easily corrupted thus. The omission of &v in negative sentences may sometimes be 
 explained by the hypothesis that the speaker has in his mind (1) " It was not so at 
 first, but something happened to bring it about," which passed into (2) " It was not 
 so and would not be so now, but that something happened to bring it about." 
 
 539 
 
[2700] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 has iyw cl/xl kou ot/c rj kXoioifiai ' and so has (Resch ad loc.) John 
 Damasc. Fid. Orthod. p. 303. This looks like a negative paraphrase 
 of o.vto% taken as d aurds. (6) The Latin a has " quoniam ego sum : 
 ipsi tractate," having apparently read iyw el/xi- avrol ij/r]Xa<f>ijaaTe. 
 (7) The Latin and Greek authorities are divided as to the position of 
 avTos, many having it before iyw ci/xt but some between eyo> and 
 d/xi. (8) Avtol icr/xev is frequent in Greek literature (Steph. p. 2558 c) 
 but means "we are by ourselves." Of aurds et/xi Steph. gives no 
 instance. If it existed, it would naturally mean " I am alone, or, by 
 myself-." (9) Ignatius, quoting a passage closely resembling Lk. 
 xxiv. 39, asserts that the Lord said {Sniyrn. §3) -'see that (or, 
 because) I am not a bodiless demon (Sai^di^tov)," and makes no 
 mention of the words iyw et//.i airrds in any order. 
 
 [2700] The most probable conclusion from all these facts is that 
 Lk. xxiv. 39 iyw el/XL airrds is an attempt — not perhaps Luke's 
 attempt but incorporated by Luke in his Gospel — to render the 
 Hebrew (2224) "/ [am] He" more fully than it is rendered by the 
 "/ am" of Mk-Mt. (2220). But iyw elfii avTo's— being neither 
 exactly Greek nor exactly Hebrew idiom — caused great perplexity. 
 Some altered the order, to izvtos iyw d/xt meaning " I myself am 
 [present]." This would be Greek, if et/xt could stand for n-apet/u, 
 but is (probably) not what Lk. meant. Others took it as iyw cI/jll 
 6 airrds , "I am the same." This, being negatively paraphrased (as 
 in Epiphanius and John of Damascus), became " I am not made 
 another." "Another" is used in Isaiah (xlii. 8) as a parallel to 
 "idols"; and it is used, in New Hebrew, (Levy i. 57a) of things 
 evil and impure about which one would fain not speak. The 
 Ignatian legend might be explained by some as a mere inference 
 
 1 [2699 a] This is somewhat similar to Mai. iii. 6 " I the Lord change not," iyu 
 Kvpios 6 debs v/jllov ko.1 ovk ijXXotw/xai. 
 
 2 [2699/'] Ai'tos occurs thus with the particip. of elfii in Iliad viii. 99 clvtos 
 wep iwv, ir[iop.6.xoL<nv e/jLixdy, where the schol. says KaLnep p.6vos u>v. Of course, 
 one is free to theorize or conjecture that ai)r6s, in eyib ei/xt avrds, may mean the 
 same as in Aurds ^</>a, or the same as in some other special Greek idiom. But, 
 until the discovery of at least one instance of ^yui ei/j.t avr6s actually thus used, the 
 most reasonable explanation is that it is not idiomatic Greek at all, but an attempt 
 to render literally in Greek some non-Greek tradition that does not bear a literal 
 rendering. The nearest approach to Lk.'s phrase that I have found is Epict. iv. 
 1. 152 '• Diogenes \\;i^ free. ..not that he was free-born (for he was not) /</// that he 
 was himself (dXX* 8ri avrbs yv)," i.e. his true self, or unsubjugated by external 
 inrlueni 1 
 
 540 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2702] 
 
 or paraphrase based on the words "I am myself." But, in view of 
 these traditions about "another" in Jewish and Christian writers, it 
 is not improbable that something more than mere inference originated 
 the traditions about a " bodiless demon." 
 On xxi. 5 ttaiaia, mh ti npoccpApoN e'xeie ; (2235) 
 
 [2701] In xxi. 5 7rcuSi'a, \xr\ ti irpoarfyayiov e\ere/ questions suggest 
 themselves as to (1) 7raioYa, (2) /xij ti, (3) -n-pocrcpdytov. (1) If Christ 
 is to be regarded as presenting the appearance of a man much older 
 than the disciples, 7rcuoYa may be taken as "children." Otherwise such 
 an address from an apparent stranger causes difficulty. Chrys., as 
 printed by Migne, omits 7rai8ia, but a version in Cramer inserts it. 
 Both versions say that Christ asked whether the disciples had any 
 fish "as though He were intending to buy from them 1 ." Nonnus 
 paraphrases 7rcuSia as 7ratSe? dAos 8frrjo-Trjpe<;, and perhaps agrees with 
 Chrysostom as to the object of the question 2 . In the Acts of John 
 (§ 2) Christ is said to have appeared to James as a little child, but to 
 John, simultaneously, as a man with a long beard and head partly 
 bald. This was " on the shore." The writer of the Acts appears 
 to have interpreted John here as meaning that Jesus appeared as 
 one of venerable aspect addressing the disciples as " children." 
 
 [2702] (2) As regards the interrogative, is it neutral, or does it 
 expect a negative answer ? Mr/ ti, with a following noun with which 
 tl agrees, does not occur anywhere in N.T. as far as I have found. 
 Mt/Vi occurs in all the Gospels, and thrice in John, as an interrogative, 
 always expecting a negative 3 . In LXX, pfrt is repeatedly used by 
 
 1 [2701 a] Chrys. (Migne) Ae^et ovv clvtoTs (Cramer + Haidia) M-q ti irpo<r<pa.yiov 
 %X €T€ >' Teixis CLvOpuirivthTepov diaKeyerai [Cramer om. t. d. 5.], (lis fx^XXoov tl wvelcrdai 
 
 [Cramer -rjaaadai] trap avT&v. u>s 8e dvivevaav /Mrjdev ^X €lv 
 
 [2701 />] 'Yypofiiovs 5' epteLvev eOrjfj.ovas ix^v^oXfjas, IlXwrd TeXeacriyopoio 
 KOfxi^Te deiirva daXdaaijs, IlalSes AXos Spr/o-r^pes; where KO/JLL^ere seems to mean 
 "Are ye catching?" He proceeds, d.fjLeip6/j.evoi di fiadr]Tal Ovdev ?x elv dvivevou — 
 which resembles Chrys. 's comment. 
 
 3 [2702 a] Mtjti is in iv. 29 fj.rjTi ovtos £<ttiv 6 Xpi<xr6s; viii. 22 (j.r)Ti dwoKTeve? 
 iavrdv ; xviii. 35 //.t/ti £yw 'lovdaios el/ii; In xxi. 5 W.H. give yd] ti without 
 option. But Greek mss. having mhti — or, if a scribe has added accents, mhti — 
 afford no guidance as to the separation or union of mh and ji : ^ has mh to which 
 a corrector has added Tl, L has miti, SS " have ye not" and so gat. "pul- 
 mentarium non habetis," b,t ";/ttw$w?Vpulmentarium habetis," e " numquid habetis 
 pulmentarium," d " numquid aliquid manducare habetis ''—but the photograph of 
 D and d shews no difference between MHTI or numquid here (xxi. 5) and in Mk iv. 
 21, where everyone takes it as firjTi — a has " habetis aliquid pulmentum vos" The 
 
 541 
 
[2702] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 Aquila to represent "Num?" and, so far as Oxf. Cone, shews (under 
 fit] Tts, jx-q ti), Tt never agrees with a following noun'. In N.T. /aiJtl 
 
 variations indicate an early difficult tradition, most probably firp-i (not fir) ti). In 
 the following paragraphs, for convenience, /it)ti will be printed as one word. 
 
 [2702/;] Westcott says (ad loc.) "The form of the question in the original 
 (ut)tl) suggests a negative answer. See iv. 29," i.e. firjTi ovt6s eanv 6 xpi ffT °si — 
 where A.V. has "Is not this the Christ?" R.V. " Can this be the Christ?" 
 and Westcott says, "The form of the sentence grammatically suggests a negative 
 answer (iv. 33) but hope bursts through it." M77 interrogative may perhaps always 
 be rendered by " can it be that?" and fir\Ti by "can it be in any way possible 
 that?" In Plato and Xenophon and other classical writers, fi-q interrogative 
 is sometimes used courteously or ironically to suggest that the possibility may be 
 realised — " can it be that we are mistaken ? " but fir) is never used by them for dp ov. 
 In the Pauline Epistles, fir) is used in passionate rejections of blasphemy as Rom. 
 iii. 5 fii] &8ikos 6 Beds; ix. 14 fir/ adi/cia rrapd rip dap; ix. 20 fih ipei to w\do~p.a; 
 I Cor. i. 13 fir/ IlaOXos iaravpdjdrj ; (comp. Rom. iii. 3. xi. 11, 1 Cor. x. 22 etc.) 
 and always expects a strong negative reply. There is the same indignant fervour 
 in Rom. x. 18 — 19 fir) ovk r)Kovaav...fir] 'lap. oiiK tyvw, " will any one venture to say 
 that they did not hear... and that Israel did not know ? " 1 Cor. ix. 4 — 5 (bis) fiy ovk 
 Hxo/iei> i^ovaiav, "will any one daiy that we have authority?" xi. 22 fiyydp otKtas 
 ovk ?x tTe e ' s T0 (cdieiv Kal iriveiv ; Here, after saying that some of the Corinthians 
 drink too much at the Lord's Supper, he adds "[Shame on yon /] For can it be 
 that ye have not houses for ordinary eating and drinking?" Mtjti interrogative 
 occurs thrice in the Epistles and always introducing a shameful or absurd 
 hypothesis, 2 Cor. i. 17 "Did I shew fickleness (fir)Ti &pa rrj e\a<pplg: expyo-d- 
 fJ.r|v)? , ' id. xii. 18 "Did Titus take advantage of you ( /it)ti eir\eoviKTrictv Ofids 
 T.)?" Jas. iii. 11 fiyri r\ TTr\yr\ £k tt)s ai>Trjs owrjs (3pvei to y\vKV k. to mKpdv; 
 
 [2702 b{\ Put it is in Epictetus that fir) and /ir)ri are most prominent : and there, 
 so far as I can judge from verifying about thirty of Schenkl's very numerous 
 instances, fir) always expects a negative answer as in i. 11. 18 "Is there in- 
 compatibility between natural affection and reason?" and fir)n is still stronger, 
 often propounding an absurd proposition for a negative reply e.g. ii. 19. 15 " Is it 
 a vice to be shipwrecked (firJTi Kada earl to vavayrjcrai) ?" In one instance (i. 16. 
 10 firyn. (or fir) ti) dxpr\dTOT(pov Tpt^wj';) ti or fir)ri has a predicative adj. agreeing 
 with it. Schweigh. Index says of fir) that it is sometimes (nonnunquam) in- 
 terpreted interrogatively where it might be rendered negatively; and this at least is 
 certain that any pupil in Epictetus's lecture-room hearing the philosopher begin a 
 sentence with /irfTi would anticipate some question that required a negative answer. 
 And the style of Epictetus is so similar to that of John that the Epictetian usage 
 Strongly increases the probability that the Tohannine fir)Ti irpoaQdyiov Zx eTe must 
 have been written with a similar meaning. In later Creek writers, e.g. Clem. 
 Alex., firjTL "is it possible that?" is found occasionally meaning "perhaps." But 
 Clement as compared with Epictetus, for the put pose of illustrating John, is like 
 Dry.1' n compared with Bacon, for the purpose of illustrating Shakespeare. 
 
 1 [2702 r] Mi)Ti interrog. and requiring a negative answer [generally to an 
 indignant question) is very often used by Aquila (where LXX differs) in Exod. ii. 
 14 (LXX fir)). Is. vii. 13, Ixvi. 9 etc. In Is. vii. 13 fir)Ti (I. XX fir)) oXlyov ; Job 
 x. 3 fi.i)Ti ( I. XX ij) dya06v ; there 1 DO connexion between r< and oKlyov or d-,adbv. 
 
 54 ' 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2703] 
 
 often introduces an impossibility {e.g. " Do men gather grapes from 
 thorns?") and implies a very strong negative 1 . But there is a difficulty 
 here if the words mean, " Is it possible that ye have caught fish ? " 
 The difficulty would not be much diminished by reading /jlij, separated 
 from ti, since py, too, expects a negative answer 2 . Chrysostom and 
 Nonnus presumably interpreted /xrjrt as "perhaps," taking the 
 language to be that of a peasant dealing with fishermen, "Might you 
 be having some fish for sale?" But this is a late usage not justified 
 by LXX, N.T., Epictetus, or Aquila. The Johannine meaning 
 appears to be widely different. The Lord does not ask for informa- 
 tion. He knew that the disciples had caught no fish and that it 
 was not possible for them to have caught fish; because they had been 
 toiling without Him in the " night " of spiritual darkness and had 
 not cast the net on the " right side " of the ship. This is mystically 
 described by representing the Master of the fishermen as standing 
 on the shore, witnessing the unavailing efforts of His servants and 
 calling to them, in effect, "Children, ye have toiled long, but can ye 
 say that ye have caught anything 1 Ye cannot say it." This is the 
 only way in which the words of the Gospel could be understood by 
 a Christian at the beginning of the first century familiar with the 
 language of the Gospels, or by a convert or enquirer familiar with 
 the doctrine of Epictetus. 
 
 [2703] (3) As regards -n-poacpdyLov, why is not the word o^dpiov 
 attributed to Jesus here as it is later on (xxi. 10 euro tCjv 6\papLu>v, and 
 comp. xxi. 9)? n poacfiuyLov appears to have been later, and more 
 vernacular, than oi//aptov 3 . In classical Greek, it might naturally be 
 
 1 [2702c/] Mk iv. 21 fJL7}Ti Zpxerai 6 Xuxvos...; xiv. 19 (Mt. xxvi. 22, 25) fxr/TL 
 tyd) ; Mt. vii. 16 /jltiti avWeyovcnv etc. ; Lk. vi. 39 /xt/tl dvvarai rv<p\6s... ; Jn iv. 
 29 firjTL ovtos eariv 6 Xp. ; viii. 22 fx-qri. aTronrevel eavrov ; xviii. 35 llt\ti iyw 
 
 *Iovdcu6s el/u; 
 
 2 [2702 t'] Conip. iii. 4 lit] dvvarat ; iv. 12 lit) o~ii ixelfav el ; iv. ^^ /jltj tis rjueyKev ; 
 vi. 67 m<7 k. v/j.els deXere virayew ; vii. 31 /jlt] wXtiova. . .iroirjaei ; vii. 41 fir) yap Ik tt)s 
 r. 6 Xp. (?px fra '.' v ii- 47 M-V * a ' i>fiets ireirXavrjade; etc. This last illustrates xviii. 
 r 7> 2 5 PV KaL vv ^k t. ixad-qrOiv el; and shews how " Is it possible that?" may be 
 used sometimes to mean "It is surely not possible that" but sometimes, in special 
 contexts, ironically, to mean " It is perhaps after all possible that." M77 in vii. 47 
 means the former ; in xviii. 17, 25 the latter. 
 
 3 [2703«] See Steph. 2024 B ''Eust. p. 867, [54] iirl rod airXuis Trpoo-oipri/j.a.TOS, 
 ravrov 5 etVetV koiv&s Trpoacpayiov, ToQipapiov Xtyerai.. [Schol. Horn. //. 1, 489] 
 Itidem Suidas, "Q\poi> ira.v to it poa 6 tpTj/xa tj Trpoo-<payiov. Similiter et Hesych. : 
 
 '0\pov, irpocKpayiov. [Et Etym. M. p. 646, 14]. Hoc alioqui vocab. neuter 
 
 543 
 
[2703] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 taken as a form of -n-pucrcpayfia "a preliminary victim." The context 
 clearly implies that the "fish,'' of which the disciples partake, is 
 a sacramental food, and a " breakfast " to strengthen the disciples for 
 the work of evangelists. Origen (Lomm. i. 259 — 62), commenting 
 on "the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world," and 
 on the sacrifice of the lamb in the morning as "the beginning of the 
 sacrifices," goes on to speak of the lamb in the language of Revelation, 
 as "standing, as having been slain as a victim (eo-TrjKos cos io-<j>ayfxei>ov)." 
 Christ, "standing on the shore" of Tiberias at the moment of 
 sunrise, might be a type of the sacrifice that is "sent up at the 
 moment of the enlightening of the soul (d/ia tw <f>wTi£t;<r6ai ttjv ijjvxw 
 dva.TrefA7r6ixii>o<;)." Regarded in this light, -n-poo-fydyiov might have an 
 inner meaning intelligible to none but the initiated — including an 
 allusion to the IXOYC 1 , or ONE FISH, which in this very narrative 
 appears as a eucharistic type of Christ : — " Ye have not yet received 
 THE FISH. Ye have not yet partaken of that sacrificial victim 
 which was slain before the foundation of the world (Rev. xiii. 8), 
 without which the eyes of your souls cannot be enlightened nor can 
 ye see how to cast the net of the Church ' on the right side ' of the 
 ship 2 ." 
 
 in serie alphabetica in numerum eorum quae exponuntur retulit : unde conjicere 
 licet plebeium fuisse, aut vetustioribus Graecis incognitum." Hence Lk. xxiv. 41 
 might very well prefer (Spu/nfiou, and the next note will shew that a Christian 
 writer substitutes fipuoLixov for irpoatpdyioi' in paraphrasing Jn. 
 
 1 On "the earliest extant reference to the emblem of the IXOYC," see 
 Lightf. Ignat. vol. i. p. 181. 
 
 - [2703 />] The comment of Origen is lost. That of Chrys., and others printed 
 by Cramer, seem to mix together the literal and the metaphorical, and perhaps the 
 accounts of Lk. and Jn and the story of the Walking on the Waters. Chrys. says 
 that Christ "was not continuously present with the disciples, and the Spirit 
 had not yet been given to them," and they were "not yet commissioned (£y»cexet- 
 pi<Tfj.{i>oi)." In the previous context he says Christ "appeared (i(pavq)" to the 
 disciples and "/tew away (a-Tr^TT))," then appeared once again "and again 
 flew away ; then, after this, [appeared] on (iiri, i.e. by) (2340 — 6) the sea and again 
 with the accompaniment of their exceeding fear (juera ttoWov tov <p6fiov)." By 
 this "fear" he appears to mean their fear of the Jews: for he says that Christ had 
 taken away most of their alarm so that they could now " peep forth [irpoKivrew) 
 from the house and go about everywhere." Hut still he adds. " Having therefore 
 nothing to do they came to fish and even this they did in the night because they 
 were in great alarm (irepide€?s)." He adds, "This Luke, too, says, but this is not 
 the same [as Luke's account | bill different (tovto /ecu 6 Aovicas <pr]<nv, dXX' OVK Zffri 
 touto t'/ceceo, dXX' trtpov) " — where he seems to refer to Luke's account of Peter 
 fishing all through the night and then saying to Jesus in alarm " Depart from me, 
 
 544 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2704] 
 
 On X. 12 6...0YK d)N TTOIMHN (2253 — 4) 
 
 [2704] In x. 12 o /xi(x8<dt6<; ko1 ovk w itol[x.7\v, A has 8e after, ND 
 have it before, /w^w-ros : a has "qui mercenarius est et non est pastor," 
 e "mercinarius (sic) autem " (om. "et qui non est pastor"), Syr. 
 Curet. (Burk.) "but the hireling, the false one" SS om. "the false 
 one " and substitutes nothing. Nonnus has 6 8k fx.iaOio'i ov 7r£'A.€ 
 ttol/x7]v. The use of ovk, instead of fir/, may be due to one of two 
 causes, (i) "Hireling and not Shepherd" may go together as 
 though the Greek were d /Aio-6Wos-Kai-ou-7roi/*T)v wv. (2) Ov may be 
 regarded as part of the name of the " hireling," who is the antithesis 
 of the Shepherd, just as the Heb. of "not" is part of the names (Hos. 
 ii. 23 " Lo-ruhamah," "Lo-ammi") "Not-beloved (or, pitied)" and 
 "Not-my people" — which are rendered in LXX tt)v Ovk rjyaivrjfxivYiv 
 and t<Z Ov Aaw /xov (comp. Rom. ix. 25, 1 Pet. ii. 10). Some sense 
 of this may have induced the Curetonian translator to paraphrase the 
 clause as " the false one" perhaps meaning "the No-shepherd." "Civ 
 might have been omitted by John without destroying the sense ; but 
 
 O Lord " (not to Luke's account of the alarm of the disciples when Christ appears 
 to them after the Resurrection). 
 
 [2703 c] Another comment (Cramer) says, "Those that were before the 
 disciples (01 Trpb tQv p-ad-qrCov, ?7rp6 = "at the head of," more prob. read irpo- 
 toltwv — TrpQroi tQv, " chief of the disciples") being in the dizziness and darkness 
 of error that was sent from evil spirits (£i> aKOTodivia ovres rr}s dcu/xoj'tciooi's TrXdvris) 
 persuaded {£nei<jav) no one, or very few — which is as good as 'nothing'"' (comp. 
 xxi. 3 " caught (iiriaaav) nothing") "...nay even the multitude of the Gentiles was 
 .not caught in the net [of the Gospel]... But when the Sun of Righteousness came. 
 He that hungereth for the salvation of men, He found nothing to cat" (the 
 writer uses fipuxnixov as in Lk. xxiv. 41, not wpoa<pdyiov as in Jn xxi. 5) "and 
 told them that the evangelic word must be cast forth, that is to say the ' right 
 (5e£td) ' teaching" (comp. xxi. 6 "on the right (Sefid) side of the ship") "com- 
 pared to which the Law and the prophets being cast forth are conceived as 
 the left side." Nonnus spells wid'geLV "take (fish)" with an e, which would 
 increase the likeness between eneic&N and emec&N suggesting an early play 
 upon the two words preserved in this tradition. 
 
 [2703 d] Compare the three following traditions of Chrysostom : (1) (On vi. 
 1\) AAA' ov8e tols p.adr)Ta2s CofyQt) ejri ttoXv touto woiQv, d.XXd d/j,a re ul(p0r) Kai 
 diriuT-q aw avruiv, (2) (On xxi. 1) Opas otl ov crwex&s avrols eTrt^wptdfet, oi>5' 
 wcnrep ZpLirpoadev ; 'E<pdvr) youv Ty icnrepa Kai aTfiirTrf elra ixerd 6ktu> 17/xepas irdXiv 
 a7rai;, Kai irdXip air^TTTT)' elra fxerd ravra eiri rrjs 6aXdao-r]s, Kai wdXiv fierd iroXXov 
 rod <p6(3ov...Ta\ai.Trii}povfxevois ecpLo-Taro 6 'Itjaovs (Cramer, eirLGTas 5£ avroh 
 TaXanrwpovp.ei'ois), (3) (On Acts i. 3) (Cramer) i<pi(TTaTo yap Kai d<picrTaTo irdXiv. 
 The comparison suggests that there has been a confusion between direvTrj and 
 dwiarr). 
 
 A- vi. 545 35 
 
[2705] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 perhaps it emphasizes the non-reality, "is not really Shepherd." 
 According to this view, John would have written 6 firj TroifjLrjv wv as 
 he has written (x. i) 6 p.rj eio-€px°V ei ' 0? > if ne ' ia d meant "he that is 
 not a shepherd." But he means something different ; in effect, he is 
 declaring that the hireling is "no shepherd." 
 On zcu Aja ce (2297) 
 
 [2705] A very important illustration of £w 8id ere occurs in a 
 passage where Epictetus describes the philosopher as using similar 
 language in the moment of death, iii. 24. 95 foil. "For this cause the 
 man that is really good — bearing in mind both who he is and whence 
 he has come, and by whom he has been brought into being — is 
 wholly absorbed in this one thought, how he can fill his appointed 
 place in orderly and zvilling obedience to God: Dost thou will me to 
 exist yet [longer] ? [Then I will do so], as a free man and noble, as 
 thou hast willed : for thou hast made me unshackled in my own 
 sphere. But, on the other hand [perhaps] thou hast no further need 
 of me ('AAA.' ovkcti p-ov xpeiav exeis;) ? I praise and bless thee 
 (KaXws aoL yivocTo) [then] ! Even up to this day I kept on abiding 
 [on earth] simply for thy sake, and for no other (kou p-t\pi vvv 81a ae 
 Zfievov, 81 a\\ov ovBeva)." Here the context indicates that <"u<x ae 
 means "for thy service," "in orderly and willing obedience (cvtoiktws 
 kou (vtt€l6<Z<;)'" to God. Other instances are iv. 1. 163 e£z\6e Sia to. 
 7ratSta, " escape for the sake of the children" i.e. to do them service, 
 iv. 8. 17 oca KaA.o3s Ittolovv ... ov Slol tov<; ^earas iiroiovv, aAAa 
 81' ifxavrov, " not for the sake of the spectators but for my oivn sake" 
 where he proceeds to exemplify the statement by using a dative of 
 advantage, qcrOiov ifiavT<5 kolXws, " I used to eat decently for my own 
 sake." Com p. i. 17. 18 ov8e yap ~Kpv(riinrov xP e ^ av tx°l xei ' &<■' Q-vtov 
 ...ovSk yap tov dvrov 81 avrov, where he subsequently (i. 17. 29) 
 explains that he goes to the ^tt;s or "sacrificer," ovk avr6i> Oav/xdo-as 
 " not out of reverence for him " but out of reverence for his teaching. 
 No doubt Epictetus frequently uses 81a. Ttva to mean "thanks to 
 so-and-so," but that is not the meaning in any of these passages. 
 Where the verb employed with 8td riva is passive or neutral, 8id may 
 mean "thanks to." But often, where it implies action and active 
 service, it means "for the sake of" 
 On various meanings of eic (2305 — 8) 
 
 [2706] The peculiarity, and the importance, of i. 18 6 wv eh tov 
 koXttov are in danger of being obscured by vague affirmations that 
 " eis is used for iv in Byzantine ami modern Greek," and that the 
 
 546 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2708] 
 same use is to be found in N.T. generally and in John elsewhere, 
 
 e.g. ix. 7 ii7raye viif/at €is rrjv Ko\vp./3ij8pav tov 2. (6 kpp.r)\>eveTai 
 
 'A7r£o-TaA/i.eVos). This last, however, may be illustrated (2305 a) from 
 the use of Aouw, ^oltttu), and /3a7rri£w in other authors 1 : and it affords 
 no ground for thinking that John would use eis for iv with elfxi 
 
 [2707] Again, as to xix. 13 rjyayev efa) TOV 'Itjctovv kuI eKdOicrev 
 
 67rt /^/xaros ets to7toi', the eis is shewn by the context not to be 
 connected with eKdOurev in the sense of "on" (which is represented 
 by eVi) but to mean "[going out] to," being influenced by rjyayev 
 e£o), and the preposition helps to illustrate two points on which John 
 lays stress (1745 #) namely, that Pilate had to go out to the Jews as 
 the Jews would not come into his palace, and that the sentence was 
 pronounced outside the palace in a place where a special tribunal 
 was erected. That John would not have used KaOi^w eh we may 
 perhaps infer from vi. 3 dvijXOev 8e eh to opos 'I. xal eKet exdO-qTo, as 
 compared with Mk xiii. 3 Kad-qp-evov avrov eh to "Opos (Mt. xxiv. 3 
 iiri tou "Opovs). Ka6i.t,ij} eh is classical Greek, but John does not 
 use it 2 . 
 
 [2708] Among other N.T. meanings of eis not found in John, is 
 "near" or "at" before place-names, e.g. "the things that happened 
 [away] at Capernaum," " Philip was found [away] at Azotus," " to 
 be at Jerusalem by the feast," " that Paul was in custody [away] at 
 Caesarea 3 ." This can hardly be paralleled from classical authors. 
 The meaning "with a view to," "in regard to," "in relation to" 
 — very common in Thucydides, when used with verbs of action 
 generally and of " expending " in particular, and also to denote 
 friendly or unfriendly relations 4 — is frequent in the Pauline Epistles, 
 
 1 [2706 c?] See Steph. on fiaitTw and fiawTifa with els and even (109 A) 7rpo$, 
 and comp. Mk i. 9 efia-irTiadii eis tov'I. (where Mt. and Lk. differ). Blass (p. 123) 
 says, on ix. 7, " vi\pa.L however appears not to be genuine." But the omissions of 
 it, and the variations of its position in several authorities, may perhaps be explained 
 by (1) its unusual position, (2) a desire to conform the text to ix. 11 elire'v jj.ol otl 
 
 Twaye els rbv ^.iXwcl/jl Kal vl\pat. If vi\pai had been interpolated into ix. 7 from ix. 
 11, would it not have been interpolated in the same order, i.e. at the end of the 
 sentence? In any case the nature of the verb, and of the context, which implies 
 motion, make els in ix. 7 easily explicable, as also in Mt. ii. 23, iv. 13, Lk. xxi. 37. 
 
 2 [2707 11] Chrys. (on Jn vii. 1) says ore yap els to opos endd-qro, <pr/crlv, f}v ij 
 eopr-q tov Traax a - Quoting John loosely, he falls into language like that of Mark 
 describing Christ as seated on the Mount of Olives. 
 
 3 Lk. iv. 23, Acts viii. 40, xx. 16, xxv. 4. 
 
 4 [2708 a] Comp. ap.apTa.vw els in .Esch. Prom. 945, Mt. xviii. 21, Lk. 
 xvii. 4. Jn, in the Gospel, uses ap.apT&vu) always (thrice) absolutely ; in 1 Jn, 
 
 54^==, 35—2 
 
 f OF THL 
 
 ( f ' F "<TRS!TY 
 
[2709] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 and may perhaps explain the curious idiom in Mark — altered by 
 many scribes and by the parallel Matthew — about breaking loaves 
 "to the five thousand 1 ." But it is not found in John. 
 
 [2709] Another important use of eis, dating from the best 
 classical writers, is with verbs of speaking or proclaiming. Some- 
 times it distinguishes speaking publicly to an assembly from speaking 
 privately to a council. It is never used, in this sense, of addressing 
 a single person. It is appropriate to the far-reaching and public 
 nature of the message of the Gospel, and John lays stress on the 
 publicity of Christ's teaching ; but he never uses this idiom 2 . 
 
 where it occurs (10) more freq. than in any book of N.T., it is always absolute or 
 with cognate accusative. 
 
 1 [2708/'] Mk viii. 19 — 20 ore tovs irevre apTovs eV-Xacra eis tovs irevTa- 
 Kiax^iovs . . . , ore tovs iirra eis rovSTerp., parall. to Mt. xvi. 9 — 10 tovs irivre aprovs 
 tQv 7rej'Ta/acrx'Aiwi/ (D tols tt€vt.)...tovs eind aprovs tQsv rerp. (D tois rerp.). 
 The text in Mk is greatly confused. As regards "the four thousand," the Syriac 
 has the preposition "to" or "for." Delitzsch has it in both clauses. This preposition 
 might be interpreted as '■'■belonging to" or "of." Comp. Ezr. x. 13 "and the 
 work is not /or (?) one day," eis 7}pApav p.i<xv where 1 Esdr. ix. 1 1 has taken the 
 meaning to be " belonging to one day," i.e. "o/one day," rj/nipas p.ias. 
 
 [2708 c\ But &c\a<ra eis, besides perhaps expressing the Semitic Original 
 exactly, harmonizes with the classical Greek use of els with verbs of spending. 
 From this came the use of eis in accounts of expenditure (Deissmann p. 118) " to 
 lamps, so much" or "to a sick horse, so much" etc. So here, there is a 
 suggestion of items, "to five thousand men, five loaves," "to four thousand men, 
 seven loaves." "To," in this sense, would not often be used with persons except 
 when regarded as labourers; but Deissmann, who calls this, when used of persons, 
 " dativus commodi," quotes [id.) t6i> els Tdyiju oIkov cpKoSo/xrj/j.ivoi' " the house built 
 ■with a view to [the occupation of] Tages." If Tages was a labourer or bailiff the 
 house might be built "with a view to" Tages but /or the advantage of his 
 employer. Having regard to this usage, it is best to render Mt. xx. 1 /iicrdovo-dai 
 els tov dfj.ire'KQva "hire with a view to the vineyard," not "hire [and bring] into the 
 vineyard." In Mt. v. 22 ivoxos els ttjv yievvav — coming as a climax after ivoxos 
 7-77 Kplffei and tQ o-wedplip — probably combines two meanings, 1st, a penalty 
 extending to Gehenna, 2nd, the penalty of being cast into Gehenna. For the 
 first, comp. Numb, xxxii. 15 "as much as, or even (?) all this people," els oXrjv ttjv 
 o~vvayuyr)v Tavr-qv. 
 
 2 [2709<7] Comp. Mk i. 21 (W.I I. marg.) Kal evOus t. o-afifi. eSldaffKev els tt)v 
 ffvvaywyqv , (txt) r. crapp. r elae\0u)i' eis tt/v aw. ehioaaKev*, Mt. um., Lk. iv. 31 koX 
 t)v 8ida<TKUi< avrovs iv tois (rapp.: Mk i. 39 Kal TjXOev (SS, latt.. AG I ) fjv) Krjpi'cro-uv 
 els ras avvaywyds, Mt. iv. 23 Trepiriyev ...SibaaKWv ev rats a. avruv k. Krjpvcrauv, Lk. 
 iv. 44 Kal r\v K-qpvoaw els tols cr. Here Mk is doubtful. Lk. iv. 44 appears to use 
 els with a notion of extension or far-reaching publicity, sending forth the message 
 of the Gospel into the synagogues, as in Lk. vii. 1 e'ir\T)pw(Tei'...tls ras dicods tov 
 \aov (perhaps with a suggestion "i els t6 ^croc). As a proof that Luke considers 
 the phrase gnu. I Greek, note Acts xvii. 20 els to.s d/coas vp-uif, uttered by 
 
 548 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2711] 
 
 [2710] As regards John's use of o-t?/vcu eis to /xtaov (2307) 
 compared with Luke's arrjiai iv /xia-w, we may adduce Mk iii. 3 
 e'ycipe £t? to fxeaov, D eyetpe kcu crTrjdei (sic) ev /xto-w, d " in medium," 
 Lk. vi. 8 eyeipe ko.1 (tttjOl eis to /xecrov, D ev to) /aco-co, d " in medio," 
 which shew how easily the two constructions might be interchanged 
 according as the notion of coming into an assembly was prominent 
 or latent. Comp. Xen. Cyropaed. iv. 1. 1 o-to.s eis t6 /xea-ov ] . 
 Reasons have been given (2307) for thinking that John might 
 deliberately prefer eis because of its spiritual suggestiveness. 
 
 [2711] More direct in its bearing on the Johannine 6 tSv eis are 
 phrases in Mark where eis oTkov or eis tt)v oIkLclv is used in connexion 
 with Christ 2 . But the text of these is doubtful. Nor do the Papyri, 
 
 philosophers (see aKoal, "ears,'" in Lucian (iii. 585) Philcp. § 1). Acts ii. 22 
 diroSeSeiynevov dwb tov deov eis vp.ds perh. means "approved from God in 
 the sight of [all of] you," or "approved fas being sent] from God to [all of] you." 
 Comp. Herm. Vis. ii. 4. 3 Trep.ypei ovv ~K.Xr)p.T)s eis ras £k,u Tr6Xet.s...YpaTTTrj 5e 
 vovderrjcrei ras xi7pas...<ri> 5e dvayvwarj eis TauTr/v tt)v ttoXiv /xera tQv TrpeafivTepuv... 
 ttjs eKKXrjaias, where the meaning seems to be "read [publicly] to [the people of] 
 this city with the elders.' 1 Comp. Mk xiii. 10 kcu eis ^afxa ret idvq vpuiTov 
 8el KT)pi>xdTJvai (Alt. xxiv. 14 K-qpvxdr)<reTai...Tois 'idveaiv) and 1 Pet. i. 25 to f>TJp.a to 
 euayyeXiadev eis v/J-ds (Hort) "which was preached [reaching even] to you," Lk. 
 xxiv. 47 Kot K7]pvx0rjvaL...ixeTavoiav r eis 1 acpeaiv dp.apTi.Gsv eis [reaching even to] wdvTa 
 Ta 'e'dv-q, and Rom. viii. 18 ttjv p-eXXovaav So^av dTroKaXvcpdrjvai eis 17/u.as. 
 
 [2709/'] That Xiyeiv eis in this public sense is good Greek, appears clearly from 
 Thucydides, especially when he describes the fear of Alcibiades lest the Spartan 
 ambassadors should convert the Athenians to peace " if they should say the same 
 things [publicly'] to the Demos" that they had said, less publicly " in the Boule," 
 v. 45 rjv es tov drjpLov ravTa Xiywcxtv (following XeyovTes ev ttj [3ovXr j, and 
 preceding es tov 8rjp.ov irapeXdbvTes) and comp. i. 72 ^cpaaav ftovXeadai ko.1 avToi es 
 to TrXrjdos avTwv eiweiv, iv. 58 es to kolvov t. drj Xbyovs elirev. In this sense, 
 Xeyeiv eis could not be used about addressing a single person. [In Herod i. 86 ovb'e'v 
 ti p.dXXov es eoji'roe Xeyuiv rj es dirav to dvdpunrivov the meaning is, "with 
 reference to."] Eis wra may be used of one person or many ; but probably Mt. x. 
 27 eis to ovs i.e. "secretly," is deliberately altered into 7rp6s to ods by Luke (xii. 
 
 3) who uses et's wtcl for publicity in Acts xi. 22 rjKouadri Se 6 Xbyos eis to. iSra 
 ttjs eKKX-rjaias (as well as in the sense of penetration in Lk. i. 44 cos eyeveT0...els to. 
 wto. ixov). Luke's liking for et's in connexion with the spread of the Gospel may be 
 illustrated by the Pauline doctrine, Rom. x. 18 p.7) ovk TjKovaav ; fievovvye, (Ps. xix. 
 
 4) Eis irdaav ttjv yijv e^rfKdev 6 <f>6byyos avTu>v. 
 
 1 [2710 a] In 1 Pet. v. 1 2 eis t\v aTrJTe — regard being had to ib. i. 8 eis ov and ib. 
 iii. 20 eis r\v and to their several contexts — we should probably take eis t)v as 
 combining two meanings (1) "looking to which''' or " with a view to which" 
 and (2) "in which" 
 
 " [2711 a] Comp. Mk ii. 1 (om. by parall. Mt.-Lk.) eicreXdwv irdXiv eis Ka</> 
 
 TjKovaOr] bri r eV oti«p iariiP, where marg. has eis oIkov eaTLV, SS is wanting, Latt. 
 
 549 
 
[2712] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 so far as is at present alleged, give a safe instance of eh toVov eiwu. 
 Blass (p. 122 n.) quotes Berlin Pap. (3rd cent.) Vol. ii. 385 eh 
 'AXe^uv&peiav iari. But the context somewhat favours the view that 
 the person spoken of is not actually at Alexandria but is coming 
 there. Moreover the text has ecro-i. And the editors regard this as 
 a misspelling for elai " will be going." If this is the meaning it may 
 be illustrated by Ox. Pap. (2nd cent.) 529 iyw 8e eh KoVtoj/ fxera 
 tov r/y€/Aoi/os etfu, "I am going to Coptus." I am informed that in 
 Tebtuti. Pap., Part 11. (416) not yet published (1905), a rather 
 illiterate letter contains eyevdjx-qv ev ' AXe^avSpeia followed by 
 eyevdfxrjv eh 'AA. But yiyveuOai eh is quite different from elrcu 
 cis, of which (at present) no certain instance is adduced from 
 papyri. 
 
 [2712] These passages in Mark about the house or home of 
 Christ, being omitted by Matthew and Luke, may be expected 
 (2396) to be referred or alluded to by John. But the other details 
 above mentioned appear in no way to help us to explain, indeed 
 they make it more difficult to explain — except upon mystical and 
 spiritual grounds — why John, who generally avoids eis for ev, writes 
 <Sv ets rbv koXttov about the Son of God at the beginning of his 
 Gospel and ev t<5 k6\ttu) about the beloved disciple toward the end 
 of it. That he had some peculiar meaning in eh is made all the 
 more probable because, so far as is alleged, eh koXttov without a verb 
 
 "in domo," but e "domi." Again, after the words "let not man put asunder," 
 common to Mk and Mt., Mk alone has x. 10 kcu eh rrjv oLkLclv ttoKw 01 /j.adr]Tal... 
 e-rr-qpwrwv (Lk. om. the whole) SS " when he entered the house again," a " domi," 
 b "in domum," _/j it "in domo." The mention of wdXiv in Mk ii. 1, x. 10 
 suggests that in both cases the meaning is (as SS in the latter) "when he entered 
 the house again "* 
 
 [2711 /'J Mk xiii. 16 has 6 ets rbv aypbv where parall. Mt. xxiv. 18, Lk. xvii. 31 
 have 6 iv tw (Lk. om. r<p) ayp$. In this last passage, the antithesis between the 
 previously mentioned "on the housetop" and "into the held" resembles that in 
 1 S. ix. 26 "-on the housetop. .. went owl... abroad." LXX £ws e"£u> but "AXXos (Field) 
 has els aypbv. In 1 S. a verb of motion is expressed. Mark peril, intends to imply 
 one, "the [man that is] on the housetop" being contrasted with "the [watt that 
 has gone out] to the held [to labour]."' The fact that both Mt. and Lk. substitute 
 iv for ets indicates that Mk's idiom was of the nature of a mannerism. Neither 
 ets oIkov nor e^s aypdv could very well have a Semitic origin, as the Semitic 
 preposition used in "at home" and "abroad" is almost always "in," not "/<?." 
 Lk. xi. 7 ets rr\v koIti}v elclv (I) and latt. iv tij koItij) has not been illustrated by 
 
 othei examples, and n appears alien from Hebrew and Latin. The meaning may 
 
 be "(recently come] to lied." 
 
 550 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2714] 
 
 of motion occurs nowhere in the Bible, nor in Greek literature, 
 whereas eV koAto is very common, and is familiar to all in the 
 phrase " in Abraham's bosom '." It is therefore natural to infer 
 that eh has a spiritual meaning — somewhat as in the Pauline Epistles 
 where men are said to be baptized, or confirmed, or fulfilled, or made 
 to grow, " into Christ," and where it is said concerning God, Rom. 
 xi. 36 «ts axTov ra -iravra, and I Cor. viii. 6 yjp.€i<; eh avrov (1475) 2 . 
 
 [2713] One explanation may be that, as the beloved disciple is 
 said to be (xiii. 23) "lying in the bosom" of the Lord when he 
 asks Him to reveal a secret, so the Son is described as being "into 
 the bosom of the Father " because He is regarded as the revealing 
 Mediator passing from man to God and from God to man. But, 
 beside this, it is not improbable that John is alluding to ancient 
 traditions about Christ's '-home." It has been maintained elsewhere 
 (1451—8, 1839 foil., 2644 (i)) that John's description of Christ as 
 " laying his head to rest " on the Cross contains an allusion to the 
 Matthew-Luke saying " The son of man hath not where to lay his 
 head to rest." If that is so, we may still more reasonably expect 
 some Johannine allusion to Mark's repeated traditions about a 
 "house" or "home" into which Christ enters — traditions almost 
 always omitted by Matthew and Luke 3 . The discussion of these 
 must be reserved for a future treatise. On the single occasion on 
 which John associates the mention of a house with Christ's teaching 
 or action Origen calls the "house" (2329)"omnem hujus mundi 
 domum ac totius ecclesiae domum." An attempt will be made in 
 a future treatise to shew that John desires to meet various unprofit- 
 able and conflicting traditions about Christ's "house" by saying, at 
 the outset of his Gospel, that He was to be regarded as being in 
 no earthly house, but as being in heaven — even while on earth — 
 leading men "to the bosom of God." 
 On iii. 34 ck Merpoy (2324) 
 
 [2714] On iii. 34 ov yap c'k fxirpov &i8a)<riv, Chrys. agrees with 
 Apollinarius in taking €k /xtrpov as p-trpw, " We all have received the 
 
 1 Hor. Heb. on Lk. xvi. 22 — 3, and comp. 2 S. xii. 3 (Heb. , Gk, and Targ.). 
 
 2 [2712 a] The Pauline Epistles exemplify all the uses of et's above mentioned 
 except "at" with places, which would naturally be rare in hortatory language. 
 Ei's is also very rare, in any sense, in Revelation. 
 
 3 [2713(7] Mk ii. i, iii. 20, vii. 17, 24, ix. 28, 33 (but see Mt. xvii. 25), x. 10. 
 See also Mt. ix. 28 (which is in the style of Mk). 
 
 551 
 
[2715] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 energy of the Spirit by measure (p.eTpu>)...but He has it without 
 measure (dpeVp^Tov)." Wetstein gives a great number of instances 
 from Greek, Latin, and Hebrew (including Vajikra R. 15 "Spiritus 
 S. non habitavit super Prophetas nisi mensura quadam ") of "-by 
 measure" or "-according to measure"; but none have "from measure." 
 Nonnus, however, takes the words to imply a spontaneous stream, as 
 distinct from " measures " of water, otpavoBev yap Ovtos ov is \B6va 
 
 7re'/Ai//€ tfeos ^pauTjxrjTOpa Kocrp.ov Uarpwrjs o~ocpir)<; avroaavTOv opi(3pov 
 laWei- Ov yap p.irpa Xoyoio (/>epei Adyos, dAAd ol aiei Mou'vw irv€vp.a 
 
 8i8(D(riv dciXt/^e'o? poov 6p.(f>rj<; : and this suggests the most satisfactory 
 solution. John has in view the living water of the Spirit (Ps. xxxvi. 
 8 — 9 "Thou shalt make them drink of the river of thy pleasures, for 
 with thee is the fountain of life") as compared with draughts from the 
 " measured vessel" (comp. ii. 6 perp-qTas) of the Law. MeVpw might 
 have meant linear (not liquid) measure as p-irpov means in Rev. 
 xxi. 17. But €K p.irpov could not mean this and might therefore 
 seem preferable 1 . 
 On Aia with genitive applied to time (2331) 
 
 [2715] Aid, with genitive, applied to time, means "passing 
 through." If the time means the whole of a life, age, year, month, 
 or day, Sid often means ''throughout" (dAos being often inserted); 
 but, if there is no such notion of wholeness, it means "passing through 
 one period to a period that follows" i.e. "after an interval of." This 
 is always the meaning where a number is mentioned. Aid vuktos, 
 however (Steph.) is sometimes loosely used to mean "by night." 
 Plutarch Quaes t. Rom. 279 F ovk...[x€to. <pioros...dAA.d Sid vkotovs 
 may throw light on Acts v. 19 (comp. xvi. 9, xvii. 10, xxiii. 31) 
 where an angel opens the door for Peter " by night," suggesting 
 perhaps that the deliverance took place, in part, " by means of' or 
 " with the aid of" night. Steph. gives no instance in which <W is used 
 with a number of years, days, etc. to mean anything but "after the 
 interval of ? Most frequently "after the interval of the third, fourth 
 
 1 [2714i/] A generic term for Heb. liquid measure occurs (Buhl 4S7 /») in Lev. 
 xix. 35 £tf>os, Ezek. iv. 11, 16, p.irpov, 1 Chr. xxiii. 29 LXX om. (or includes that 
 and another word under [xtrpov) but al. (prob. Aquila) airoaipurbv (Field) " ut 
 praepositio quidem primam vocis Hebraeae literam repraesentet," and lie com- 
 pares Ps. exxxviii. 10 aw-twota. This suggests that, in connexion with this 
 particular word for "measure," the "praepositio" iK might arise from "prima 
 vocis Hebraeae litera," and the same statement applies to another Ileb. word 
 meaning " measure " in Sir. xxxi. 27 {Jewish <;>. 1SX9, p. 6). 
 
 55^ 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2715] 
 
 year etc." means "every third or fourth year." But Herod, i. 62 Sia 
 kvhi.Ka.Tov It€os, describing the long interval during which Pisistratus 
 waited to effect his return to Athens, appears to mean "after an 
 interval extending to the eleventh year" (not, as L.S., "in the course 
 of the eleventh year") 1 . The facts confirm the view taken in 2331 
 that Sia in Acts i. 3 means "after an interval of." 'Ev, rather than 
 81a, would be used to express "in the course of' 2 ." 
 
 1 [2715 a] In an extremely obscure passage, Lucian Hist. Conscr. 2t (ii. 30) 
 ridicules a fabulous account of a death by self-starvation undergone by Severianus, 
 who attacked Osroes and was taken prisoner and killed by him. Lucian says that 
 "the man's suffering" was, in fact, a matter of three days only; whereas men 
 starved to death mostly last as many as seven days — " unless one were to resort to 
 the supposition that Osroes d<jTr]K<a. irepip.ivwv £<jt dv 2. \i^£ dwoX^Tai Kal 5td 
 tovto ouk etrriyaye (v.r. e7r?;7e) 5ia ri js i/356[x,i]s. " The meaning is disputed. But it 
 affords very slight ground for supposing that 5ia TetraapaKovTa rip.epuiv can mean 
 "through forty days." Like the extract from Herodotus it describes an interval of 
 prolonged waiting, and the final words seem to ridicule the notion that Osroes 
 stood waiting " till the expiration of the seventh day." It certainly does not mean 
 " during the seventh day. " 
 
 2 [2715 6] As regards iv, "in the course of," or "during," in vi. 39 — 54 (see 
 2548) the mss. vary greatly, between rfj, and iv rrj, before io-x°- T TI vpipa. W.H. 
 gives, in order, two instances without iv, a third with iv (vi. 44), and a fourth 
 without iv. As 6N follows (or would follow), in some of these cases, &yTO 
 or &Y T0N ) ^ might be easily dropped or inserted, after the similar letters o 
 or ON. But iv rrj io-x& T V rjpipa occurs, without v.r., in xi. 24 iv ry dvaaracrei., iv t. 
 i. r/., xii. 48 iKeivos Kpivel avrbv iv t. i. 77. Both there, and in vii. 37 iv 8i rrj i. 
 17...T7JS iopTrjs, the preposition seems to mean "in the course of" ; and "the last 
 day " is regarded, not as a date or a point of time, but as a period in the course of 
 which great events take place. If this view is correct, iv rrj i. 17. in vi. 44 may be 
 regarded as a climax, the weightiest of the three utterances in vi. 39 — 44, and vi. 
 54 as being a separate utterance. 
 
 [2715 (] As regards oafilidTip with or without iv, the preposition may be 
 regarded as emphasizing the sacred period of rest during which work may not be 
 done. But it is very doubtful whether John ever omits iv with this word. B and 
 some latt. versions omit it once, so that W.H. bracket it, in vii. 22 — 3 /cat [iv] 
 
 cajSjSdTip TrepiT€fj.veT€...(i irepi.Top.rjv ...Xaixfiavei iv crafSjS i'Yit; iTroirjaa iv ca/3/3. 
 
 But the latt. vss. omit it also in v. 16 raOra iwoiei iv aappdTii). And B, before 
 other words, (against W.H.) omits iv temporal in ii. 19, 23, xviii. 39. In ii. 19, 
 23, iv, if inserted by B, would come at the end of a line and would be liable 
 to omission as being written in small letters. In xviii. 39, cn might be dropped 
 after yMlN, especially if the latter was written YAA6IN in B's archetype. In ii. 19, 
 vii. 22 6N follows kai, and the latter, if written K6 in B's archetype, might easily 
 cause the omission of a following e meaning €N. A priori one might maintain 
 that, in vii. 22 — 3, aafifidTip was used at first unemphatically to be followed 
 by a more emphatic iv (ja/3/3dra) : but the evidence negatives this supposition. 
 
 [2715 d] 'Ev, or /card, is always used by Mk, Mt., and Jn, with iopT-q to express 
 
 553 
 
[2716] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 On vi. 21 HOeAoN oyn AaBgin (2346) 
 
 [2716] Nonnus paraphrases this Kai iuv e\eiv ixinviawov (sic) «s 
 O/Wada- Kai /xevos aA/xr/s 'Hi/ tote, kcll ireXev opfxos, eTrel Oeo&ivei 7ra.Ap.a5 
 Ota voo<; 77-Tcpdeis, aWpan' Si'^a, v6(T<f>Li' epeTixwv, T^Ae7ropoi5 AtpeVeo-o-iv 
 opxAeev avTo/xdrr] vrfis 1 , where p^yeatvov implies earnest desire that 
 was not fulfilled because the vessel was brought to shore by a heaven- 
 sent blast before the disciples could receive Jesus on board. Chrys. 
 takes the same view, twice repeating that Christ "did not go on 
 board" and attempting to give a reason for it 2 . Both take rjOeXov as 
 denoting unfulfilled desire. 
 
 [2717] In the LXX, forms of y/OeXov are very rare as compared 
 with those of tjdeXrjaa. The 3rd pers., rjdeXov, rjdeXe, without ov, 
 hardly occurs outside apocryph. exc. in Judg. xiii. 23 el rjBeXev 6 
 Kvpios where Theod. (and sim. A) has e/3orAcro (and see other 
 instances from LXX in 1735 b). Many Indices do not distinguish 
 between Oe\w and iOeXw, so that statements must be cautiously based 
 on them. In Egypt. Pap. Indices, iBeho is very rare ; but -qOikrjcra. 
 is sometimes used about authoritative resolutions of those in power, 
 and ovk -qBk\y](T(.v means " he refused " ; r}6e\ev occurs (according to 
 the Indices) only once, and then apparently of unfulfilled desire '. 
 
 "during" or " in the course of." Lk. alone has the dat. without prep, in Lk. ii. 
 41 tTroptuovTo...TTJ eoprrj, "at the feast." Strictly, Lk. should have said "for the 
 feast," or "to the feast" (as Jn vii. 8, 10, xi. =,6, xii. 12 eh ttjv eopr-qv) and hence 
 D ins. ei>, d " in die festo," b " in diem sollemni (sic)," e " ad dies solomni (sic)," 
 f" in die solemni," a "die sollemni." 
 
 1 [2716(7] For Lxeveaivw signifying vain desire see //. xv. 617 d\\" ovd ws 
 dvvaro prji-at fj.a\a irep iievealvwv and comp. //. xv. 104. '\lv Tore is perh. an 
 imitation of Virgil's "sed/*«7," "was a thing of the past :" HT0T6 might easily 
 spring, as a corruption, from HCTOTe i.e. j\otq re, but (Steph.) rip-ai does not appear 
 to be used of " settling down." Qeooivei TraX/xco may he illustrated from Chrys. (ad 
 Joe.) ov yap p-ovov dcrfpaXi] riXAa Kai e'| ovpiwv avroh wapiaxe 7 "t" / irXovv. 
 
 " [2716 />} TLvos 5e eveKev ovk aviji-r] eh to ttXoiov ; . . . ovk evijir) 5e eh rb ir\olov, 
 'iva to Oav/xa p-el'gov epydo-qrai. Chrys. supposes that Christ first walked on the sea, 
 and then, " as soon as He had appeared to the disciples, in the same ///owe/it, removed 
 to the land, (dp.a re uxpdri Kai air^rij air' airwv)" He quotes vi. 21 yjdeXov 
 Xa(3eti> avrbv Kai ev6tw rb irXolov eyyvs rrjs yrjs eyivero. Perhaps X means this in 
 substituting iirl tj)v yr\v eh T/v vtrnvrrio-ev "the land to which Jesus came to meet 
 them.'''' Origen (on Prov. xxx. [9) has eiOibK yap eyiverorb ttXoiov iwl ttjv yrjv eh 
 i\v vTrrjyou, Oeia dvva.fj.ei. 
 
 '■'■ [2717 ./ ] See Oxy. Pap. ii. no. 237, col. vii. 10, 18, iy etc. Here, and 
 in several othei passages of this long petition, the word seems to mean "willed," 
 "decreed," "decided" (once redeX-^Kaat). In Faviim Pap. 131. 7 ovk i]di\t)aev 
 means "refused." In Oxy. iii. n<>. 47:. 14 "did not wish (ovk ijdeXev) her to 
 survive him " the context indicates that the desire was frustrated. 
 
 554 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2718] 
 
 According to the Indices of Lucian and Aristotle, rjOeXov does not 
 occur in those authors, although i6e\(o and #e'Aw are frequent in 
 them 1 . The fact that rjOeXov occurs twice at no great interval in 
 Test. xii. Patr. and that it is used by Hernias to express a modest 
 wish-, indicates that it may have been freely used by some writers; 
 but its rarity in the writers above-mentioned and its non-existence in 
 Mt.-Lk., confirm the view taken elsewhere (1735/') that in the 
 Walking on the Waters John's use of rj6e\ov is connected with Mark's 
 use of rjOeXev 5 . 
 On i. 30 ynep ay'toy (2369) 
 
 [2718] On this passage Blass (p. 135) says that the use of v-n-ip 
 
 1 [2717/'] Lucian's Index has Dial. Marin, xiii. 2 (i. 321) ovk fdeXes, "you did 
 not wish," but nowhere ijdeXes or -qOiX-qaas. Schenkl's Index to Epictetus gives 
 rjOeXov (without &i>) 1st pers. sing. " / could have wished," " / should have liked'" 
 (in vernacular English, " I only wish ") in i. 10. 6 " I only wish I could stand by 
 him and remind him" (comp. iv. 1. 143 "I only wish I could stand over one of 
 these people" and Gal. iv. 20 rjdeXov de -rrapelvai), i. 29. 35 " I should have liked 
 to go on still as a pupil," and sim. i. 29. 38, ii. 8. 16 etc., almost always of 
 impracticable (and often of unreasonable) desires. So in 2nd pers. i. 1. 18 (and 
 comp. iii. 23. 13) Ti' odv ; ijdeXes Trdfras TpaxriXoKOirriOrivai.: " woztld you have 
 liked to see all the world beheaded?" and 3rd pers. ii. 9. 22 olov ei' t« 5eVa Xirpas 
 dpai fiT] 5wd/j.€i/os, rbv rod Aiavros Xidov ^aard^eLV jjdeXev " as though a man 
 unequal to carrying ten pounds would like to lift the stone of Ajax ! " In ii. 17. 
 33 -rjdeXov S" dacpaXuis exeiv the desire is scoffed at by Epictetus (av debs et, o> 
 avdpwTte) as absurdly ambitious. It occurs with a neg. in iv. 11. 24, "God 
 forbid ! I would not wish such a thing, even if it were to make me a wise man 
 (ovd' el ao(pbs ZpuXXov eivai ijdeXov)." Schenkl gives only one instance of rjdeXes 
 ac (iii. 17. 4) "could you possibly have wished," referring to a disgraceful 
 action. 
 
 [2717 c] Schenkl's very copious Index gives no instance of i^'^eXe in Epictetus. 
 Swete's note on Mk vi. 48 is " Vg. volehat praeterire eos...With the feigned 
 purpose comp. Lc. xxiv. 28 and see Mc. v. 36, vii. 27." But r)6tXev (so far as 
 I know) never means "he feigned," and the passages referred to in Mk and Lk. 
 do not contain ijdeXev. 
 
 - [2717 d] Test. xii. Patr. Ku/>. % 1 ei p.r\ Ta/cw/3...7rpo0'7?i'<i;aro irepl efxov...6ri (?) 
 rjdeXe Kvpios aueXelv /xe, ib. Sym. § 2 k. iXduv Poi'/3r)/x eXinr-qd-q- rjdeXe yap avrbv 
 
 8ia<rC><Tai In Herm. Mand. v. 1. 7, -rjtieXov yvQvai, " volebam cognoscere," is 
 
 like our " I wanted to know — in case you can spare me five minutes — whether you 
 think...,'" which does not imply that the "want" is given up. 
 
 3 [2717 1'] Mt. xiv. 25 y)Xdev rrpbs avrovs has neither yjdeXou nor rjdeXev. 
 Possibly there may have been some Gk confusion between hAGcn and HOeAoN 
 or H9eAeN. In Jn vi. 21, the Cureton. Syr. (Burk. ) has " And they rvere willing 
 that they should receive him," but SS " and when they took him " ; N has r/Xdov for 
 TJdeXov, an interchange like that in 2 S. xxiii. 9, where B* reads -ijdeXe for 
 
 555 
 
[2719] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 for TrepL as in Ae'yeiv vrrip "to speak about," (i) "is common in Attic 
 and Hellenistic Greek," (2) "as also in the LXX," (3) that it "is 
 found more rarely [in N.T.] and is almost confined to Paul," and he 
 instances "Jo. i. 30 v-n-kp ov (ircpl ov X C A al.) eT-n-ov, 2 Cor. viii. 23 
 £tT€ virep Titov ('as concerning'), xii. 8 vTrep tovtov irapf.Ka.Xi.o- a ('on 
 this account,' 'on behalf of this')...2 Thess. ii. 1, Koa^ao-flai wrep 
 often in Paul, also <pvo-iovo~Bai. xmip, <ppovetv v-rrep (in Phil. i. 7 'to 
 think upon ' in iv. 10 ' to care for')." (4) On Jn i. 30 he adds (p. 313) 
 " better ov without prep. Nonn. Chrys." 
 
 [2719] (1) A distinction should be drawn between v-rrkp tivos 
 masc. and v-n-ep tivo? neuter. The former almost always means "in 
 behalf of" or at all events suggests some interest in the person 
 mentioned. Comp. II. vi. 524 virlp credev aur^e' a-KOVoy irp6<; Tpwwv 
 implying that Hector blushes for his brother Paris, whom he would 
 gladly defend, when he hears the Trojans revile him, Soph. (Ed. Tyr. 
 1 444 outws ap avSpos dBXiov trajcreo-6' virip (i.e. taking any interest in 
 the fallen king), Lucian De Salt. 9 (ii. 273) of Achilles "receiving 
 good news about (TvvvBa.vop.zvo<i v-n-ep) " his son. In Plat. Legg. 776 E, 
 the meaning may well be that Homer, " making proclamation in 
 behalf of Zeus (vwep tov Ai6s ayopeiW)," has "openly declared " or 
 " given sentence " that Zeus takes away half a man's being when 
 he takes his freedom : that is, he speaks for the god, though not in 
 the first person, as though he were in the counsels of Zeus 1 . 
 
 1 [2719 a] Plato 776 e may be punctuated thus, 6 oe ffo<pLbraTos -rjuiv rGiv 
 ttoltjtQv Kai anecprivaTo virep tov Aids , dyopevwv, "has actually given sentence in 
 the name of Zeus, making public proclamation thereof." Comp. ib. 580 B Wi 5rj 
 /Mot, l(f>r)i> iyib, vvv ijorj uxrirep 6 5ia wdvrwv Kpirr;s airo<paiveTai, Kai av ovtw, "as the 
 judge gives his sentence [as to which chorus is first, which second] so do you," 
 followed by /j.icr6wo-Jj/j.€da ovv KrjpvKa "let us hire a herald" to proclaim the 
 sentence. Homer, then, seems to be the "herald" giving sentence in behalf of 
 Zeus. Conversely, comp. Epict. ii. 23. 7 t'i yap eari to dtroipaiv6fj.a>oi> inrcp 
 iKacrTrjs tovtuiv ruji> dvvdp.twv . . .with ib. p.i]TL ttJs opaTiKrjs ttot iJKovffas Xeyovcrrjs ti 
 ■tepi iavrrjs; "What is it that declares in behalf of each of these faculties?... Did 
 you ever hear the faculty of sight uttering a word about itself?" i.e. there is a 
 higher power that speaks in behalf of or as the interpreter of, its servants, for they 
 cannot speak about themselves. Apart from Xen. Cyrop. (discussed in 2370 a), 
 Steph. gives no oilur instances except from an affidavit in Demosth. 554, 11 77 
 tiaayytXla (560T}...inrip'Api<TTdpxov, and Aeschin. 22, 12 (eh. 154 Teubn. p. 15,7) 
 virip avrCiv \f/r)<pui<r6ai wv 7) dlui^n 17. As I" the former, >ince a contest is said to 
 be "«i behalf 0) (i>r4p) life or death," vwlp tivos (masc.) came to be used in an 
 action of a public character (tiaayycXla), perh. meaning at fust " /'// behalf of 
 and 1 In 11 ■'/,»■ or against," comp. Arrian .Ilex. i. 25. 8 tI XPV i>wtp 'A\(i;di>5pov 
 
 556 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2719] 
 
 yvCovai. In Aeschin., the preceding words (tI v/j.els 6fj.uix6Ka.Te ;) and the context, 
 indicate that avrQv is neut., as in the accepted Latin transl. " Vos quid jurastis? 
 De lis rebus pronuntiaturos quae in accusatione prrescripta.' sunt." Steph.'s 
 numerous instances from Polyb. are all neuter. Lucian's Index gives abundant 
 instances of virip with gen. of person, but all mean "pro,''' exc. perhaps Phal. 
 prior 10 (ii. 197) dXXa p.ev virep ifiov 6.k7jkows, eirel 8' eireipdOrj dirrjXdev eiratvQ>v /xe 
 where the Latin gives ' ' de we" and the meaning may be ' ' in controversy for and 
 against me.' 1 [If the meaning had been " other [good things] in my favour," we 
 should have expected dXXa re... /ecu'.] 
 
 [2719 b] In Arrian's Exped. Alex, virep is freq. used with genit. of person and 
 verbs of writing, inquiring etc. In his preface, distinguishing between ypd(pu) irepl 
 and ypa<f>(j) virip, he says, ocra p.ev (?) rai'rd d/x<f)(ii irepl ' AXei;dv5pov..Xvveypa\pav 
 TavTo, eyw ws iravTrj dXrjdrj dvaypd<f>u}..."AXXoi ixev di] dXXa virep 'AXe^dfSpov 
 dveypaipav, ovd' 'tanv virep otov irXeloves 77 d^v/xtpcovoTepoi e's dXXrjXovs. The dp.(pw 
 are Ptolemaeus and Aristobulus, and he proceeds to explain that these two wrote 
 without being influenced by love of gain or other pressure. These two write in a 
 detached and disinterested way " about" 1 Alexander ; the others " in behalf of" or 
 " in praise of" him (or perhaps "in a controversial spirit about him"). He 
 proceeds (ib.) to say that he has neglected mere idle oral tradition or talk 
 "in favour of" Alexander (iravrr) airiara. ws Xey6/xeva ix6vov vir&p 'A.). It is perh. 
 significant that vi. 2. 6 virip ' AXeijdvdpov t,weypa\pe is followed by txpev'cTa.To. Of 
 course virip with genit. of person may mean "about" a man, or men, when regarded 
 impersonally, as an enemy, a nation etc., as in Arr. Alex. i. 5. 3 v. tQu 
 AvTapiaruv, ii. 6. 2 v. Aapeiov, v. 5. 1 it. 'Ivdwv. The Index to Arrian contains 
 several instances where virep twos masc. means " in behalf of," as in N.T. 
 
 [2719 c] 'Tirep, in an ocpaivecxd ai vire'p, has been shewn (2719 a) to mean 
 "in behalf of " or "in the name of." Contrast Epict. iii. iS. 4 7repi 'EwKpdrovs 5' 
 ovk dire<py)vavTO ol 5iKa<TTai; — i.e. "gave sentence about Socrates." Epictetus 
 appears never to use virep for wepi. The former, when used with the genitive, he 
 mostly connects with verbs that imply anxious effort to gain some prize, retain 
 some possession, or defend some person. His view is (ii. 16. 41, and comp. iv. 
 10. 22) that it is right to "strive even to desperation for the sake of (virep) 
 tranquillity, freedom, noblemindedness," for these things are parts of oneself; but 
 it is only fools that would be anxious for the sake of a mere possession. Hence 
 the parenthesis with virep in the following, amidst a group of irepl clauses, ii. 13. 
 ir dXXd irepl tov aoop-aTiov dyoiVLun-ev — virep rod KTijo-eidlov (comp. iii. 18. 3 eirl to 
 awLidTiov — eirl t6 KTijaeidwv) — 7rept tov tl 86^ei tw Kaiaapi, irepl tuv ^<rw 5' ovdevos. 
 This might be paraphrased: "But we are anxious about the paltry body — 
 [anxious] for the sake of that most trumpery possession ! — about what Caesar will 
 think — but never a jot about the things within us." The inrip clause anticipates 
 and meets the objection: "Why of course a man is anxious for the sake of his 
 body !" and the meaning is, we are anxious for the sake 0/" external unrealities, but 
 we are not anxious, not even in the lowest sense, '■'■about" internal realities. In 
 i. 19. 26 virep iepwo-vvtjs eXdXei /xoi, virep appears from the context to mean "about 
 the advisableness of attempting to obtain" such an office (for it does not seem likely 
 that virep could mean "to secure my interest for his application"). The closest 
 approximation of virep to irepl that I have been able to find is in iv. 1. 105 where 
 evxapiaTelv (elsewhere twice used with eirl) is used with virep : but even here virep 
 probably represents a feeling less detached and more emotional than would be 
 represented by irepl. Similarly, in English, when we say "sorry or thankful for" 
 
 557 
 
[2720] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 [2720] (2) In LXX, virkp with gen. is very rare except in the 
 titles of Psalms and in the phrases 6 virkp and virlp ov. In the 
 Pentateuch, it occurs only in Deut. xxiv. 16 {bis) "the fathers shall 
 not be put to death for the children " and xxviii. 23 6 ovoavos 6 virkp 
 KecpaXrj'; aov. Different authors and mss. use virkp and ire.pi differently. 
 As to genit. of person, note Judg. vi. 31 "Will ye plead for Baal?" 
 virkp, A irepi, 1 S. ii. 25 "who shall entreat for him ?" virkp. A irepi, 
 hut 1 S. i. 27 "for this child I prayed" virkp (no v.r.), 2 S. vii. 25 
 and parall. 1 Chr. xvii. 23 (David to God) "thou hast spoken 
 concerning thy servant and concerning his house," S. LXX irepi (once), 
 Luc. virkp (bis), Chr. LXX irpo<s and em 1 . There are probably very 
 few instances of virkp with genit. of person in canonical LXX meaning 
 "about" except in the various reading (Luc.) of David's prayer 
 quoted above 2 . 
 
 [2721] (3) In N.T., virkp with genit. is relatively very much 
 more frequent than in LXX. It occurs nearly twenty times in the 
 
 (but "angry or delighted at") there is a notion of having received something "[in 
 return] for" which we make an emotional response of sorrow or thankfulness. 
 
 [2719 </] 'Tirkp with genit. of pers. occurs in Epict. Fragm. (3 Schenkl, 136 
 Schweig.) virkp i]/jiwv [3e(3ov\evTai to mean "in behalf of " and also with ypa<pu> 
 i. 9. 27, where yp&cpu inrkp twos means "write in behalf of" or "a letter of 
 introduction for," rep. i. 9. 33 virkp tovtov tL aXXo rj dvayKi) ypdcpfiv kiriaroXas (lis 
 virkp veKpov; Here there seems to be a play on writing a letter of introduction for 
 the sake of helping a helpless creature and writing a letter of request for the sake 
 of recovering a dead body to give it burial. It may be doubted whether the 
 genit. is masc. or neut. in ii. 16. 42 apx«" M e OkXecs, Idiarevetv, p.kveiv, (pevyeiv, 
 irivecrdai, irXovrelv; e'^ui aoi virkp dirduTw y t ovtwv irpos tovs dvOpwirovs diro\oyr)- 
 0-op.aL- 5a|a> rrpi kadoTOv (pvcriv o'ia kmiv, but tovtwv, if not masculine, is at least 
 personal in effect. The Philosopher says to God, "Make me play what part thou 
 wilt, Ruler, Citizen, etc. I will justify thy ways to men, representing these 
 characters \in accordance with thy will]." The discrimination between irepi and 
 virkp in Epictetus strongly confirms the conclusion that John likewise discrimi- 
 nated between them. 
 
 1 [2720 a] As to genit. of thing, comp. 1 Esdr. vii. 8 virkp dp-aprias with Ezr. 
 vi. 1 7 irepi ap-aprlas and Dan. ii. 18 "mercies concerning this secret " (where there 
 is a notion of intercession) LXX irepi, Theod. virkp, with id. vii. 16 " concerning all 
 tlii " LXX inrkp, Theod. irepi. Comp. also Y./.r. \. 19 (about sacrifice) irepi 
 ir\i)p.}j.e\ri<Teus witli parall. 1 Esdr. ix. 20 inrkp rrjs dyvoias. In 2 S. vii. 19 
 "spoken of thy servant's house," vii. 28 "promised unto thy servant." the LXX 
 has virkp, perh. (1) taking "house" as a thing, and (:) confusing " unto'' with "in 
 behalf of," but the parall. l.XX in 1 Chr. xvii. 17, 26 has eni in both cases. 
 
 - [2720 /'| In 1 and 2 Mace, virkp witli genit. occurs about 38 times, and when 
 used with genit. of person, it alw. means "in behalf of" exc. in 2 .Mace. ix. 8 
 "■above [the level of] men." 
 
 55» 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2722] 
 
 Gospels (as compared with twice in the Pentateuch and Joshua) 
 always with genit. of person, and — unless it can be proved that i. 30 is 
 an exception — always meaning "in behalf of 1 ." This also is its 
 meaning in the Acts where the genitive is always personal, or quasi- 
 personal, referring four times (out of seven) to sufferings "in behalf 
 of the Name [of the Lord]." In the Pauline Epistles it occurs about 
 ninety times, and in almost every instance it means "in behalf of r 
 some person, or some name, or cause, for which the Apostle contends as 
 though contending for a person, or some object for which he is striving, 
 or praying, or interceding : and in the very few instances in which 
 this meaning is not expressed, it is probably always implied 3 . 
 
 [2722] (4) As regards the alleged omission of inrep by Chrys. and 
 Nonnus in i. 30 outck Icttlv virep ov, Migne prints two quotations of 
 it by Chrys. thus (1) Ovros rjv irepi ov eiirov O oircau) /jlov ep^6p,evo^ 
 epLirpoo~6ev p.ov yeyovev, (2) Ovtos f]V ov enrov Ottlctid /xov ep^erai av-qp 
 
 09 e/xirpoadev p.ov yeyovev, and a subsequent quotation of i. 15 thus 
 
 (3) ottlo-w p.ov ep^erat 6s ep-trpooQev p.ov yeyovev although he has 
 previously quoted i. 15 (ad loc.) thus (4) outos r/v ov eiirov, 6 oVio-oj 
 fxov epxop-evos efxirpoo-Oev /xov yeyovev. It will be observed, ISt, that 
 
 Chrys. does not omit a prep, in his first quotation of i. 30 (though he 
 
 1 [2721 a] Mt. has it only in v. 44 (Lk. vi. 28) irpoaevxeade virep (Lk. 7rept) tGiv 
 oiukovtwv. Where Mk xiv. 24 has virep ttoWQv, Mt. xxvi. 28 has irepi, and 
 bracketed Lk. xxii. 19, 20 has virep vfiQu. 
 
 - [2721/'] The single doubtful case of pers. genit. is Rom. ix. 27 "ttaalas 5e 
 Kpdi'ei vwep tov 'lapa-qX, where Fritzsche may be right in alleging Arrian Exp. Al. 
 vi. 2. 6 virep ' A\e£av5pov, " about Alexander" (2719 />), so that Israel is not a. person, 
 but a historical subject. But note the obvious contrast in Rom. xi. 2 "R\elq....Co% 
 evrvyxavei. . .Kara tov '\o-pa.-qh. In Rom. xi. 2, Elijah intercedes against Israel and 
 is rebuked by the answer that there is "a remnant.'''' In Rom. ix. 27, Isaiah "cries 
 in behalf of Israel" and announces that there will be a "remnant." 2 Cor. viii. 
 23 e'lre virep Tirov means " whether [I have to stand up in defence] concerning 
 Titus and his relations with you and myself — I maintain that he has done you no 
 wrong. In 2 Thess. ii. 1, virep rrjs irapovaias means — as Lightf. expresses it, 
 " roughly and broadly paraphrased " — " to advocate the true view of the coming." 
 Phil. i. 7 Kadws ianv diKaiov ip,ol tovto (ppovelv virep iravTwv vp.C)v, means that the 
 Apostle is bound to feel confident, hopeful, and thankful "in behalf of * his 
 l'hilippian converts. 
 
 [2721 c] 'firip, when used with a verb and such phrases as vi. 51 " the life of 
 the world," xi. 4 " the glory of God," Acts ix. 16 "my name," Rom. xv. 8 " the 
 truth of God," 2 Cor. i. 6 "your comforting," 2 Thess. i. 4 "your endurance" — 
 whether the verb be "contend" or "speak as an ambassador" or "boast" or 
 whatever else — manifestly implies a personal interest " in behalf of" some person or 
 some personified thing. 
 
 559 
 
[2723] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 has -n-ept for vvrep), 2nd, that he alters eo-riv to rjv in both his 
 quotations of i. 30 (conforming them to i. 15), 3rd, that he omits the 
 important word dvrjp in his first quotation of i. 30. These variations 
 detract from the value of his testimony and indicate that he mixed 
 i. 30 and i. 15. The same statement applies to Nonnus so far as 
 
 concerns rjv in l. 30 Ouros erjv ov keiirov, oVio-repos ep^crat dvrjp. Even 
 
 Origen uses -m.pl in his commentary on Samuel (1 S. xxviii. 18 foil.) 
 ovtos i<TTi nepl ov iyto €i7rov, O oitlo-w p.ov ip\-, also Omitting avr/p . 
 It has been shewn above (2371) that dvrjp, if it means " husband " or 
 "bridegroom 2 ," goes far to explain virep. This view is confirmed 
 by the fact that, when Origen says that the Baptist called Christ not 
 only ayuvo's but also dvrjp, he quotes the text correctly with uVep, and 
 he does it again later on 3 . The evidence from Chrys. therefore 
 indicates nothing except that he did not understand the three points 
 that differentiate i. 30 from i. 15, namely, e'cmV for rjv, virep ov for 
 ov, and the important insertion of dvrjp. A review of all the 
 evidence makes it almost certain that John did not use virkp for jrepi. 
 On ix. 21 aytoc nepi caytoy (2374 — 80) 
 
 [2723] ix. 21 ourros irepl kavrov XaXrjaei, if translated according to 
 classical Greek usage, would closely connect avrds irepi kavrov making 
 airros little more than a preparation for emphasizing kavrov " he will 
 speak — he about his own self" i.e. about himself and nothing else. 
 
 1 [2722 <?] Lomm. xi. 328 Qvros ovv aKiprr]cras irpb yevitretos, ' liodvvijs 6 elirtbv 
 " ovtos tan, 7rept ov iytb tlirov 6 biriaio nov ipxbp-evos t/nnpoadev p.ov ytyove." Kal 
 "6 irep.\pas dirt poi- e<f So av t'S^s to irvevfxa KarafSaivov, Kal /nivov, ovrbs turiv 
 6 vlbs rovdeov." ovtos, <paolv, ovKtri jibei 'l-quovv Xpicrrbv iv KoiXia. "Hibei yap avrbv. 
 AWd 81' InreplSoXrjv So^tjs tifioibv tl ti2 llerpip ireiroirjKev. Origen is quoting freely 
 but Lomm.'s text is also corrupt. We should prob. ins. the words bracketed as 
 follows, ovtos, (pacriv, ovKtri rjbei 'lijaovv Xpurrbv [8v] iv noCklq [tfoeij- rjbti yap avrbv, 
 dXXd 5t' v..., "They assert that he no longer knew Jesus Christ [whom] in the 
 womb [he had known]. Absurd (2068rt) ! For he knew Him, ...but...." 
 
 3 [2722/'] Origen (2722 c) ranks the Baptist's testimony as to avr/p along with 
 his testimony as to d/xvbs, suggesting that he laid stress on the former ; but his 
 ■ omment ad loc. is lost. Cramer ad loc. prints (as one of several explanations of 
 dvrjp given by Ammonius) 77 otl irdaris rm \oyiKrjs (pvaeus, 6 iari ttjs EK/cXr/aLas, 
 wfxfpios e'oriv. 
 
 s [2722 1 ] Lomm. i. 47 olov b'lwdvvijs avrbv ap.vbv 0eov dvayopevei \iywv, T5e... 
 Kal avbpa otd tovtwv, Ovrbs ianv inrtp ov iyu dirov 6tl 'Qirlaw /xov..., rep. id. 
 p. 156. In both passages, Origen, or the scribe, lias perhaps rep. orn (of birlaw) as 
 otl. Nonnus (on [n i. 13) seems to take aitxara as referring to (2269) the mother 
 anil dv-qp to the father, Oik cpvcris ovk djSive \ex w 'ds- ol ' /3< os ^7"w 'Avdpo/ttov 
 fi\do-Tr)pia 6e\rip.aros, ovdt Kal avrr) ZapKos ipwrorbKoio yap.ri\ios r/po<rev evvfj. 
 
 560 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2724] 
 
 Thus 6 Se Karwv auros iavrov avctAcv would not mean "Cato himself 
 [virtuous though he was] committed suicide" but "Cato killed 
 himself with his own hand" as in Xen. Anab. ii. 4. 10 ol Se "EAA^ves 
 iK^opwiTes tovtous avrol i(f> €aurc3v i\o}pow "but the Greeks. . .marched 
 entirely by themselves" not "the Greeks themselves by themselves." 
 
 So 2 Cor. i. 9 aXXa avrol iv eavrols ro a7ro/cptpa r. 0. io-\7]KajX€v means 
 
 "we have had in our own selves the sentence of death" (R.V. "we 
 ourselves " — less suitably if it means " we ourselves [as distinct from 
 others].") But where the context makes cdrrds emphatic so that one 
 pauses on it, it may be separated from the iavrov- phrase, as possibly 
 in 2 Cor. X. 12 aAAa avroi — iv iavTOis iavrovs /xerpovvres. . .ov crwiacrtj/. 
 77/i.ei? Se ovk.... There W.H. make no stop after avrol, but avroi seems 
 to refer emphatically to " certain persons " mentioned above and 
 contrasted with "we" thus: "but they — measuring themselves by 
 themselves... have no understanding, but we..." So probably in 
 
 Rom. Vlll. 23 ov jxovov 8i, aAAa /cat avroi — rr]v a-rrap-^rjv rov Trvev/xaros 
 €^ovt€s [-^//.eis] — /cat avrol iv eairrots crreva^o/xev, " we ourselves, we 
 ourselves, I say, having in ourselves..." (not "in our own selves"). 
 In Jn ix. 21 the context exhibits the timorous parents shifting 
 responsibility from themselves to their son, laying an increasing stress 
 on the antithesis between "we" and "him": "We (unemph.) know 
 that this is our son... but how he now seeth we (unemph.) know not, 
 or (2759 a—f) who [as it is said] opened his eyes we (emph.) (^V" 5 ) 
 know not. Ask him (avrov) — he is of age — he (avros) shall speak 
 concerning himself" — where "he" means "he himself," apart from 
 us and uninfluenced by us. 
 On vi. 15 aytoc monoc (2375) 
 
 [2724] Origen, commenting on Christ's retirement to Ephraim 
 (xi. 54) and mentioning other retirements, quotes vi. 15 yvovs on... 
 ave)(u>prio-(.v ets to opos and adds aAA. ov fxera rwv p.a6r]rwi' dAAa poVos 
 (not airos /aovos) 1 . The Latin b also omits "ipse." Chrys. has yvovs 
 oTL...avex ( *>py]o~w £ t? to opos, and proceeds to comment, without adding 
 airos p.ovos. Both Origen and Chrys. omit the preceding 7raA.11/ (in 
 
 1 [2724 a] Origen elsewhere (on Mt. xv. 29 ava§as els to opos eKad-qro e/ce?) says 
 that the mountain represents the Ecclesia, and he argues that the disciples (Loram. 
 iii. 122) went up with their Master. This is before the Feeding of the Four 
 Thousand. The going up to the mountain at first with the disciples affords 
 a contrast with the going up to the mountain afterwards without the disciples 
 (cu'ros p.bvos). 
 
 A. VI. 561 36 
 
[2725] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 dvc^wpijo-ev 7rdX.Lv ets to opos). Nonnus does not express aurds or 
 ■n-ttAiv in his paraphrase, Oupcos vXrjevTo<; iprjixd&a Svo-aro irerpryv. 
 Avo-aro, implying "hiding" resembles iKpvfirj in Epiphanius (117 d 
 Haer. xxix. 2) yi'oi'S dve^wprjcre kou eKpv/3r] iv 'Ecppalp. troXti tj^s ipijp-ov 
 (after the words r/Xdov yap ((ptjal to evayyeXiov) ^pio-cu avrov as 
 fiaaiXea) which also omits the words avVds pdi/os. SS supports W.H. 
 as to (xvtos pdi/os, but the Curetonian Syr. has "he left them and fled 
 again to the hill alone," cpevyei is also the reading of X*, and Chrys., 
 in his comment, uses this word, 6 Se Xpio-rds (frevyei. Ti c^rore; 
 Strangely enough, a little afterwards, Chrys., who has omitted the 
 words 7raA.11/ and poVos in describing Christ's retirement, inserts them 
 in the Walking on the Waters 1 . D and d add KctKet irpoa-qvx^o after 
 olvtos poVos, X has poVos curros. 
 
 [2725] In xii. 24 airrds p.6vo<; peVet there is no various reading. 
 Latin versions of Origen twice paraphrase it as "doth not bring forth 
 fruit." Chrys. first quotes the greater part of xii. 24, including auYds 
 p. pei'ei, then explains r)\Bev r\ wpa, then d KOKKo<;...dTvo6dvr), but 
 makes no attempt to explain auYds p. peVet. But Origen elsewhere 
 (in his comment on Jeremiah xi. 19 in which he finds a reference 
 to the "wood" of the cross) quotes xii. 24 lav p?) kokko% (for 6 k.) 
 ...avrbs p.6vo<; peVet and adds that, but for the crucifixion, lp,etvev dv 
 ja6vo<; 6 ko/ckos. There is nothing in his comment to shew clearly at 
 first whether he took currds to mean "it" (as A.V.) or "by itself" (as 
 R.V.), but when he repeats the words, he transposes them into a form 
 that may be rendered thus, "Consider therefore His saying [and 
 ask] whether He has not intended (fiefiovkrjTai) this [i.e. a reference 
 to the cross] saying, ' The grain of wheat, except it, [or, it itself \ fall 
 into the earth and die (d k. t. (tltov, Idv p.7) ■Kf.uwv ets tt/v yrjv aTroOdvy 
 avTo's), abideth alone (pdvos p.eVei) ' " — if we punctuate after av-ros. 
 Nonnus brings out the predicative meaning of avros, "by itself 
 and fruitless," with great force 2 . 
 
 (2726] Autos p.oVos must be distinguished from pdvos avrds (which 
 X reads in Jn vi. 15). The latter, according to the analogy of 
 Scv'rcpos, lyuTos etc. followed by ai'rds, would mean "alone by 
 himself." It occurs two or three times in Lucian to mean " unique 3 ." 
 
 1 [2724/'] TiVos ovv (vexa/ a<f>LT)<ni> olvtovs koX avax^p^', ixa.\\ov be, tLvos ItvtKtv 
 <paivtTai Tra.Xtv pbvos (7rl tt;s 0a\d(rar]s fiadii^wv ; 
 
 " [2726rt] T6re (aouvos irwcrtos avT66i /xl/xvei "Acnropos, axpyioTos, dv/jporos, 
 &/j./xopos ap7T7J?. 
 
 rt [2726 </J Lucian Demon. ii) (ii. 386) p.bvo% aiVos eari /cat wpQiTos tQiv 5ia\ekri- 
 
 562 
 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2727] 
 
 But ai/ro? /xoVos might have various meanings according to its 
 context e.g. "he hi??iself [did it, and that too] alone and unaided," 
 or " [He is] by himself [quite] alone," or " [existing] by himself [and] 
 alone 1 ." In vi. 15, auros fx6vo<;, coming at the end of the sentence 
 is peculiarly emphatic (more so than in xii. 24) and the general 
 confusion of the text, together with the difficulty of the phrase, suffice 
 to explain the omission (by some) of avros, or of /u.oVos, or of both. 
 But the peculiar language springs from peculiar circumstances. In 
 Gethsemane, Christ's disciples were to "leave" Him "alone" 
 {xvi. 32). After the Feeding of the Five Thousand (as Origen 
 suggests 2 ) they perhaps went, from one point of view, still further 
 from their Lord, if they abetted the multitude against Him, and 
 desired to see Him "made a king" by force. If ever the Son could 
 be called " alone " — though He could not really be " alone " because 
 the Father " was with " Him — it was on this occasion ; and this 
 perhaps is the meaning of the final avjh% /xovo?, " — by Himself, even 
 the disciples being against Him, taking His way a/one." In reality, 
 as Origen says, it was not Christ that was left "alone." It was the 
 disciples. And this sinister word "alone" ending the narrative of 
 the Five Thousand, prepares the way for the Walking on the Waters, 
 which describes the disciples as leaving their Master and failing in 
 faith. 
 On vii. 4 zht6i ayto'c (marg. ay'to). ..€?nai (2375 (?) 
 
 [2727] In vii. 4 ouSels yap ti ei' KpvirT(Z 7roiet kcll ^rei ' ciutoV 
 
 kG)v, " that he is unique and first" (see 1895 c), Gymnas. 40 (ii. 921) pvq eprjfiriv, u 
 7e*'i'are, /xriSe twv avbpwv airbvTicv, /xbvos cu'toj [alone by yourself) \4yuv o'iov 
 Kparttv. The meaning is ironical in both these cases. Harmon. 3 (i. 855) /jlovos 
 uvtos &fieii><j}i> av fjada, seems to mean " You alone by yourself would have been 
 better than all these together." 
 
 1 [2726/'] L. S. quotes avTixs /j.6vw and ko.6' avrovs /j.6vol from Plato, but 
 not avrbs ixbvos, nor does Mitchell's Index. Aristoph. Ran. 78 'locpQvr' d7ro\a/3d)c 
 avrbv jxbvov means "taking aside Iophon by himself alone" emphasizing the secrecy. 
 Long. De Sublim, 35 rod yrjyevovs eKeivov nal avrou fj.6vov...Trvp6s, referring to 
 the flames of Etna, might mean "unique" fire, but Dr Roberts (p. 238) indicates 
 a parall. in Tind. Pyth. i. 21 — 4 irvpb% ayvorarat... way at and renders clvtou p.bvov 
 "pure and unmixed" (comp. Steph. 2508 a quoting Demetr. De Eloc. 144 to Sk 
 avTiTrjs irewoLrjp.€vov in tov olvtos). On clvtos meaning " alone," see 2699. 
 
 2 [2726 c] Lomm. ii. 368 (on xi. 50). Origen speaks of the disciples as 
 fiovKrideicnv ai> p-era twv OeXbvTwv woirjcrai avrbv jiacrtXea, Iv Tjdrj y£v7]rai Kai 
 Koo-fiLKus avrwv /3ao-i\efo, i.e. their king after the manner of this world, which might 
 be paraphrased as ' ' according to the manner of ' the prince of this world.' " The 
 crisis resembled that in the Temptation (Mt. iv. 9, Lk. iv. 6). 
 
 563 36—2 
 
[2728] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 (marg. avro) iv irapp-qo-ia zlvai, there is probably a contrast between 
 the "works" mentioned in vii. 3 ("that thy disciples also may behold 
 thy works which thou art doing") and the worker ("himself") — as in 
 x. 38 (" Even if ye believe not me believe the works" and comp. xiv. 
 n). Missing this contrast, some scribes have dropped avVo's as 
 superfluous or have supposed aytoc6n to be an error for AyToeN 1 . 
 Chrys. quotes ovcVis yap iv Kpvn-rw Ti...auVos, but afterwards refers 
 freely thus, To /xev ovv elireiv, OuSei's ti iv KpvivTa) ttoul, SeiXtav iyica- 
 XovvTutv icrriv. ..to Se iirayaytLv on ZrjTtL iv Tcapp-qo-'ia aval, <£(AoSo£ias. 
 Under the circumstances this can hardly be taken as proof that he 
 did not read aurds. For t^rd au'rds quoted apart from its context 
 would be liable to misunderstanding. It should be added, however, 
 that SS has "wisheth himself that it (or, he) should be in the open," 
 which suggests that it may have read aurds avro. Nonnus certainly did 
 not read avro, but he may have omitted the pronoun altogether : Ov 
 
 yap TLS-.-v-JTOKok-rrLOV epyov vcpaivei. . .ap.<fiaon]v 8' iOeXei dpaavs cp/xevcu — 
 
 where he combines the two meanings of vapp-qo-ia, (1) publicity 
 (dp.cf>a8irjv), (2) boldness (Opao-vs). The textual evidence against 
 avro, when combined with the fact that irapp-qo-ia is regularly applied 
 to persons, not to reports, makes it certain that avro is corrupt, and 
 probable that avros is correct. 
 On viii. 44 e« toon iAioon AaAgi (2378) 
 
 [2728] R.V. "speaketh of his own" leaves it an open question 
 whether e/c is (1) partitive (2214) "[some] of," or (2) significative of 
 origin (as in Mt. xii. 34 (sim. Lk. vi. 45) e/< tov Trepio-aevpaTos t^s 
 Kap&ias to o-Topa XaXel). Probably it is the latter ("from"). But 
 "speaketh from [a source] belonging to him" seems (but see 2728*/) 
 to make very poor sense as compared with Mt.-Lk. where the meaning 
 is "speaks, because he cannot help it — the stream of words bursting 
 forth from the fountain in the heart." Chrys. says "Man uses 
 falsehood not as belonging to him (iStw) but as alien (dWoTplw), but 
 he [that is, Satan, uses it] as belonging to him." By "belonging to 
 him" he means "one of his family" as appears from his preceding 
 
 1 [2727 a] There are many variations in X, D and latt. and syr. vss., as to 
 the order of the words and transl. : X and b have ttoiuv for iroie? ko.1, e has "in 
 auctoritate" for iv nappr/aia and omits yap, ff has "Nemo quid facit in occulto. 
 Quid facit quaeril ipse " : b and e omit " ipse." 'Ev kpvttt&ti, the reading of D 
 and most Intl., seems to lay less stress on ti than is laid in ovdels yap ti iv Kp. The 
 latter may have bet n supposed by the scribe oi l'> to mean "doeth a attain thing 
 in sard" in contrast with " wisheth it to be [known] in pubh 
 
 5C4 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2728] 
 
 statement that Satan was the origin and parent of falsehood (tTe/ce to 
 i^ei'So? 7rpwros) in the words to Eve ("Your eyes shall be opened"). 
 Origen ad loc. refers to the " spirit " that " stood before the Lord " in 
 order to cause the death of Ahab, saying " I will go forth and be a 
 spirit of falsehood in the mouth of all his prophets." The lying 
 " spirit," on that occasion " spake from his own {Ik w i8<W iXdXrjo-e) " 
 i.e. from the false prophets whom he had made " his own " by placing 
 the spirit of falsehood in them. This view explains the Johannine 
 connexion between "speaking from his own" and "ye are from the 
 devil as your father," which otherwise is obscure 1 . 
 
 1 [2728a] Comp. Mt. x. 20, "it is not ye that speak but the spirit of your 
 Father that spcakcth in you," where it would have made good sense to substitute 
 " speaketh from you," as the " speaking" goes forth from the disciples to the world. 
 Nonnus gives no help as to the meaning of "his own," ^deyyerac e£ idluv Sti 
 \oiyiov rfdos di^wv "irevaTT]? cu'tos £<pv ^evdrj/j-ovos iic yeveTTJpos, where Nonnus 
 appears to take a view thrown out by Origen at the outset of his comment on the 
 passage (Loram. ii. 241) dfxcpifloXos 7/ Xe^ts tcrrl- 5r]XovTa<. yap aw' avrrjs iv fxev, ujs 
 dpa £x €l ° Std/SoXos vrarepa. 
 
 [2728 />] In viii. 44 R.V. and A.V. may intend " speaketh of his own" to mean 
 " speaketh />w«." Comp. vii. 17, 18, xiv. 10, xvi. 13, XaXdv d7r6, xii. 49 XaXeiv 
 €K, where A.V. has " speak of" (but R.V. has " speakfrom "). In xviii. 34 (as in 
 viii. 44) d7ro <reavTov...\£yeis is rendered by R.V. as well as A.V. " 0/" thyself." 
 Shakespeare uses "of" for " from" in "of one's self, himself etc.," and (in very 
 rare cases) with a verb of speech as prob. in All's Well i. 3. 7 " when of ourselves 
 we publish them " i.e. our own praises. " Sayest thou this of thyself} " is therefore 
 justifiable: but there is probably nothing in English literature to justify such 
 a phrase as "speaketh of his own" in any sense but "speaketh about his own." 
 
 [2728 c] Origen (Lomm. ii. 267) calls attention to the contrast between the 
 spirit of falsehood — which speaks e/c tCiv lolwv — and the Holy Spirit, T6 fxev ovv 
 dyiov irvevfxa...ovK €K tQv ioiwv XaXeidXX' a7r6 rod \6yov rrjs ahrjdelas (comp. xvi. 13 
 ov yap \a\riaet, d<f eavrov). 
 
 [2728 </] The above comment, on viii. 44 4k tuv idiuv, should have included 
 some notice of Epictetus's use of rb idiov. By idia he means " essential property." 
 Etymologically, a man's "property," being that which is " peculiar" to him, ought 
 to include — if the question is of the difference between man and non-human 
 creatures — such possessions as his reason, temperance, charity, etc. But in Gk, as 
 in English, rd i'Sia had come to mean mostly a man's house, estate, etc. Against this 
 popular use Epictetus protests, as when he bids us (iv. 5. 15 — 16) "mourn over 
 one whose fate it has been, not to die, but, while still living, to lose his essential 
 property {diroXiaai rd t'Sta), not his patrimony or paltry plot of ground ... (for none 
 of these things is proper (i!oioi>) to the man)... but the qualities of man (rd 
 dvdpu-n-iKa), those characteristics with the stamp of which upon his mind he 
 has come [into the world] (tovs x a P aKT VP as °®* ^X 0JV & T V oiavoia iXrjXvdev)." 
 Elsewhere he says of a man's "rooted convictions (56y/J.ara) " or "motives" — 
 a very different thing from our "dogma" — iv. 4. 44 "these are a man's essential 
 property, the things that make his actions also either vile or honourable {ravra yap 
 
 565 
 
[2729] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 On e«eiNoc (2381—5) 
 
 [2729] The insertion of a superfluous e/cetvos for the sake of em- 
 phasis was explained above (1920) as mainly due to Hebrew influence. 
 But it is in part traceable to a universal desire, among those who 
 speak naturally, to put the subject they are going to talk about at the 
 head of the sentence, as often in old-fashioned English songs (" our 
 captain he did say"). Comp. the use of auVw in Ox. Pap. 299 (late 
 
 ISt cent.) Aa/ULTTiDVL p.vo6rjptvrfj eoWa avrw Ota crov dpafiioi'a (8pa^p.d<;) t) 
 iva ixvoOrjpevaet evroKa. /caAws 7rot^cret? 7r€p.t//eis p.01 auras. koX 
 Aiovwiw Trpocr\j\dTrj Ne/xcpojv KeKprjKa (Spa^/xas) t] /cat ravTa? ovk 
 €7re/xi//e, tVa €18175, eppwa(o), which edd. transl. " Regarding Lampon 
 the mouse-catcher I paid him for you as earnest money 8 drachmae 
 in order that he may catch the mice while they are with young. 
 Please send me the money. I have also lent Dionysius, the chief 
 man of Nemerae, 8 drachmae, and he has not repaid them, to which 
 I call your attention. Good-bye 1 ." 
 On v. 32 a'AAoc.o MApTypooN (2384) 
 
 [2730] In v. 32 aAAos io-rlv 6 paprvpwv, Nonnus has *AAAos dvyp 
 ■n-eXe p.dpTvs taking aAAos to mean the Baptist, as Chrysostom does 
 (2384) : and N*D a, e, and SS, read olSare for dt8a in what follows 
 ("Ye know that his witness is true"),, indicating that they, too, took 
 
 eari ra t'oia eKaarov, to. xal ras Trpd^eis alaxp as 17 KaAds iroiovvTa).''' Comp. ii. 4. I 
 avarptTrei to lolov (i.e. faithfulness) tov avdpdnrov, ii. 12. 14 to ..p.d\icrTa idiov 
 Sw/cpdroi's, ii. 26. tit. to tbiov tov afj.apTrjjj.aTos. These facts indicate that, in the 
 Epictetian sense, e/c tGiv idlwv might mean nearly the same thing as "from the 
 abundance of the heart," and that this is one of the two meanings intended. 
 
 1 [2729 a] Note here, for future reference (1) 5ia crov used by an illiterate 
 writer for did ai "on thy account," "for thy sake" (2294, 2705), (2) 'iva. with the 
 future (2114), (3) /caXws 7rotTjcrets Trtp.\j/eis either misspelt for k. tt. wi/iipa 1 ;, or 
 more prob. taken by this writer as meaning "you will kindly send," (4) 'iva eiSrjs 
 (familiar to us in N.T.) used for "[I write this] that you may know [it]." "Iv 
 eloijs, used absolutely in Euripides, means " that you may know [the facts]," and is 
 sometimes used towards enemies, "that you may know [what 1 think]," as in Hec. 
 1243, where Agamemnon tells 1'olymestor what he thinks of him. Comp. Ami. 
 5'S(^ "that you may know [what will be the result of your insolence]," Ion 35 
 "that you may know [the truth]," Orest. 534 "that you may know [my mind, 
 I say] 'Do not go against the Gods.'" So Ulysses to Philoctetes in Soph. 
 Phil. 989 " It is Zeus, it is Zeus — that you may know [the truth] — who bade me 
 do this." In the Papyrus, it seems to mean " [I write) that you may know [the 
 fact that I have nol been paid]." The prevalence of eidrjs in this particular phrase 
 mighl result in the correct use of forms in the 2nd pers., dSrjs, -rJTe (comp. Mk ii. 
 10, Mt. ix. 6, Lk. v. 24, Eph. vi. 91, 1 Tim. iii. 15, 1 Jn ii. 29, V. 13), after other 
 forms, e.g. eldw, -wp.tv, had fallen into disuse (see 2690). 
 
 566 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2731] 
 
 the meaning to be " Ye, Jews, know that the Baptist's witness is true." 
 But (i) whereas there is no difficulty in supposing that Jesus appeals 
 to the testimony of God (as a physician might appeal to Nature) there 
 is some weakness in supposing that Jesus, as it were, calls into court 
 a human witness to Himself and then adds "7 know that this man 
 speaks the truth." [This objection is removed by N*D etc., but at 
 the cost of altering the text.] (2) As John was probably by this time 
 in prison, or dead, and as he is described by the context in the past 
 tense (" He was the lamp ") it is not likely that he would be described 
 here in the present (eoriv). (3) The whole passage appears to mean : 
 " There is another witness now witnessing about me — I do not speak 
 of John, who witnessed in the past — a present witness and a greater 
 witness than John, I mean the works given me by my Father." 
 (4) This explanation suits aAAos (2675 — 7) "another of the same kind 
 as myself (a d and ff "alter," not "alius" as the rest) by which the 
 evangelist suggests Christ's unique unity with the Father. (5) Origen 
 (2794 — 5) probably agrees with Cyprian, who (Epist. lxvi. 2, ed. 
 Hartel, vol. ii. p. 727) quotes v. 31 — -2 as shewing that "The 
 Lord Himself... was unwilling to be believed on His own testimony, 
 but preferred to be approved by the judgment and testimony of 
 God the Father" On aAAos in Epictetus see 2791 foil. 
 On xix. 35 kai eKeiNOc oiAeisi (2384) 
 
 [2731] On xix. 35 nal exeivos olSev, paraphrased by Nonnus as 
 I'Sfter, com p. Barn. ix. 8 — 9 87/A01 ovv tov fxev 'Irjcrovv iv Tots 8vo-lv 
 ypdfXfxacrLV kcu iv tw evi tov aravpov. olSev 6 rrjv efX(f)VTOv Swpeav rrjs 
 
 SiSa^s avTov Oe/xevos iv tj/juv. The writer has been enlarging on the 
 mystery of " the three letters " that point to Jesus and His cruci- 
 fixion, and he concludes, "He knotveth [the truth of this mystery] — 
 even He who set in us the implanted gift of the Teaching." The 
 parallel in the two appeals (" He knoweth ") is made the more 
 remarkable by a parallel corruption of the texts. As Nonnus tried to 
 make sense by reading olSa/xev, so the Latin translator of Barnabas 
 ("scitote quia") read oiSarc (or ? tare) on, and N has on for o and 
 Sia0r]Kr]<; for StSa^r;?. Corresponding to John's use of iKelvos to mean 
 the Lord or Master, is the ancient Greek use of avros in auros €<£a, 
 " He [the Master] said it," meaning Pythagoras, frequently referred 
 to in Greek literature, and used of God in Heb. xiii. 6 " Be ye free 
 from the love of money. ..for HE (R.V. himself) hath said...," where 
 Wetst. refers to Josh. i. 5 and adds " ko.t e^o^V, i.e. Deus." 
 
 567 
 
[2732] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 On vii. ii nof ecTiN ckginoc (2385) 
 
 [2732] In vii. ir Uov iarlv c/ceu'o?, whereas Chrys. asks why the 
 Jews will not call Christ by His name and decides that it is because 
 of their detestation of Him, Nonnus apparently takes the pronoun as 
 
 =" ille " in a good sense, Kou /xtv 'lovSaloi <f)i\ir) fjidarevov avayKy Wvj 
 Hoi eftrj; ttol Ketvos; The double meaning is illustrated by Mt. xxvii. 
 19 tw SiKatw £k€li>u>, ib. 63 iKelvos 6 7rAaVos. The context in vii. 11 
 allows of Nonnus' interpretation ; but that of Chrys. is favoured by 
 ix. 12 ttov eoriv e/cetvos; xix. 21 c/cetvos elirev, where it is almost 
 certainly contemptuous as well as hostile. On Acts v. 28, Blass 
 (p. 171) says " D has tov dvdp. iiceivov for t. a. tovtov of the other 
 mss. (the latter is due to eiri ™ ovofiari tovtw in the same verse)." 
 Against this are the following facts : (1) the Latin of D in Acts v. 28 
 has "huius"; (2) the Gk, though it shews signs of an original 
 6K6IN0Y, has toytoy written over it, not above the line but in the 
 line ; (3) in the line above, there happens to be reiN which may have 
 led the scribe to write gkeinoy by a mere lapse. 
 On xix. 9 no'SeN el rf ; (2403) 
 
 [2733] Alford and Westcott take -n-oOtv el av ; to mean, in effect, 
 " Whence art thou ? [Art thou from heaven f\ ' This suits the 
 charge brought by the Jews in xix. 7, "He made himself the Son 
 of God." It also suits xix. 8 paWov 1 icfiofiTJOr), since "fear" would 
 be natural in a Governor if he suspected that he had scourged a god 
 or angel from heaven, as Pentheus had dealt with Dionysus. The 
 words may be intended by John to include this meaning, just as 
 (2645) " Behold, the Man ! " may be intended by John to include 
 the meaning with which Christians utter the latter. That Pilate, 
 however, intended them thus is improbable for the following reasons. 
 
 [2734] Wc have seen (2403) that Chrysostom describes Pilate as 
 " beginning the examination over again." Similarly says Nonnus, but 
 
 1 [2733a] No mention has been previously made of Pilate's "fearing." 
 Hence it would seem we must render "lie was rather terrified [than incensed 
 against the prisoner as the Jews had hoped]." Similarly, in v. 18, /xaWoc i^Tovv 
 avrbv ol 'I. awoKTiivai does not mean " they sought more [earnestly than before] to 
 kill him." For the previous context lias made no mention of " killing," but only, 
 v. 16 "began to persecute Jesus." Some mss., it is true, after "persecute," 
 add '.m.l sought to slay him": but this is only because the scribes have mis- 
 interpreted naWov later on, which means " they rather sought to kill him [than 
 merely to persecute him as before]." SS and Nonnus omit /xdWov in v. 18 and 
 Nonnu-. (SS is wanting) in xix. 8. 
 
 568 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2734] 
 
 more in detail, " He began to question Jesus the second time in the 
 customary language, ' Who art thou (tcXc^cis) ? Whence art thou 
 (d o-v) 1 ?" The phrase "customary language" appears to mean 
 that a magistrate would begin the examination, whether of a witness 
 or of an accused person 2 , by asking his name and domicile — as Minos 
 asks that of Scipio Africanus, when the latter demands a hearing — 
 " Who and whence are you ? " Outside the Greek Testament, iroOev 
 ci does not seem to be used without tis 3 , and a-v is not usually 
 inserted. According to this view, Pilate — terrified rather than 
 goaded into severity by the charge of the Jews " He made himself 
 the Son of God " — may be seeking to gain time, and to find a way of 
 releasing Jesus without irritating the Jews, by asking Jesus about His 
 birth and domicile in the usual form, which he ought to have used 
 at first 4 . This is a rational supposition. But in that case, it may 
 be urged that Pilate would have said tis kolI -rroOev, according to 
 Greek usage (and as Nonnus has it), and that he would not have 
 inserted the superfluous av, which, in non-hebraic Greek, savours 
 rather of familiarity, or contempt, or hatred, than of reverence, when 
 used in questions or commands 5 . 
 
 1 [2734 a] Irjaovv 8' epeeive to oevrepov i)d&5i p.vdu), IVs reXedeis; wbdev 
 el av ; 
 
 2 [2734 l>] Lucian, Dial. Mort. xii. 7 MIN. Tis yap el, 1J0 fieXriare ; ij wbdev wv 
 epeis; ZKH. TtciXicuttjs, ^KTjwiwv, arparriybs. 
 
 3 [2734 <•] Steph. quotes many instances such as Horn. //. xxi. 150 tis wbdev eh 
 dvdpwv; Soph. Phil. 56 tis re /cat wbdev wdpei ; also from Plato and later authors, 
 but none of wbdev el without Ws. Rev. vii. 13 rives eicrlv kclI wbdev -qXdov refers to 
 those previously described as vii. 9 e/c 7rai>ros Ztlvovs ko.1 <pv\Qv ko.1 Xauiv ko.1 
 yXuicrauiv, now brought into the City or Congregation of God. 
 
 4 [2734;/] Chrys. has EZVa IliXaros /xev <po(ielTat...auToi 5e...ov irecpp'iKaaiv, dX\' 
 dvaipoucriv avrbv vwep tov expV" wpocrKvvelv, i.e. Pilate on the one hand "fears" 
 instead of being incensed against Jesus ; the Jews, on the other hand, desire to 
 kill Him for the very reasons for which they should have done Him homage. 
 There is perh. a latent reference to /xaXXov e<pofi-qdr], i.e. to Pilate's feeling "fear," 
 rathe)- than desiring to kill Jesus as the Jews hoped. Chrys. continues. Aid tovto 
 oi>K&Ti avrbv epcoTq., Ti ewoiyjaas ; dXX' dvwtiev wdXiv, vwb rod <pbj3ov naraaeib/xevos, 
 iroLeirai tt)v e^iraoLv, Xeywv, Ei av el 6 Xp«TT6s ; aXX' ovk dweKpivaTo. The Latin 
 of Chrys. renders avwdev "a sublimioribus, " but d. ir. must mean here "all over 
 again." Jn, however, does not contain the words ei ad el 6 Xpicrros nor anything 
 like them. Nor do the Synoptists attribute them to Pilate. Either Chrys. (or 
 a scribe) has attributed to Pilate the words of the Highpriest (Mt. xxvi. 63 ei <rv el 
 6 Xptcrros) or the text is corrupt. 
 
 5 [2734 e] A superfluous <rv is freq. in Aristophanes after tcd/uore etc., and 
 comp. Soph. Phil. 927 u wvp av, Eurip. And. 26 r w (3dpj3apov av dpefx/xa. When 
 not required for sense e.g. after an imperative, it is either antithetical to another 
 
 569 
 
[2735] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 [2735] In O.T., "Whence [art] thou (or [are] ye)?" is at least 
 once distinguished from " Whence comest thou ? " and means " What 
 is thy birth and origin ? " The Hebrew regularly omits the verb and 
 inserts the pronoun, contrary to the Greek idiom. On two occasions 
 the LXX inserts both verb and pronoun, thus mixing the two idioms. 
 The question is from a superior to an inferior except when Jacob 
 modifies it by adding "brethren 1 ." 
 
 [2736] These facts shew that if Pilate recommenced his exami- 
 nation as Nonnus and Chrysostom suggest — a view that is favoured 
 by Mark (xv. 4) who alone says " but Pilate began to question him 
 again (7rccA.1i') " — he might begin with a question about the name and 
 domicile of the accused, and that this, in Biblical Greek, might be 
 expressed by iroBev el av ; This might commend itself to John 
 because of its inner and mystical meaning. Throughout his Gospel, 
 7ro0€v elfit and troOev epxofxai refer to the Father from whom the Son 
 was born and from whom He came 2 . 
 
 pronoun, or emphatic as in vernacular English ("come here, you rascal"), or 
 familiar. It does not appear to be used in reverential requests, e.g. with Zed, by 
 the tragedians (2776/'). 
 
 1 [2735 a] Comp. Gen. xxix. 4 ' A5e\<poi, irbdev ecrre vp.eh; ol 5e elirav, 'Ek 
 Xappdv iajxev, where the meaning may be "What is your country?" and the Heb. 
 (as always) omits the verb, 1 S. xxx. 13 t'ivo<s <tv el /ecu irbdev el (to a slave) ; 2 S. i. 
 13 irbdev el av ; This last — since it follows i. 3 "Whence comest thou?" — would 
 seem to mean, " What is thy country and extraction?" The man answers " I am 
 the son of a stranger, an Amalekite. " In Josh. ix. 8, " Who [are] ye and whence 
 come ye?" LXX, through Heb. corruption, has irbdev eare (Aq. rts vfiels) Kal 
 irbdev irapaye yovare ; Philo i. 470 quotes Gen. xxix. 4 without i/fxels. 
 
 • [2736 a] In the Synoptists, Christ is represented by Mt. as using irbdev 
 in connexion with John's baptism, xxi. 25 irbdev i\v; e£ ovpavov ij e£ avdpdiiruv 
 (where Mk-I.k. 0111. irbdev, and Orig. Lomm. iii. 55 reads irbrepov and elsewhere 
 (Huet) omits e'i ovpavov 17, prob. by homoeotel.). In Mk, the people of Nazareth 
 use it about Christ's powers, Mk vi. 2 irbdev tovtij) ravra ; The par all. Mt. 
 xiii. 54. 56 uses it twice thus. Roth Mk ami Mt. mention in the context 
 a discussion about Christ's parentage. Mk's two other uses of irbdev are viii. 4 
 
 irbdev eV iprj/xlai ; (Mt. xv. -1,3, irbdev. ..ev epi)p.la), and Mk xii. 37 irbdev avrov 
 
 iarlv vibs; (Ml.-Lk. -mis). In both, irbdev might imply impossibility. 
 
 [2736/'] According to the usage of Epictetus, irbdev tovtw ; would imply 
 a denial, " This man could not possibly possess these powers." Comp. iii. 13. 12 
 irbdev yap oi'tw Tavrijv [i.e. t'i)v eip7)v-r)v\ K-c\pvi,ai. ; " for what power has he to preach 
 peace?" iii. 21. 10 irbdev o~oi fj.era5idbvai tovtiov u>v ovk e"xeis : " what power have 
 you to imparl to others things you don't yourself possess?" Sometimes irbdev is 
 without a verb, as in Epict. iii. 24. 70 " Who then has authority over me? Philip, 
 or Alexander, 01 us or the Great King? Whence do they get it (irbdev 
 
 ai/Tois)?" In i. 10. o a tyrant says " I will shew you that I am your lord," and 
 
 570 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2737] 
 
 [2737] The evidence from Luke and from the Acta Pilati 1 
 indicates that John is not inventing a saying for Pilate but is 
 utilising, in a form quite different from Luke's, a tradition that 
 the Roman governor asked some question about Christ's origin. 
 
 the philosopher replies irbdev <rv ; and in iii. i. 36 (see Schweig. Index) some MSS. 
 read the nom. irbdev yap e/ceiVos, but the best MSS. have e/cetVy. 
 
 [2736 r] In Jn, irbdev is freq. used by Christ to express His coming from 
 the Father, as in viii. 14 olba nbdev rfKdov Kal irov vwayia, vfxels Se ovk oldare 
 irbdev gpxo/J-ai V ttov inrayw, vii. 28 K&p.e oldare Kal oldare irbdev el/j.1. The Jews 
 are represented as using the phrase about Jesus in a local sense, vii. 27 toutov 
 oi5a/j.ev irbdev ejrtv {i.e. I lis native place). They proceed, 6 5i Xpicrrbs orav 
 tpxyrai ovdels yivdicrKei irbdev earlv (a phrase quite distinct from the one implying 
 rejection or disowning in Lk. xiii. 25 — 7 (bis) ovk olda v/j.as irbdev iffre). How could 
 they make this last statement in view of the Jewish belief that the Messiah was to 
 be born in Bethlehem? Hor. Heb. (on vii. 27) refers to Jer. Berach. fol. 5. 1 and 
 to other traditions asserting that the Messiah, after being born, was snatched away 
 or hidden. Sanhedr, 97 a speaks of " Messiah, treasure-trove, and a scorpion " as 
 three things that come when one does not think of them (comp. Lk. xvii. 20 
 "without observation"), and the Jew in Justin's Dialogue (Tryph. 8) mentions a 
 belief that Messiah "if he is really born, is unknown and does not yet know his 
 own self, or possess any power, till Elias shall anoint him." Traditions as to the 
 material and local " whence " the Messiah was to come — on the clouds of heaven, 
 or riding on an ass down from Mount Olivet, or, as Tacitus says, " from the East," 
 or from Nazareth, or from Bethlehem — might so overshadow the spiritual 
 "whence," that John might naturally desire to emphasize the latter. 
 
 1 [2737 a] Luke, alone of the Synoptists, explains how such a question might 
 have arisen. He represents the Jews as using, concerning the origin of the 
 Christian heresy, die phrase (Lk. xxiii. 5) " beginning from Galilee." On this, 
 Pilate questions them and ascertains that Jesus came from the jurisdiction of 
 Herod \tetrarch of Galilee']. A rival tradition (in which the three versions of the 
 Acta Pilati (ix. 4) agree) says that the Jews mentioned, not Galilee, but "Beth- 
 lehem" as the implied birthplace, and mentioned Herod [the King] as having 
 sought for the infant Jesus. Pilate questions them as to whether this was the 
 Jesus whom " Herod sought." 
 
 [2737/'] Mk, in his description of Christ's silence, has xv. 4 6 5e II. ttclXlv 
 ewTipwra avrbv [\eywv] Ovk diroKplvri ovdev; i'5e rr6o~a aov Karriyopovcnv (without 
 mention of previous silence). Mt., after mentioning Christ's silence, has xxvii. 13 
 rdre X^7€t avrf 6 II., Ovk aKoveis wdcra gov Kara/j-aprvpovaLv ; but here B has 
 o<ra, D roQ-q ; the Acta Pilati — though reading tl ovtol or tl otl or "quid est quod 
 isti" here (ii. 2) — have, later on (ix. 5) " thine own nation, or race, hath convicted 
 thee." This would agree with John, " thine own nation... delivered thee up to me, 
 what hast thou done?" which Jn places at the beginning of the trial, \l66ev, 
 which often means "for what cause?" "from what motive?" — might very well 
 come at the end of Pilate's words thus : " Dost thou not hear? Thine own people 
 accuse thee? Whence [is this]?" If this were reported in the third person, Kal 
 iir-qpihra ainov wbdev, or wbdev rji/, it might give rise to the tradition presented in 
 different forms by Lk., Jn, and Acta Pilati. 
 
 571 
 
[2738] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 But it is far from sufficient to shew that Pilate uttered the Johannine 
 question. To understand its inner meaning we must go back to the 
 last words of Pilate's previous dialogue with Jesus (xviii. 38) " What 
 is truth?" and to the sequel— " Having said this he went out 
 again." This does not imply (as Bacon assumes) that Pilate was 
 "jesting"; but it does imply that "he did not stay for an answer." 
 Though we may be unable to believe that Pilate uttered the words — 
 at least in this abstract sense— it is easy to see the deep mystical 
 meaning capable of being attached to them as representing 
 the restless and unsatisfied scepticism of the upper classes 
 of the Empire. The Roman world asks the Truth to reveal itself, 
 and then, "goes out" from its presence without waiting for the 
 revelation. Hence, afterwards, when it asks the Truth a second 
 question, "Whence art thou?" the Truth is silent. The question 
 and the silence are dramatically appropriate. But this very appro- 
 priateness—suggesting that the Son of God was judicially hidden 
 from the eyes of the unjust judge — makes it likely that a symbolistic 
 evangelist would accept on slight evidence a non-historic tradition, 
 or interpretation of tradition, that lent itself to symbolism. This 
 likelihood combines with the divergence and confusion of all the 
 Gospel traditions at this point, and with the uncertainty as to the 
 witnesses of the dialogue between Christ and Pilate, so as to make 
 it impossible to feel sure that Pilate uttered the question in any 
 sense at all — least of all in the sense "What is thy parentage, human 
 or divine 1 ? " 
 On xix. 17 KpANi'oy To'noN 6 (2412) 
 
 [2738] In xix. 17 eh rov Xeyop.evov Kpariov ToVov, o Aeyerat 
 'E/Jatori r roAyo0cT (marg. To\y6$), some mss. alter 6' to 09, others 
 omit o Ae'yeTcu, and Blass (p. 77) would read Kp. T., 'Efip. 8e r. 
 But the question is complicated by the fact that the same repetition 
 
 1 [2737 rj The dialogue between Christ and Pilate is comparatively little quoted 
 by early Christian writers and is given in a confused form, in parts almost 
 amounting to a parody, by Acta Pilati. For example, Mk xv. 1: (Mt. xxvii. 22) 
 rL ovu wot.r)<rw; addressed by Pilate to the Jews, appears, in all three versions of the 
 Acta (iv. 3), as addressed by him to Jesus, A tl woi-qou col; (B) tI diXets 
 Troirjo-u got ; Lat. "Quid faciani tibi?" Cyprian Adv. Jitd. § 6 quotes xix. 15 
 thus "Ignoramus qui sit hie, non enim est rex noster : habemus alium regem 
 Caesarem" — no doubt quoting from memory and perhaps blending ix. 29, but Mill 
 giving an insight into great possibilities of early confusion of the text. We have 
 seen above (2734,/) that perhaps even so late a writer as Chrysostom blends 
 an utterance of Pilate with an utterance of tin- High Priest. 
 
 572 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2739] 
 
 of Aey. is found in Mt. X.wii. 33 €is toVov Aeyopevov To\yo8d, o (al. os) 
 i<TTw Kpaviov ToVos Aeyo'pei'os (D Olll. Aeyo/xevos) where Mk xv. 22 
 has €7ri top roAyo^av tottov (D toVov ToAyo^a), o ecrriv r /x.c6'epyW.ryi'€uo- 
 pevos 1 (marg. and D -o/Aevoi/) Kpaviov ToVos, but Lk. xxiii. 33 (omitting 
 ToAyo^a) has simply €7rt t6v tottov tov KaXovfjcei'ov Kpaviov. Confusion 
 seems to have arisen from the fact that the place was really called 
 "Skull," but was known to many Christians as The Place of the 
 Skull. The very extraordinary text in Mk (W. H. txt) seems to 
 mean "to the place [called] Golgotha which [word] is Place of Skull 
 rendered into [Hebrew]," making petfepp/^vevo'pei/os agree with toVos ! 
 For the most part an Aramaic word would be put first, then eo-Tiv, 
 and then the Gk equivalent. But in xix. 17 the Greek comes first, 
 and o may refer either (1) to Kpaviov as a Gk neuter noun, or (2) to 
 Kpaviov Tottov regarded as a place-name and therefore as neuter. 
 Having regard to the fact that this is a case where Lk. is omitting 
 and Jn intervening to support Mk-Mt., we must be prepared for a 
 mixture of traditions, and the safest plan seems to be to adopt 
 W. H.'s txt, though we must leave in doubt the precise antecedent 
 of o. The repetition of Aeyerai may indicate that the place was 
 " (popularly) called (in Greek) " by one name and " (correctly) called 
 in Hebrew " by another. 
 On an and ca'n interchanged (2414) 
 
 [2739] Since os dv might be expressed by idv ns, some writers 
 might like, in the former phrase, to spell dv as idv — thus emphasizing 
 its conditional meaning and distinguishing it from dv in apodosis. 
 On the other hand, writers that freely use dv (as in classical Greek) 
 for "if" in protasis, would not recognise the use of this distinction. 
 John, alone of writers of N.T., uses dv for "if" — almost, how- 
 ever, if not entirely, restricted to the phrase dv tis. As he also 
 freely uses idv us, it may be presumed that he uses dv ns to express 
 the condition with less emphasis, so as to approximate to oo-tis dv. 
 'Eav after a relative occurs frequently in Mark and Matthew, but 
 only in one passage of W.H.'s text of Luke (xvii. t,3 os idv £771-7707; . . . 
 os 8' av aTToXecrei). In John it occurs in xv. 7 o idv ^c'A^re (N daa) 
 and in xxi. 25. As to the latter, see 2414 on the question whether 
 idv means "if" or "soever 1 ." 
 
 1 [2739 a] In v. 19 "nothing, except,'" ovUv, civ /j.t), W.H. read ^without 
 altern. on the authority of XB, but in both MSS. oyAeN comes at the end of the 
 line, which, in their archetype, may very well have originally terminated with 
 
 573 
 
[2740] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 On xvii. 2 ttan o AeAooKAC (2422) 
 
 [2740] In xvii. 2 86£a<r6v crov tov v'lov, iva d mos 8o£aarr) ere, Ka0ws 
 
 oyAee so that the second e was dropped and AN at the beginning of the next 
 line was supposed to mean "if."' In xii. 32 W.H. read K&yu dv v\j/w6Q, without 
 altern., on the authority of B alone, but there again AN comes at the end of the 
 line. In the other instances, dv is followed by ris, xiii. 20, xvi. 23, xx. 23 {bis). 
 In Acts ix. 2 ottuis, iav Tivas, S reads av at the end of a line. Chrys. quotes viii. 14 
 k$.v iyw correctly, and then Kai iav eyu immediately afterwards. He also quotes 
 vi. 62 as dv ovv 'idrjTe (W.H. iav ovv Oeuprjre). 
 
 [2739^]" As regards vi. 62 discussed in 2210—2, 2515, and just mentioned as 
 misquoted by Chrys. (in Migne) as av odv 'Cd-qre — it should be added that Cramer 
 prints a version containing the context of Chrys. {to to. airbpp-qTa <pipeiv els pio-ov) 
 but having iav with indie, pres., iav ovv dewpe'ire. SS has " but [what] i( ye shall 
 see" and the Latin versions have "videritis." The indices give no reference to 
 this passage in the works of Clement of Alexandria, or Origen. Nonnus has d 8e 
 K(v aOpr\at\Ti... TL pi^ere tovto /j.a06vTes ; not only paraphrasing the protasis with an 
 aorist subjunctive but also consistently supplying an apodosis in the future. These 
 facts increase the uncertainty of interpretation. But it still remains probable that 
 the difficult OewpTJTe is the correct reading, corrupted by translators and com- 
 mentators into something that gives a more intelligible and materialistic meaning 
 than the evangelist himself intended. According to Johannine usage, iav dfuiprjTe 
 should mean either "if ye be at this moment beholding," or "if ye be found in the 
 day of visitation beholding." 
 
 [2739 <r] An omission may be here supplied as to the Johannine use of av with 
 indie, in apodosis touched on in 2566/'. Outside Jn, Bruder (1888) gives no 
 instance of av before a pause in N.T., the nearest approach being Mt. xxiv. 43 
 iyp-qydp-qaev av Kai ovk av daaev.. .where Bruder inserts a comma after the first av, 
 but W.H. rightly omit it, and the parall. Lk. xii. 39 has in W.H. txt iypy)y6py)<Tev 
 av Kal ovk d<p7JKev, but marg. simply ovk dv acprJKev. Jelf § 431, in a page on "the 
 position of av," gives no instance of av at the end of a clause. But {id. § 432) in 
 a page on "the repetition of av" he gives a large number of instances where it is 
 repeated in order to emphasize the condition. In a few of these (not distinguished 
 by [elf from the rest) av comes before a pause, Aesch. Ag. 340 ov rav.. dvda\o?ev 
 av, Eur. Hipp. 961 Trjad' av yivoivr' av, Hcc. 359 i'ews av. . .TVxot-fJ.' dv. J e ^ at ^ s 
 l'lato 31 A v/xeh 5' tVws rax dv...Kpov<ravT(s dv fxe...pq.5iws av airoKTeivaire, dra tov 
 \oiirbv (3iov KadevSovTfs StareXoIr' av. But there (elra being equiv. to "and then") 
 SiaTfXoiT dv seems to be parall. to &v diroKTtlvaiTe so that dv is not reduplicated. 
 This passage, then, resembles xiv. 28 ixdpvre dv and xviii. 36 yyuvifovTo dv 
 quoted in 2566/' as placing a non-reduplicated dv at the end of a clause. No 
 doubt there are other instances in Greek, but Jelf does not mention any and they 
 are probably rare. 
 
 [2739</] As regards the position of dv in viii. 19, xiv. 7 tov waripa jjlov dv 
 fldeiTe (where Bruder, 1888, has av final), it follows the rule (Jelf §431. :) that dv 
 is generally joined i" the predicate, as in Ae7oe dv, or to il tkat member oj the 
 setiteuce on which most emphasis is laid." \\ hat is peculiar to these two 
 Johannine passages is that the "member" is not here a single word (as in o&K dv, 
 nd\ai dv, rax' dv, iavr dv) but a phrase, tov iraripa fxov. 
 
 574 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2740] 
 
 !8o>/<as ai'rul i£ov<TLav irdarfi aapKo?, iVa -wav o SeSaiKas avrw &wcrei awrots 
 £,u>rjv alwvwv, there are striking variations in the MSS., in Chrysostom, 
 Nonnus, and Epiphanius, who repeatedly reads 80s for Swo-ei 1 . 
 Origen's comment is lost ; but elsewhere he blends xvii. 1 1 with 
 xvii. 21 Trdrep dyte, 80s <W... in a manner resembling the tradition of 
 Epiphanius' 2 . "O, -n-av 6, and ovojxa o, with the aorist or perfect of 
 " give," occur frequently in John, and seldom without important 
 variations. Sometimes the neuter is changed to the masculine; or the 
 clause about " giving," or the word " name," is omitted, so as to 
 substitute "he that gave" for " that which he gave," '■'those whom 
 
 1 [2740 a] W.H. have Ka0ibs Hdwuas avrip e^ovffiav Trdo-ijs aapnos, 'iva irdv 
 8 5f'5w/cas airrcp Stlxrei avrois for/v aiibviov. Some MSS. read Soocrr), Somtuj and 8u>s. 
 D has exv for Swcxei avrois, and some conflation of these two readings (Suis being 
 spelt (2114) as 80s) might give rise to a tradition 80s ev [e]avrois exeiv which 
 Epiphanius (Resch) five times repeats {e.g. Epiph. 753 A Haer. lxix. 28 etc., <pr)cri 
 yovv 6 Kvpios- 80s avrois far)v %X €IV ^ v eavrots- avrrj 8e eariv 17 aidivios £wt?...). 
 
 [2740 />] Chrys. appears to quote xvii. 2 in two forms, of which the first is 'iva 
 irav 8 SeSuKas avrip fiij dwoX^rat. But perhaps fxij dirok-qrai is not a quotation but 
 a preparatory paraphrase ; '' ' Even as thou gavest him authority over all flesh, that 
 all that thou hast given Aim' — may not perish, for to benefit is always 'glory' to 
 God." Later on, having explained that " authority over all flesh " does not imply 
 authority over those that refuse to believe, he resumes the text correctly thus, 'iva 
 rrdv 8e8wnas avrip 8i2 avrois farjv aiwviov. But he proceeds to apologize for it, as it 
 were, by saying that Jesus speaks here about Himself dvdpwwivdirepov, whereas the 
 evangelist takes higher language. His meaning seems to be that Jesus says, 
 in effect, "the Father hath given me eternal life," whereas John says " He was 
 life," and "He was light." This implies the rendering "that all that He [the 
 Father] hath given to Him [to the Son] He [the Son] may give to them — [namely] 
 eternal life?' 
 
 [2740 ("] Nonnus has... (is iropes avrip 2ap/cds oXtjs fiporir)s irpviJ.vr)aiov ijvioxeveiv 
 Bov\op,ai €tv evi wdvras, ocrois irdpos diiraaas avros, Zootjv decnreair)v aiwviov ap.cpi.iro- 
 \eveiv"0<ppa ae ytvusencwo-t. debv povov..." I desire that in unity (elv ivi) all on whom 
 thou thyself by preordinance (irdpos) hast bestowed it may follow after eternal life, 
 
 in order that they may know " Comp. xvii. n rr/prjerov avrovs ev rip 6vbp.ari 
 
 crov ip [where he read of's] 8e8ojK&s poi, which he paraphrases as <f>i/\ai;ov 
 6 p6(ppovas. The two passages suggest that Nonnus vaguely felt that these phrases 
 about "giving" were connected with the unity of the Church and might be 
 rendered by "at one " and " likeminded." Also, in xvii. 2 he seems to have read 
 <p 8e8coKas avrd for o 8e8coKas atrip. 
 
 2 [2740 d] Lomm. xiii. 304 irarep ayie, Sbs 'iva Kadihs eyio Kai cru ev eo~p.ev (and 
 sun. Lomm. xxv. 54) and xiv. 118, with " I ask " for "give," " Pater sancte, rogo 
 ut sicut ego...." These quotations blend xvii. n with xvii. 21. They may have 
 arisen from regarding 'iva as meaning " Oh, that ! " " Would that ! " In xvii. 2, 
 Iva. following the imperat. So^aaov may have been taken as meaning ["Do this, 
 I pray thee] in order that," or "[I desire that thou wouldest do this] in order that," 
 and hence Nonnus may have rendered it Bov\op.at. 
 
 575 
 
[2741] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 thou hast given" for '•'■that which thou hast given " etc. Sometimes 
 the word "give," sometimes the whole clause about "giving," is 
 omitted. The Latin translations of Origen repeatedly exhibit these 
 deviations ; and even in Christ's utterance to the Samaritan woman 
 " If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith unto thee, 
 ' Give me to drink,' " the translation of Origen omits the italicised 
 words 1 . 
 
 [2741] Most unfortunately, Origen's Greek comment is missing 
 on almost every one of the passages where this difficult phrase 
 occurs. But textual evidence and antecedent probability support 
 W.H. in retaining o against os and <ws, and indicate that the phrase 
 " that which thou hast given me," even when it denotes the Church, 
 points back to the unity between the Father and the Son and to the 
 unity between God and man. Origen, in his commentary on 
 Romans (xvi. 20 "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ"), says, "the 
 grace of God and the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ is to be taken 
 as one and the same, ' For as the Father maketh alive whom he will, 
 the Son also (et) maketh alive whom he will'; and ''As the Father 
 hath life in himself to the Son also (et) he hath given to have life in 
 himself: so also the grace that the Father gives the Son too gives": 
 he adds, "Gratia ergo est, quicquid habet is, qui non fuit, et est, 
 accipiens ab eo, qui semper fuit, et est, et erit in aeternum 2 ." 
 
 [2742] These words of Origen's explain not only why the word 
 "give" occurs more frequently in John than in the Synoptists but 
 also why it is applied by him so frequently to the Father and to the 
 Son. What "grace" is in the Pauline Epistles, "giving" is in the 
 
 1 [2740 e] Comp. xvii. 24 irarrip, o oedwK&s fioi, WXu IV a 6irov elfj.1 eyio KaKdvoi 
 waiv fj.er' f/xov, a very difficult passage but susceptible of a mystical rendering 
 (2741). The words 5 dtdwKas fioi are omitted in the Latin transl. of Origen 
 in Lomm. vi. 393, vii. 02, x. 265, 370, xi. 155, xii. 231, (?) xv. 82 : xvii. 12 
 ir-qpovv clvtous ii> t$ ovd^ari crov <J> 5^5w/cds fioi /ecu e<f>v\a.i;a kclI ovdeh ii; avrQv 
 airibXfTo el fir)..., is rendered (Lomm. vi. 104) " Omnes, inquit, quos dedisti mihi 
 servavi et nullus ex eis periit...": iv. 10 el rjSeis H]V diopeav tov Oeov ko.1 tLs ecriv is 
 (vi. 199) " Si scires quis est...." 
 
 - [2741 a] Origen here blends Jn v. 21 and v. 26 (Lomm. vii. 44N). According 
 to this view, if x°-P LS ' s received only by a human being ("qui non fuit et est"), 
 as distinct from a divine one, we might expect some evangelists to prefer not 
 to use such expressions as Lk. ii. 40, 52 about Christ, although Origen accepts 
 and explains them as applying to C'luist's human nature. Jn and Lk., alone 
 of the evangelists, use x^P' 5 - And both apply it to Christ, but they apply it 
 very differently (1776). 
 
 576 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2742] 
 
 Fourth Gospel. The Father is represented above as "giving" to the 
 Son "to have life in himself" and also the power of " making alive." 
 That which the Son "makes alive" is the Church. The Father, 
 therefore, virtually "gives" the Church to the Son. Elsewhere, it is 
 implied that the Father has "given" His "name" to the Son (xvii. 12 
 "thy name that thou hast given me"), that is, the essential being of 
 the true Son of God. This implies unity with the Father ("I and 
 the Father are one" etc.) and the possession of the love of the 
 Father (xv. 10 "ye will abide in my love... I abide in his love," xvii. 26 
 " that the love wherewith thou lovedst me may be in them and I in 
 them "). There is also a gift of peace, a peace above the peace of 
 the world (" My peace I give unto you — not as the world giveth "). 
 When, therefore, the Son prays to the Father for the disciples "Keep 
 them in thy name that thou hast given me" He means "keep them in 
 thy love and peace, at one with me, as I am with thee 1 ." 
 
 1 [2742(7] The "giving" of the Father to the Son is connected with the 
 following nouns or phrases: — iii. 34 "the Spirit," iii. 35 "all things," v. 22 "all 
 judgment," v. 26 "to have life in himself," v. 27 "authority to do judgment," 
 v. 36 "the works that the Father hath given me," vi. 37 "all that the Father is 
 giving (or, giveth) to me," vi. 39 "all that he hath given to me," x. 29 (W.H. txt) 
 "my Father, that which he hath given to me," xii. 49 "He (avros) himself hath given 
 me commandment what I should say," xiii. 3 "the Father gave all things into his 
 hands," xiv. 31 "even as the Father gave me commandment" (following the words 
 "that the world may know that I love the Father"). Here Tisch. and Alf. read 
 eVereiXaro fiOL with ADS. Nonnus too — who in xii. 49 has ieidwpov fyw irapa 
 Trarpbs i(p€T/xrjv — has here KVpepvrjTrjpi irarrip eTrereWero fivdio. It is certainly 
 strange that no MSS. should alter "give commandment" in xii. 49 and that so many 
 should alter it here. But ivereiXaro so distinctly means the commandment of 
 a law-giver or master (e.g. Mk xiii. 34) that it is difficult to believe that John could 
 have used it here. 
 
 [2742/;] There remain the instances in the Last Prayer: — xvii. 2 "thou gavest 
 him authority over all flesh," ib. "that all that thou hast given to him he should 
 give to them eternal life," ib. 4 "having perfected the work that thou hast given 
 to me that I might do it," ib. 6 "the men that thou gavest me out of the world 
 ...thine they were and thou gavest them to me," ib. 7 "all things as many 
 as thou gavest (marg. hast given) me are from thee," ib. 8 "the words that thou 
 gavest (marg. hast given) me," ib. 9 " I ask. ..about them that thou hast given me," 
 ib. 11 "keep them in my name that thou hast given me," ib. 12 "I was keeping 
 them in thy name that thou hast given me," ib. 22 "the glory that thou hast given 
 me," ib. 24 "Father, that which (0) thou hast given me, I will that where I am 
 they also may be with me," ib. 24 "that they may be beholding the glory that is 
 mine [the glory] that thou hast given (marg. gavest) to me," xviii. 9 "those whom 
 thou hast given me I have not lost [a single] one (otiSeva) of them" (referring 
 to xvii. 12), ib. 11 "the cup that the Father hath given me." There is nothing 
 
 A. vi. 577 37 
 
[2743] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 [2743] Nonnus paraphrases the words "the Father hath life in 
 himself" as "provideth the all-motherly life of the world (TrafXfxrjTopa 
 Koa/xov £10771/)," an epithet applied to the Earth by ^Eschylus (From. 
 90) and Philo. As the Psalmist says (Ps. cxlv. 16) "Thou 
 openest thy hand and satisfiest the desire of every living thing," so 
 Philo (i. 32) says that the poets were right to call the earth "All- 
 mother," and that "Nature has bestowed on her, as being the most 
 ancient and fruitful of mothers, the streams of rivers and fountains, 
 like breasts" — a saying that would appeal to worshippers of the 
 "many-breasted" image of " Diana of the Ephesians." Another epithet 
 of the earth was Pandora, the All-giver, applied by Philo to the earth 
 in the passage just quoted, and by Cleanthes (in the masculine) to 
 Zeus. In the Sermon on the Mount, our Lord refers to the Father 
 as the Giver of the sunshine and the rain. Elsewhere He speaks of 
 the Father as giving (Mt. vii. n) "good gifts" to them that ask Him. 
 For "good gifts" the parallel in Luke (xi. 13) substitutes "the Holy 
 Spirit." John (iv. 10) speaks of "the gift of God," meaning "the 
 living Water," which must be interpreted as the Holy Spirit. The 
 Spirit, as being God's ''gift," and "the gifts of the Spirit," are 
 mentioned throughout the Epistles. When John describes the 
 Father as "giving" the bread of heavenly life and the water of the 
 Holy Spirit to men, and also as giving life in Himself, and in His 
 Name, to the Son, he appears to be attempting to raise his readers 
 above formal notions about "grace (x<zpis) " and "reward (por^os)," 
 into a high spiritual sphere where God is regarded not only as the 
 All-giver, but also as the Self-giver, so that "that which he hath 
 given " to the Son means not only this or that divine attribute, but 
 the Pleroma or Fulness, of all the divine attributes, — the Father 
 giving His own Fulness to the Son, and, through the Son, dis- 
 pensing gifts from His Fulness to men. This language would be 
 intelligible to Greeks as well as Jews and would avoid the notion of 
 '■'■favouritism " suggested by the word " grace " or " favour " in Greek 1 . 
 
 [ike this in tin- Synoptists exc. Mt. xxviii. 18 "all authority is given to me in 
 heaven and upon the earth.'' 
 
 1 [2743(/] Epictetus, like John, prefers to speak of God as "giving" rather 
 than to speak <>\ llis grace or x"-i ns - He twice (i. 10. 1 .=, Schweig. n. "beneficia," 
 ,1. ; ;. 2) uses the pi. (as Philo does, 2285/', c) to mean God's "gifts" to man; but 
 
 OUCl o- frequently uses the sing, and then it almost always means "gratitude" 
 
 (mostly from man tn God), < •.;'. 111. 5. 10 vvv /xe OtlXeis aTreXOuv iic rrjs irav-qyvpews ; 
 ...Xa-piv c<" ^X w vaaav ort rj^lwcrds Lif avfiiravrj-yvpiaai croi. On the doctrine that 
 
 5/ 
 
 78 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2744] 
 
 [2744] If this was John's meaning, we can understand why he 
 may have in some cases strained the Greek language to suggest, 
 without too sharply defining, all that the Son of God implied when 
 He spoke of the Father as "giving." For example, x. 29 6 iraT-rjp pru 
 '5 8e8(jK€v ju.01 iravTMv /xet£6V io-riv 1 , if it refers to the Church as being 
 the new-created Cosmos, may mean that the Church includes (and is 
 therefore "greater than ") all things, or superior to all enemies. But 
 it may also refer to the redeeming Love of the Father — to the (Eph. 
 iii. 18 — 19) "breadth and length and height and depth" of the love 
 of God in Christ "which passeth knowledge,'' by which the Church 
 is "filled unto all the fulness of God." At the same time it suggests 
 the Father as a Fountain of Giving — " The Father, that which hath 
 given to me" — a Being that desires to be known as "the Being that 
 gives 1 ."' We can also understand how some found difficulty in the 
 thought as well as in the Greek. The reception of gifts, they may have 
 said, is "grace"; and then they may have added, with Origen (2741), 
 " Grace, or the reception of gifts, belongs to man, 70/10 once was not, 
 and now is (qui non fuit, et est) — receiving from Him that ever was 
 and is and shall be to all eternity." The inference followed that 
 Christ was not to be regarded as a recipient of "gifts 2 ." This, as 
 well as the crabbed Greek, may have caused the corruption of the 
 
 "a man has nothing that he has not received from God" no Christian teacher 
 can be more fervid (iv. r. 103) "And after all this, canst thou — having received 
 everything from Another, yea, even thine own self's self (km avrbv aeavrov) — canst 
 thou, I say, chafe against and chide Him that gave (tov dbvra) if He take aught away 
 from thee? Who art thou [to dare this]? And for what hast thou come [into this 
 world]? Did not He (eKelvos) bring thee on the stage (elarjyayev)? Did not He 
 shew thee the light? Did He notgive thee fellow-workers? Senses? Reason? 
 And in what character did He bring thee on the stage (d>s riva 8e eiarjyayev;)? 
 Was it not as a mortal?. ..Art thou not willing, then, after beholding the procession 
 for as long a time as hath been given to thee... to depart with homage and thank- 
 fulness for the things thou hast heard and seen?" 
 
 1 [2744a] For example, in xvii. 24 "Father, that which thou hast given me, 
 I desire that where I am they also may be with me," it seems probable that the 
 italicised words mean something more than "as for that portion of the human race 
 which thou hast given me." They suggest a spiritual conception that puts the 
 reader on his guard against supposing that "'with me" means "2// the same place 
 with /«<.'," instead of meaning in the unity of the Giver and the Receiver, the 
 Father and the Son. 
 
 - [2744 £] Comp. Eph. iv. 8 " Having ascended on high... he gave gifts to men." 
 This is from Ps. lxviii. 18 "Thou hast received gifts among men," LXX Aaftes 
 56/xara iv dvdpuiiru}. The Targum however paraphrases with St 1'aul (Walton) 
 ''Docuisti verba Legis, dedisti dona filiis hominum." 
 
 579 37— 2 
 
[2745] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 Johannine doctrine expressed in -n-av S Se'SwKe, which teaches that it 
 is the glory of the Son to receive everything from God and to give 
 everything to man 1 . 
 On vi. 5 ndeeN Af-opACooweN (v.r. -omen). (2428) 
 
 [2745] Chrysostom, after explaining why Christ selected Philip as 
 the disciple to be questioned, drops "buy" and inserts "so many" in 
 the question thus, " And see what He saith (ko1 opa rt <p-qo-iv e/mvo?), 
 Whence [can there come\ to us so many loaves that these may eat (ttoQzv 
 rjfjuv apTot ToaovTOL IVa <paywcriv ovtoi;)?" Later on he describes the 
 disciples as having been, at first, so unbelieving as to say, " Whence 
 shall we buy loaves (ir60ei> ayopa.a-op.ev ap-rov?;)?" — words that occur 
 nowhere in N.T. except in vi. 5 (v.r.), which assigns them to Christ' 2 . 
 
 1 [2744 c] In support of the masc. reading oiis in xvii. 12 err/povv clvtovs iv ry 
 6vbfJ.a.Tl (xov oi'S (for W.H. (j) dedwK&s /j.oi...Kai ovdris e£ avrQiv dird)XeTo...\t may be 
 urged that Jn himself refers to the words thus xviii. 9 "the word that he said, ' Those 
 whom (oi)s) thou hast given me I have lost (ci7ruAecra) not one of them.'" To this 
 however it may be replied that, if the quotation had been intended to be exact, 
 awLoXeTo would have been repeated. It is not exact. It refers to the general tenor 
 of Christ's prayer for His disciples (xvii. 1 — 26) in which wv dedwKas, 6 5e5wKas, 
 (j deduKws, and a <5^5u>\-as occur in connexion with His thought of them. In 
 particular, John may be referring to xvii. 9—12 ipu)Tu>...Trepi wv 5e8wK&s fioi...ore 
 ijfX7]v fier' avrQv eyio er-qpovv aiirovs...Kal ovoeis e£ avrCiv dirtbXeTo. Xonnus para- 
 phrases xviii. 9 as Tovtwv ovdev oXuiXa (v.r. -Xe) rd fj.01 yrdpes, and xvii. 1 2 as Ai'rds oXovs 
 ("(puXaffaov airr]iAoi>as' ovde tls ai'Tuiv [Ous 7ropes vU'C crov j3porirjs aunripL yevidXrji] 
 "ilXero. He appears, as elsewhere, to have taken "in thy name, which thou hast 
 given me" to mean vaguely "in peace and unity" (which he expressed by "whole 
 and entire, unharmed"). An interpolator has added something about "giving" — 
 "which thou didst give to thy Son the Saviour of the race of mortals." 
 
 '-' [2745«] Chrys. says, in the context, (1) "The other evangelists say that the 
 disciples came to [Jesus] and questioned and besought so that He should not send 
 them away fasting (ipurq.v /cat irapaKaXeiv wore fxr) aTroXvaai avrovs vrjcrreis): but 
 thi> one [John] introduces [the fact] that Philip was asked by Christ {ovtos 8i 
 eLffdyet. rbv <i>. epwT-ndrjvai trapa rod Xptarov).'" (2) Then, after assigning to Christ 
 the question, " Whence [are there] to us so many loaves that these may eat?" he 
 proceeds, "So also in the Old Testament He said to Moses. For He did not 
 work (he sign till He had asked him, What ever (ri irore) is in thy hand?" Here 
 we should have expected a reference to the question of Moses (Numb. xi. 13) 
 " Whence [is there] to me flesh to give to all this people?" But he quotes Ex. iv. 2 
 " What is this (rl tout6 (utiv) in thine hand?" — which does not seem to apply to 
 anything in the Feeding of the Five Thousand (unless it refers to the tradition 
 peculiar to Mk vi. 38 "How many /oaves have ye?" COmp. 1 S. \\i. 3 "Now 
 therefore what is under thine hand? Give me Jive loaves....") (3) Chrys. continues, 
 "And having been asked he answereth {koL ipwr-qOek dnoKpiveTai) saying, /.oaves 
 of [the value of] two hundred denarii suffice not that each should take a little. 
 But tin- lie said tempting him, foi he himself knew what he was intending to do." 
 
 5«SO 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2747) 
 
 Nonnus has "buy" (in a different word — npidfjLeaOa, not dyopdcrojfxev) 
 but introduces "so many" in connexion, not with the loaves, but with 
 the people, " whence are we [to be] buying an abundance of loaves/w 
 so many men (too-o-cltlomtlv) ? " 
 
 [2746] Origen nowhere quotes vi. 5. Nor does he refer to 
 Christ's question about "buying" — though he refers more than once 
 to "buying food," on the part of the disciples, as signifying the 
 attempt (and failure) to obtain spiritual truth 1 . He certainly regarded 
 the bread in the Feeding of the Five Thousand as having a 
 Eucharistic meaning, and as signifying the flesh or body of Christ. 
 But, if he accepted, as Christ's, the question, " Whence are we to buy 
 loaves 1" he would probably interpret it as mystically meaning (in 
 accordance with a frequent meaning (2736 a, b) of "Whence?") that 
 the Bread could not be bought. It was bread stamped with the sign 
 of the Cross, or imbued with its savour, given by the Lamb of God 
 "without price 2 ." 
 On the non = use of some active perfects (2441 a) 
 
 [2747] The best illustration of the non-use of active perfects, as 
 compared with the use of passives, is to be found in kti£w "create," 
 
 There can be no doubt that "he said " here means "Be said," that is, Christ. But 
 the extract, with the words so strangely transposed, shews how easily "said, 
 tempting him," might form part of a tradition that Philip or some other disciple 
 "tempted" Christ, by questioning Him as Moses questioned God. In "so that 
 He should not send them away fasting," fx-q seems to be a corrupt insertion : 
 "The disciples, in effect, said to Christ, 'Send them away fasting.'" Or else 
 Chrys. has attributed to the disciples the expression of Christ's own feeling, 
 "I am unwilling to send them away fasting." This commentary — which is the 
 earliest we possess on the Johannine miracle — must be described as chaotic. 
 
 1 [2746 a] Origen on Mt. xiv. 15 represents Christ as saying to the disciples, in 
 effect, "These people have need of me, not of food from the villages." A little 
 before this, he speaks of "the bread" and "the cup" of the Lord, and illustrates 
 Christ's healing of the sick before the miracle, by reference to 1 Cor. xi. 30 
 " For this cause [i.e. desecration of the Eucharist} many of you are weak and sickly.'''' 
 When the disciples abandon Jesus near Sychar, Origen says (on iv. 8) that they 
 had gone into the city "to buy food or [in other words] — having found agreeable 
 food among the heterodox — doctrines of a sort that suited them (\6yovs nvas 
 apfj-ofovTas)." 
 
 - [2746 i>] Comp. Clem. Alex. 75 — 6 on Is. Iv. 1 "without price," where the 
 bastard or son of perdition is said to "buy for money" what the true child of God 
 receives "without price," created by God for the child's "eucharistic banquets (reus 
 evxapio-Tois rpiKpah)." A connexion between the Bread and the Cross was traced 
 from the LXX of Jer. xi. 19 "let us cast wood into his bread," ep.jidXwp.ev £u\ov els 
 rbv dprou avrov, by Origen (ad toe.) as well as by Justin Martyr (Tryph. 72). 
 Origen illustrates it by the wood cast by Moses into the bitter water. 
 
 5 8l 
 
[2748] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 applied to the Creator throughout the whole of the Greek Testament 
 and J reqti 'ently used in the perfect passive, cktio-tcu 1 , but never in the 
 active, l/c-nxa. Prof. Jannaris (Gk Gr. p. 189) gives Zktiko., without 
 reference. L.S. give " k€ktiko. Diod." Diod. Sic. Index gives no 
 such instance. But Steph. gives " Perf. k£ktlk£vci.i ttjv 'Pw'/a^v ap. 
 Diodor. (ex Georg. Syncell.) vol. 2, p. 636, 67." This may be 
 corrupt, but it is instructive. The rule is that when a verb begins 
 with kt the perfect should begin with ckt : but it is broken with 
 Krdofxai. Whoever wrote K€KTi*eVai may have thought himself 
 entitled to break it with kti£w. All other Greek writers (so far as 
 Steph. alleges) appear to have left the active perfect of kti£w alone. 
 And yet there are abundant cases in LXX where the passive perfect 
 is used and where the active perfect would have been, though not 
 necessary, at all events suitable, as in Ps. lxxxix. 12 "Thou hast created 
 the north and the south," where the LXX has €KTio-a9. 
 
 [2748] Take also 'Qqrkia and 6pi£w. Veitch quotes Uinarchus 
 for i&jTriKa — non-occurrent in Aristoph., Demosth., Aristot., O.T., 
 N.T. and Steph., though the latter mentions ^retrat and Z&TrjTat, 
 as frequent in scholiasts. Its use by Dinarchus accords with the 
 unfavourable judgment pronounced on him by Dionysius. The 
 active perfect of opi£a> occurs once in Demosth. (doubtful), once in 
 Aristot., never in N.T. ; the passive perfect is frequent 2 . 
 
 [2749] In support of the statement that "the perfect sometimes 
 stands for the aorist even in A [i.e. Classical Antiquity]" Jann. p. 439 
 
 quotes (a) " Thuc. i. 21 ovtc cos TroirjTal vp.vrjKa(Ti...ovTf. cos \oyoypa<poi 
 £ui'€#€a-ai'," {l>) "Demosth. 7, 29 ttjv x°>P av W °' L "EAA^res «at 
 j3acriXtv<; 6 IlepcrcoV iij/rjcpLaai'TO koi wp.o\oyrjKa(Tiv vp.erepav cuai, 
 
 and, for post-classical Greek, (c) " Polyb. iii. 1. 2 iv T-rj rplry /?uj8A.cp " 
 
 (Schweig. /ii/3Acp) " SeST/XojKa/xci' • d/xoicos hi koli ras tunas iv avrfj 
 
 ineivy 8ieq-a<f>rjaa/iev." But, in (a), the perf. expresses the permanent 
 works of the ancient poets regarded as a present possession for their 
 posterity, while the aorist refers to comparatively recent compila- 
 tions, with perhaps a special allusion (Classen) to Herodotus. In 
 
 1 [2747(7] Comp. Col. i. [6 cv a.VT$ iKTicrBy) to. vavra. . .to. TravTa...eis airrbv 
 ?kt«tt<xl. The distinction here drawn between "were created" and " have been 
 created" might (it would seem) be just as logically made between "thou didst 
 create" and " thou hast created." But it is not made anywhere in the Gk Test, by 
 the use of the act. perf. of ktL£u>. 
 
 ■ [2748a] A^ an instance of variation, note the abnormal perf. in Eurip. /ph. 
 Aid. 595 (f/iXao-nj/v-curi, but the normal pluperf. in Thuc. iii. 26 <?/9e,S\a<rr/;K«. 
 
 582 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2752] 
 
 (b), — beside the fact that the perf. of i//r/<pi'£op,ai in active sense 
 (Steph.) appears to be extremely rare or non-existent — the aorist of 
 \p. naturally expresses past decrees, and the perf. wuoAoy/yKao-iy the 
 resultant, permanent, and present agreement. In (c), there is no 
 reason for saying that Polybius uses o^T/AwKapej/ for co^Awo-a.p.ev 1 . It 
 would be less misleading to say that, as the perf. act. of Sia<xa<£eco 
 was very rare (in Steph. it is non-existent) and the aorist very 
 frequent, he used the aorist, Sieo-a^o-apei', for the perfect, Siacreaa- 
 4>rjKajXi.v. But we may give both tenses their several value thus : 
 "I have indicated above... and similarly I clearly shewed." In English, 
 we should often prefer to use the past thus, after the complete 
 present ; and Polybius, too, may have preferred it. 
 
 [2750] Again, Jann. p. 439 alleges from Mt. xiii. 46, and 
 Hernias, "and so on in all post-Christian compositions," a number 
 of perfects, including TreVpaKe, "he sold," to illustrate "the full 
 development of this usage" of the perfect for the aorist "during the 
 latter part of G [the Graeco- Roman period]." But ■KL-rrpdo-Kia never 
 had an active aorist from the beginning of Greek literature — so that 
 the use of its perfect as aorist cannot prove "development." 
 
 [2751] Jann. p. 439 also refers, for further illustrations of this 
 "development," to " Hebr. n, 17. Cp. John 4, 6. 6, 3. 6, 9." In 
 iv. 6, K6K07riaKw's means "being completely tired out." In vi. 3, 
 ii<d9r]To is not a perfect and has no manifest bearing on the point ; 
 the other reference is perhaps a misprint. In Heb. xi. 17 irio-Tii 
 
 irpo(T€vr)vo)(€v '\/3pad/j. ror 'Io-aa* 7r€(pa£o'p.ei'Os, Kal tov /xovoyeinj 
 
 7rpoo-£<j>fpev. the contrast between the perfect and the imperfect is 
 most instructive. The perf. means that Abraham, through God's 
 guidance, has offered up the typical sacrifice just as Moses (Heb. 
 xi. 28) "has instituted (Tmroi-qKev)" the typical Passover, and it is one 
 of many perfects (see Westc. on Heb. vii. 6 SeSe/caTWKtv) shewing 
 that the writer regarded Biblical events as present possessions for 
 those who accept the Bible as God's word. See 2758. 
 
 [2752] Jann. p. 439 alleges only one instance of the "perf. for 
 aorist " from LXX, " Ex. xxxii. 1 Kal I8wv 6 Aa6s on KexpoViKt Muivo-rjs 
 Kara/3//iai €K tov opovs, avio-rrj" (Swete crwca-n;) " o Aaos iirl 'Aapwv." 
 
 1 [2749 «] In English we should more often say " I have shewn above that this 
 is the case" than " I shewed." Demosthenes (Preuss) uses de8r)\u>Ka five times, 
 never eS^Xwo-a. The Index to Polybius gives ii. 22. 11 dfSrjXdiKa/j.ev but no 
 instance of edrjXdxrafxeu. 
 
 583 
 
[2753] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 This might have been illustrated by Tob. x. 4 where Tobit's mother 
 says to her husband, a7raj'A.€To to -n-aiSioj' SidVi K€\p6viK£v " He must 
 be dead because he has been [so] long [away]," i.e. " he is putting oft 
 his coming" (comp. ib. ix. 4 "my father counteth the days"). Here 
 the perf. is clearly not used for an aorist but rather for a present. 
 A close examination of Ex. xxxii. 1 shews that the perf. is there, too, 
 used rather as a present than an aorist, somewhat like Jn vi. 24 ore 
 ovv ctScv d o^Xos on 'lrjaovs ovk ecrriv ckci (2466 (i)). Ex. xxxii. 1 
 means, in effect, " When the people saw [what was happening and 
 said] Moses is disappointing us, or, not keeping to his time 1 ." 
 
 [2753] These details have been discussed in order to shew the 
 futility of the attempt to judge Johannine by Byzantine Greek (in 
 which the perfect is unquestionably sometimes used for the aorist). 
 In criticizing the Fourth Gospel, credit must be given by the critic 
 to the evangelist for a careful use of tense forms above, not below, 
 the average of Greek authors. John may occasionally use an aorist 
 where Englishmen would use a perfect or a pluperfect : but such 
 uses will be found to be in accord with the rules of contemporary 
 Greek, written or vernacular. And the notion that he "uses" one 
 Greek tense "for" another Greek tense must be shunned as an ignis 
 fatuus' 2 . 
 
 1 [2752 a] So Buhl 97 a " beschamt machen." Gesen. Oxf. 101 b "delay in 
 shame." Jer. Targ. adds " when they saw that the time he had appointed to them 
 had passed." 
 
 2 [2753 a] These facts illustrate such passages as xii. 19 i'de, 6 k6<t/j.os oTriau 
 avTov airr)\0cv (R.V.) " Lo, the world is gone after him," where the rendering 
 " is gone" may seem to demand aire\-r)\v6ev, so that, if R.Y. is right, some might 
 say "here we have a case where Jn uses one Gk tense for another." Certainly, 
 it can hardly he maintained that the Pharisees mean "the whole of Jerusalem 
 went after him \a few hours ago when he rode into the City] " : hut the following 
 facts shew that Jn could not have said &Tre\r]\vdev because, besides being ex- 
 tremely rare, it had acquired a special meaning, which would have been unsuitable 
 here. 
 
 [2753 /'] ' Awt\7)\v0a does not occur once, in any form of the indicative perfect, in 
 the whole of Aristophanes and Demosthenes. The Oxf. Cone, amid more than 
 three columns of different forms of air^pxafiai, gives (as far as I have found) no 
 form of aire\r)\vda, except in 7 S. iii. 22 — 4 " He [i.e. David] had sent him [i.e. 
 Abner] away and he had gone away (air(\r)\tjdei) in peace.... they told Joab 
 saying, ' Abner... came to the king, and he hath sent him away (a7r^(rra\/fev) and 
 he went away (aTrr/XOtv) in peace." Then Joab came to the king and said, ' What 
 hast thou done. ..Why is it that thou hast sent him away (i^av^<TTa\Kas. sent him 
 right away) and he is i/uite gone (airc\-r)\v6ev iu etprjvri) ?"' 1 [ere (besides repeating 
 "in peace,'" which does not bear upon the point in question) the LXX clearlyuses 
 
 5^4 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2755] 
 
 On the "gnomic" aorist (2445 a) 
 
 [2754] Jelf § 402. 1 says that the aorist " is used to express an 
 action which took place repeatedly in past time," and goes on to say 
 that "the imperfect also has an iterative force." I should prefer to 
 say that the so-called "gnomic" aorist tells the hearer simply and 
 indefinitely that "so-and-so happened" leaving him to take the hint 
 and to infer that it will happen again. This "gnomic" "empiric" or 
 "suggestive" aorist is quite different from the aorist of ins/am 'ancousness. 
 
 [2755] Special contexts, however, may make it doubtful whether 
 an aorist is "gnomic" or "instantaneous." Thus Jann. p. 436 places 
 under empiric or gnomic aorists, and Jelf § 403. 2 under aorists that 
 "express future events which must certainly happen," Demosth. 20, 9 
 which describes how, when a tyrant has attained power through 
 
 the perf. aTreX-riXvdev emphatically to represent the emphatic Hebrew (lit.) "going 
 hath gone T i.e. - l is quite gone" ox " gone for good" " gone past recall." [For 
 the same reason the LXX puts into Joab's mouth e^aireuTaXKas " sent him right 
 aivay" as compared with the preceding awiaTaXKev " sent him away" — a distinc- 
 tion not in the Hebrew.] 
 
 [2753 c] As to N.T., though various forms of dTripxop.cn occupy more than two 
 columns of Bruder, no form of a.TreXr)Xv6a occurs except in Jas i. 24 KCLTevbyo-ev yap 
 eavToi* Kal dTre\r]\v0ei' rendered by Mayor "just a glance and he is off," where the 
 perf. expresses the completeness of the action as well as the suddenness of it — " he 
 is gone for good." Compare the Demosthenic use of e^epxop-ai ; it occurs fre- 
 quently in the aorist indie, but only once (Preuss) in the perf. indie, (xxiii. 204) 
 concerning the good old habit of punishing the guilty, which i^eX^Xvdev £k tt}s 
 7r6Xews, ' ' has quite vanished out of the City." 
 
 [2753</] In xii. 19 dvrjXdev, SS has "goeth," Nonnus odetiei, ff " sequitur," — 
 indicating that the translators felt (as it was right to feel) that the aorist had more 
 than the usual aorist meaning. 'AweXrjXvdev being out of the question, Jn has used 
 anrfXdev as the best Gk writers often use the aorist to include a meaning that 
 would be expressed in English by " have." Similarly our English aorist (" I 
 saw") includes meanings that would be expressed in French by a perfect (" I saw 
 him yesterday," " je Fai vu hier "). But we should not admit that such a use of 
 "I saw" was "using one tense for another." It is our regular tense in such 
 circumstances. 
 
 [2753 t.'] In xii. 19 i5e, 6 kw/xos, SS, DL, latt., Nonnus, and other authorities, 
 add oXos. Chrys. does not. But he calls attention to the fact that K6ap.os is here 
 used in the sense ofoxXos. Possibly this may explain the remarkable prevalence of 
 the interpolated bXos. "OxXos may have been first placed in the margin, or above 
 the line, as an explanation of k6ct/j.os. Then it may have been introduced into the 
 text so as to give 6 Kda/xos oxXos — in which 6'xXos was afterwards corrected to 8Xos. 
 Comp. Oxf. Cone, on 2 Mace. vi. 3 (R) oxXois (A, as in Swete, 6Xois). This view 
 is confirmed by the reading of ff, " ecce unus populus sequitur post ilium," "the 
 multitude as one man." 
 
 585 
 
[2756] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 Villainy, r/ TrpojTr/ 7rp6<pam<; kolI p-iKpov 7rTai(r/xa airavra dvc^aiVtcrc 
 kol 8ie\v(rev. This should be compared with 24, 21 which says that, 
 while a state is waging a distant war, d<pavrj to xaxa tols TroWoU itmv, 
 
 €7r€i8av Se o/AOpos Tr6\e/JL0<; o-v/jLirXaKfj iravTa i-rrol-qaev €K?>r]\a. Probably 
 
 the aorist in both passages is not "gnomic." It does not however 
 seem to indicate certainty so much as instantaneousness ; and this is 
 confirmed by many other instances of the aorist in apodosis. The 
 essence of the "gnomic" aorist is that it expresses nothing but 
 indefinite past action. When the protasis defines the circumstances of 
 the action, e.g. by a clause with orav, the aorist in the apodosis cannot 
 be "gnomic" — if "gnomic" (2754) implies an indefinite "happened." 
 Consequently after a orav clause, an aorist, if it occurs where a present 
 might have been expected, may be used to denote instantaneousness 1 . 
 It is therefore possible that the instantaneous aorist in xv. 6 ifiX-jdr), 
 being preceded by the protasis idv fj.rj ns, may not be Hebraic, 
 though it is in accordance with Hebraic Greek. But, in any case, 
 the purely gnomic aorist of the type of//, ix. 320 KarOav d/xw? o t 
 depyo? dvr]p 6 re TroWa iopya><; is certainly alien from the style of O.T. 
 and N.T. and probably non-occurrent in the latter. 
 On xii. 14 6YpoL»N...ONApioN (2461) 
 
 [2756] The Diatessaron omits the whole of the clause about 
 Christ's finding the ass. SS omits "finding" ("Now Jesus was 
 riding on [an ass]"). Origen (Lomm. i. 316 foil.) points out that 
 the Johannine and the Synoptic accounts are, according to the letter, 
 inconsistent: but both he and Chrys. mention the "finding" by 
 Christ ; and Chrys. tries to reconcile it with the Synoptic account". 
 
 1 [2755 a] Comp. the following passages where a protasis with orav, el etc., de- 
 fines the circumstances: (a) Eurip. Med. v^o pel^ovs 5' dras orav dpyiaBrj b~alp.wv 
 oiVois airlouiKev, (/>) id. 245 avyp 8' orav rots 2v5ov &x&V Tal ^vvdv, ££w p.o\wp 
 Ziravoe Kapbiav &o-r}S, (c) II. xvii. 99 biriroT dvrip e9i\r)...Tdxa oi p-iya Tcfjpa 
 
 Ki'\La»7], (tl) II. i.\. 413 el pev k' ailU (t4v<l)V . .t'l/u/nit" \i:'uui, td\eTO in'r lUH v6ffT0t, 
 
 (;) Plato 462 D 6to.v...86.ktv\6s tov TrXrjyrj . . .wdera i] Koivwvla...^adeTO re — Jelf 
 calls (a) and (ft) aorists of iteration, but the rest aorists of certainty. I should be 
 disposed to >ay that the aorist, in all of them, denotes instantaneous consequence 
 implying certainty. Add Epict. iv. 10. 27 bWav 0A77S, cifTJXfles "at the instant you 
 desire, you are out [of prison]." "Orav or t\v is expressed by the participle in Soph. 
 Ant. 709 cScttis yap...<ppoi>eiv p.bvos Soxei, ...ovtoi StairTvxOivTes wcpO-qcrav Kevol. 
 
 2 [2756 a] Chrys., 71-tDs 5^ oi &W01 <paaiv on fxadrjTas Zwefjuj/e Kai elirev, Avtrare 
 ttjv ovov Kai rbv ttQXov (Cramer, tov wQXov Kai rbv ovov). oi>tos 5^ ovdev rotovrbv 
 (ptjiriv, dW 8ti 'Ovdpiov evpuv eweK&di<rei> (Cramer, eKdOurev) ; "On d/j.<p6Tepa yevtcrdai 
 cIkos r/v, Kai, p.erd rb XvOrjvai rr\v 6vov, dybvTWv tQiv p.aOr)Tu>v evpbvra avrbv 
 
 5 So 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2757] 
 
 Nonnus omits evptav, but lias Wvvutv 1 . The very great difficulty 
 implied in cvpwv and its frank acceptance by Origen — whose spiritual 
 interpretation of the text raises him above all danger of harmonis- 
 tically corrupting it — make it certain that evpwv is genuine. Some 
 may have omitted or corrupted evpwv for the sake of reconciling the 
 Johannine with the Synoptic account. 
 On xii. 16 €mnhc6hcan oti tayta...kai tayta enomcAN (2469) 
 
 |2757] In xii. 16, R.V. renders k. l-rroi-qo-ar "and that they had 
 done." making i-n-oirja-av depend on the on in the preceding words, 
 cm ravra rjv eV olvtw -yeypa^fieva, and accordingly supplying " that' 
 in English. But a second "that" is not inserted in the Greek, nor 
 in SS, nor in the Latin versions. Nonnus also (ed. Passovv) has Kai 
 01 rat'ra Ti\(.crcra.v at the beginning of a new sentence, pointing to 
 a reading of iTroirjo-av as independent of on' 1 . If John had wished to 
 say "remembered that.. .and that" there seems no obvious reason 
 why he should not have repeated oti after Kai, as he does elsewhere 
 when he wishes to say "because (#/)... and because, 1 '' and once " that... 
 and that 9 ." Here, however, he may have wished to combine the 
 fact that "these things had been written," and the fact that the 
 
 ewucaMaau Chrys. omits the difficult Synoptic words " Ye shall find zxv ass," but, 
 even when they are omitted, how he can say that Christ "found" what the 
 disciples brought to Him I cannot understand. No doubt, evpiaKu, besides mean- 
 ing "find"' in the sense of "discover," means also "find" in the sense of "earn," 
 "procure" : but can Chrys. possibly be suggesting that the disciples first "found" 
 the ass in the former sense, and Christ afterwards "found" it in the latter? Also, 
 it is not clear whether avrbv iiriKadi<ra.i means " He Himself (emph.) sat on [it]," 
 or, "He (unemph.) sat on [it]." Previously Migne's text has to 8e [ewi] ovov 
 (Cramer, rd 8e ovov) Kadiaai which Chrys. explains as a prediction that Christ 
 "was destined to subject ( vtroxti-piov ex eiv ) the unclean race of the Gentiles (tQv 
 idvQv)." Cramer's text takes ovov as accus. gov. by KaSiaai. 
 
 1 [2756/'] Idvvwv dxdXtvov ovov TaXaepyov 65Lrrjv,"E^6u.€vos vwroicriv aTreiprjToio 
 (popijos. Possibly idvvwv is to be explained from poetic desire of symbolism, and 
 to be illustrated by Origen (Lomm. i. 331) who describes Christ as rjviox^v tovs eK 
 irepiTouTJs nal idvQv Trio-TevovTas having previously mentioned the " ass" as the type 
 of the Jews, and the " colt " as the type of the Gentiles. 
 
 - [2757 a] Nonnus has, rdre iravres dvep.vqaa.vTo ixadrirai" Ottl ao<pr, rdde vdvTa 
 TreXei Kexa.pa.ypi.iva j3i(3X({i. Kai ol irdvra TeXeo-aav .... Burkitt has " they remem- 
 bered that these things had been written of him, and these things did they (not, 
 they did) to him." Walton, without inserting " that," removes ambiguity by the 
 Latin subjunctive " quod ea essent scripta de eo et haec feels sent ei." In xiii. 3 
 (see below) "knowing that., .and that" Syr. (Burkitt) has " was knowing that. . . 
 and was knowing that." 
 
 3 [2757/'] ii. 25 "because of (bid to). ..and because (oti)" xiii. 3 "that (oti). ..and 
 that (6V()," 1 Jn ii. 21 "because (oti). ..and because (8ti)." 
 
 587 
 
[2758] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 pilgrims or disciples "had done these things" in fulfilment of the 
 prophecy, as one fact of coincidence "remembered" by the disciples. He 
 also wishes (2396 — 7) to convey a suggestion of divine fulfilment of 
 prophecy by the triple repetition of " these things " in one sentence. 
 But it is not surprising that the words have been variously interpreted 
 and perhaps corrupted 1 . 
 On vi. 25 noTe wAe re'roNAc (2478) 
 
 [2758] It is of course possible that Nonnus and Chrysostom 
 may have found no difficulty in regarding ye'yovas as aorist because, 
 by their time, the 2nd perf. had come to be thus used. Is yeyovev 
 thus used in Origen (Lomra. i. 278) -KwOavoiiivoi^ r/fjlv Tvtpi tov 
 
 1 [2757 c] Origen says (Comtn. Matth., Lomm. iv. 46) 6 5e 'Itodvvris avri rod 
 " iTnpep-qKus ewl v-rro^vyiov kcu iruiKov viov " ireiroirjKe " Kadrifxevo$ ^pxerat eVi ttQXov 
 (tvov 6'crris ep.cpa.ivwv otl yvcbcrews deTrai to Kara tov tottov, eirupipei., to " TaOra 
 5£ ovk tyvuxrav oi /j.a6rjTal avTou to irpoTepov." This not only gives eyvcoaav 
 correctly (which D reads as evorjo-av) but shews that Origen perceived its force. The 
 meaning is not "knew" but " recognised" or "■understood"; and Origen 
 accordingly says that the subject required gnosis, i.e. spiritual understanding or 
 recognition. Origen stops short at vpuiTov (which he read, or remembered, 
 as irpbTtpov) : but we cannot infer that he was unacquainted with the following 
 words d\\' oTt...tiro'n)oo.v ctiVcjJ. He is not here commenting on Jn but on Mt., 
 and he quotes enough for his purpose. 
 
 [2757 </] Chrys. on the other hand seems either to miss the meaning of iyvoxrav 
 if he is paraphrasing, or else to misquote, if he is quoting, in the following (ad 
 loc.) Toi>ro 5e ovk r/d ecrav, tprjc/iv, oi fiaOrjTai avTOV on r\v eir aviTip yeypap.p.evov . . .Spa 
 be <pi\oao(piav evayyeXiarov, 7ra;s ovk ejraiffxvveTai tt\v irporepav avTwv ayvoiav 
 {KTrofAirfveiv. "Oti pc'ev ofiv yiypairTai ybeaav 8tl be ew avrip yeypcnrTai, ovk 
 T jbecrav. He makes no mention of "remembering" and omits the whole of the 
 clause about "doing." Thus the whole is condensed into a statement that the 
 disciples "knew" Zechariah's prophecy but "did not faimv" that it applied 
 to Christ — perfectly intelligible, but not what the evangelist meant. 
 
 [2757 1 ] These two criticisms — of Origen and Chrysostom — should be borne in 
 mind as giving a clue to their different methods. Origen is a scholar ; Chrysostom 
 — at least as represented by his Johannine commentary in its extant form — is rather 
 a preacher. Origen gives full value to each word, Chrysostom criticizes on the 
 unscholarly basis of a belief — too common in our own days — that the evangelist 
 "uses one word for another." Origen is often fanciful and minutely diffuse in 
 allegorization — as in this instance where he gives copious details about the typical 
 meaning of the ass and the foal — but he rarely tampers with, and does not very 
 often even paraphrase, his text. Chrysostom is much less imaginative but also 
 much less faithful to bis author. As for the mysterious purpose of Providence 
 latent under to t7?s 6vov, all he says is ko.1 tovto p.e"ya. r/v, il t//is, too, was great" — 
 he means by, "too," that it was "great" like the mystery in "Destroy this 
 temple" — but he does not make up for tliis brevity by any compensating 
 explanation of the verbal difficulties of the clause about " remembering," which he 
 does not quote. 
 
 5 88 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2759] 
 
 IIoTe (Huet has gap in text, but -n-ore in marg. with Cod. Bodl.) 
 
 yeyore 7rpwroy iv rrj KaepapraovfX 6 Xoco-tos...? Unless other instances 
 
 of Origen's aoristic use of ylyovzv are produced, this might best be 
 rendered, " When is it on record that Christ -was first at Capernaum?" 
 In the context, Origen appeals to the exact words (Ae£is) of the 
 evangelists. Comp. Orig. on Ps. xxi. 4 where LXX has yrrja-aTo... 
 ISw/cas, and Origen says (Lomra. xii. 80) 77x170-0.1-0... /cat dX^ev, "he 
 [Hezekiah] asked... and is recorded to have received." According to 
 this view, yiyovev, like the perfects in the Epistle to the Hebrews 
 (2751), represents, in Origen, a past event as a present record 1 . And 
 if it does so in Origen, perhaps it may do so in the formula frequently 
 used by Matthew to introduce prophecy (2478 a) "// is on record that 
 this came to pass in order that it might be fulfilled..." 
 On viii. 14 kai itoy ynAroj...H nof YTT^rto (2490) 
 
 [2759] On viii. 14 ol8a...Kal irov virdyw ij/x€ts Se ovk oiSare irodev 
 (.pyofxat r) 7rov vTrdyo). u/xeis... Blass remarks (p. 324) " Chrys. and 
 Nonnus omit r}...vir." This is true of Chrys. who quotes thus, xdv 
 
 eyw jxapTvpw 7repi ipavrov, r/ p.apivpia p.ov aXrjOrjs iariv. on olba iroOev 
 epXp/xai Kal ttov virdyw vp.€is oe ovk ot'Sare ttoOcv tpxpfiai, — and there 
 
 stops. But can we feel sure that he does not stop because he has 
 quoted enough to be the basis of his comment ? After two short 
 
 Sentences, he quotes again /ecu iav eyw p.apTvpui irepl i/JLavrov akrjdrjS 
 
 icmv p.apr. p.ov, on olSa iroOev ep^o/xai — and there stops. If we had this 
 quotation alone, we might say that he omitted in his text the clause 
 kol 7rov virdyut. But he has quoted it above. Again, after one more 
 sentence, he quotes, 'Y^cts Se ovk olSare — and there stops ; but the 
 reason obviously is that he does not want to repeat what he has 
 said. Ammonius (Cramer) says, 'Yptis Se Sia tovto p\v ovk oi'Sarc, 
 
 i-rreiSy ovBev ^e'Aere toij (paivojxivov voetv. ovk €i7r€ Se, ®eos ci/xi, a'AA.a, 
 H66ev ep^o/xat Kai ttov vtrdyw ZdekoKaKOvv (sic) yap «cu irpocreTroiovvTo 
 
 1 [2758 a] See 2751 and contrast the perf. of recorded action with the imperf. of 
 habitual action, and with the aorist of special action, in Epict. ii. 12. 15 el diXere 
 yvQi'ai Trbarjv iv tovtu 5vva/xiv el\ev (sc. HwKpdrrjs) {habitually possessed) dvdyviare 
 to A€i>o(pu3VTot ILvfxTroaiov Kal 6\f/ecr9e woaas fiaxas StctAAwe " how many quarrels 
 he is recorded to have peacefully settled,'''' iv. 5. 3 " See in the pages of Xenophon 
 (■7rapd S« / o0tDj'Tt)...how many quarrels he is recorded to have settled (\i\vKe), how 
 again [in the several dialogues in which their names are mentioned] he tolerated 
 (r]viffx €T0 ) Thrasymachus, Polus, and Callicles, how lie habitually tolerated his 
 wife (7rcDs ttjs yvvaiKos -fjveixeTo)." So Origen (Lomm. ii. 366) after saying yiypawrai 
 (xi. 54) yap... dirrjh6ev, proceeds, Kal ov fxovos ye eKel dweXrjXvdev, i.e. is recorded to 
 have departed. 
 
 589 
 
[2759] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 fir) ciSeVut. This shews how commentators, even though they had 
 the full W.H. text before them, might stop short at ovk otSare (and 
 perhaps at iroOev epxopai) because those words sufficed to indicate 
 the argument as to Christ's divine origin. The omission of u/xets Se 
 ...vVayw by Origen, Cyril, and Augustine (Alf.) (through homoeotel.) 
 indicates a lacuna in very early mss. Nonnus has MoCvos e-yw voew 
 
 7r66ev r)\v6ov i) ttqOl /3atVw. 'Y/xcis o' ovk ecyd.rjTe TroOev yev6fut)v TrdBev 
 eo-T-qv. John uses eo-T-n with eis but not with ex or onro, and // is 
 improbable that Nonnus would paraphrase TroOev (.pyojxai by two 
 clauses — the second so meaningless and farfetched as TroOev lo-rrjv. 
 More probably Nonnus paraphrased rj ttov vTrdyw as noBiAecTHN, where 
 iA might easily be corrupted into in. Then noeiN would be amended 
 into tto6€n. H66ev yevoixrjv ttoBl 8' eo-TTjv would correspond to TroOev 
 ep^o/xtti •>/ ttov virdyw in John, and would also harmonize with the 
 preceding irodev rjXvOov r) it66l /SatVoj in Nonnus himself (see 2549 a)\ 
 
 1 [2759 a] Ammonius, apparently commenting on the object of ovk o'idare in 
 viii. 14, ovk otdare irbdev ipxo/J.ai rj ttov..., has Kcufoi'7/, thus repeating the previous 
 clause irbdev Zpx- xal ttov vrrdyio. This is not so strange as Nonnus's substitution 
 of rj for kolL in the previous clause. "H is comparatively intelligible after a negative 
 [ovk oidare), but not after a positive (olda). It was briefly suggested in 2549 a that 77 
 in viii. 14 prob. means "or [which is the same thing']." In view of a frequent 
 confusion between 77 and kclL elsewhere, and of arguments — based on these two 
 conjunctions-^-about the Lord's Supper, the following additional facts about ov... 
 Kal and ov...rj are here submitted. 
 
 [2759/'] In Genesis and Exodus, when A.V. "nor" is represented by Heb. 
 "and,"' it corresponds to ovte or fJ.T)8£ in Gen. xxi. 23, xlv. 6, Ex. xii. 9, xxiii. :6, 
 but to Kal in Gen. xlix. to, Ex. viii- 22 (R.V. "and"), xx. 10, xxiii. 32, xxxiv. 10. 
 In Dan. xi. 24, LXX has ovdi but Theod. Kal, and so Heb. Ov...ov5e is clear but 
 not literal. 06. ..Kal is literal but not clear, e.g. "thou shalt not sow with wheat 
 and barley" would be a literal transl. of Heb., in which it would mean "with 
 wheat or barley," — neither being allowed. But in English and Greek it might 
 mean "thou shalt not sow with wheat and barley [together]" — one being allowed. 
 In 2 K. xxiii. 10 "that no man might make his son (Heb.) and (R.V. and A.V. 
 ,'/■•) his daughter pass through the fire," Sym. has rj for "and.'' As his style 
 somewhat resembles that of Luke, the instance will prepare us to find ov...rj in the 
 Acts. 
 
 [2759 c] From classical Gk (from which Blass p. 266 and the Thesaurus quote 
 no instance) Winer- Moulton (p. 550) alleges only Thuc. i. 122, which I should 
 punctuate thus, ovk 'icfxev u7ru)5 rdde rpiQv... air rjWa Krai — ai;vi>ecrlas rj fxaXaKias 
 rj d/ieXtias. Here the negation "we do not see the way to an acquittal" is 
 equivalent t" the affirmation "there must be a verdict of guilty. " This necessitates 
 an appositional clause: — "that is to say. guilty, not of all three, but of the lust. 
 or the second, or the third of the three." Both m rhythm and in grammatical con- 
 struction, the passage is inappropriate as an illustration ofN.T. usage. 
 
 590 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2759] 
 
 [2759 d] Winer-Moulton (but not Blass) refers to Acts xxiv. 12 nai ovre iv rtp 
 iepij) tvpbv fie wpbs riva 8ta\eyb/j.evov — r/ irriaraaiv iroiovvra oxKov — oiire iv rais 
 crwaywyais. But if this is punctuated as above, it appears that rj introduces 
 a parenthetical clause and that oiJre prepares the way for otfre not for rj. And this 
 gives the clue to other instances, e.g. Acts i. 7 ov\ v/j.u>v iariv yvQvai xP 0V0VS 
 V Kaipovs " It is not for you to know the times — or [rather I should say] appointed 
 seasons," preparing the way for the words, "which the Father placed under his 
 own authority,'" Acts xvii. 29 " we ought not to suppose that the divine [being] is 
 like gold — or [may be] silver or stone — the sculpturing of art and of human device." 
 So, too, Rom. iv. 13 " For not through Torah [was] the promise to Abraham — or 
 [as it might also be said] to his seed," ix. 11 " not yet having been born nor even 
 having done anything — good or bad (p-r/bi rrpa^dvrwv ri — dyadbv rj (pavXov)." 
 
 [2759 e] A more interesting instance is Acts xi. 8 prj5ap.Qs, /a'pie, on koivov 
 rj aKadaprov ovbitrore elarjkdev els to o~r6fxa piov, in a Petrine speech, corresponding 
 to Acts x. 14 /jLT)5a./j.Qs, Kvpie, on ovbirrore Zcpayov irav koivov kclI aKadaprov. In 
 Acts x. 14, several authorities have altered Kai to rj to make the text correspond to 
 Peter's report of his own words ; but it has been pointed out (1913) that Luke in 
 writing the Petrine speech has allowed himself more freedom than in the Petrine 
 narrative of the facts. The narrative retains the old Hebraic idiom ov8iTrore...Trdv : 
 and the kuI aKadaprov (which, coming at the end of the sentence, cannot be 
 parenthetic) is also to be explained as Hebraic. But when writing a speech for 
 Peter — a speech that, without shorthand writers, or a miracle, or both, cannot 
 possibly be regarded as giving the Apostle's exact words — Luke allows himself to 
 drop some Hebraisms; and, like Symmachus above (2759b), he substitutes rj for 
 the Hebraic Kai. 
 
 [2759 / ] We pass to I Cor. xi. 27 8s civ icrdiri rbv aprov i) wivy rb irorripiov rod 
 Kvpiov dvu^lus, Zvoxos ferai rod <ru>Ma.ros Kai rod aifiaros rod Kvpiov. This may be 
 illustrated by Lev. xx. 9 8s av KaKuis dirrj rbv waripa avrou ^ rr\v pL-qrepa avrov 
 Oavdrip davarovcrdoj' iraripa avrov rj fir/rtpa avrov KaKuis elirev, hoxos 'iorai. Here 
 the Heb. has "and" twice, but the obvious inconvenience of allowing a man to 
 suppose that he may ill-treat " his father or his mother," because the Law merely 
 forbade him to ill-treat " his father and his mother" has led the LXX here and in 
 Ex. xxi. 15, 17, Deut. xxvii. 16, Prov. xx. 20 (and comp. Mk vii. 10, Mt. xv. 4) 
 to render the Heb. "and" by the Gk "or." In 1 Cor. xi. 22 — 9, the whole 
 passage assumes the "eating and drinking" (ib. 22 iadieiv Kai wivetv, 26 bcraKis 
 yap eav iadiriT€...Kai...irivr)T€, 28 iadieru Kal...TrLveTU3, 29 6 yap iffd'iwv Kai rrivwv) 
 of the Lord's Supper, and teaches the preparation for it. But when the Apostle 
 comes to warn the Corinthians about the danger of eating and drinking irreverenti- 
 ally, he naturally substitutes "or" for " and" in order to shew that either act was 
 liable to penalty. There is no question of ov — rj here, nor is the a in ava^lus 
 regarded as a negative. The construction would have been the same if the adverb 
 had been inreprj(pavQs. 
 
 [2759^] In explaining viii. 14, we must have regard to the fact that (1) it would 
 have made good sense to repeat ov. ..Kai instead of introducing ov...rj. (2) Also 
 (2549 a) rj is rare in Jn as compared with the Synoptists. (3) It has been just 
 shewn that ov...Kai and ov...ij are interchanged by various writers and scribes in a 
 manner that suggests a thoughtful distinction between the two. (4) "H is used by Jn 
 (2549 a) where ovde" would differentiate too strongly. These facts confirm the view 
 taken in 2549 a that " or " means " or [which is the same thing]." 
 
 591 
 
[2760] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 On xiv. 7 att' a'pti pNcocKeTe ay'ton (2491) 
 
 [2760] The context (W.H.) el eyvtiMceiTC tie, kou tov iraTepa. fxov 
 av rjSeiTe- an aprt yivaxrKeTe clvtov kou ewpaKaTe (al. + avrov) is rendered 
 by SS "If me ye have not known, my Father also will ye know? 
 And from now ye know him and have seen him." Nonnus has Ei Se 
 
 6eoppT]Ttp p.e ao(fi<Z yivwaxeTe p.v6w, 'E^ ep.edev yvuicreaOe kou vip ipebovTa 
 TOKrja- "Apri Be p.tv cppdcr(raa6e ko.1 vxpip.ehovTa p.a86vT€$. The last 
 
 line shews that he took yivwo-KeTe to be imperative, " If ye recognise 
 me... ye shall from me recognise the Father also. [A^)'] but at once 
 understand Him learning the Father also [as well as myself]." This 
 makes good sense, meaning in effect, " Do I say ' Ye would have 
 known ' ? Nay, begin to know Him at once [through me], and 
 [then] ye [will] have seen [Him]." The sequence " Do this, and 
 straightway that will have followed" is like Lk. xi. 41 "Give for 
 alms. ..and behold all things are clean." It should be added that 
 Irenaeus iii. 13. 2 — quoted above (2491 a) — places these words out 
 of their order as part of Christ's reply to Philip. 
 
 [2761] Epiphanius (i. 919) wedges between two quotations of 
 " He that hath seen me hath seen the Father " a statement about 
 
 Christ as 6 Aeywv on 6 ytvwo-Kwv e/xe yiywcrKCi tov irarepa. The most 
 
 probable explanation of this is that he is borrowing unintelligently (as 
 he often does) from Hippolytus (adv. Noet. 7), who, after quoting 
 " He that hath seen... the Father," adds, "That is to say, If thou hast 
 seen me thou mayest know the Fatlier through me." Epiphanius seems 
 to have mistaken a version of this (conforming "seen " to "know ") for 
 an actual saying of Christ. Hippolytus — after saying that the Father 
 is known through the "image" like Him — continues "But if thou 
 didst not know the image, which is the Son, hotv wouldest (fo'Acis) thou 
 see the Father?" It will not escape the reader that this is like SS "If 
 me ye have not known, my Father also will ye know?" Corruption 
 of the text may have done something to produce these variations, 
 but paraphrase probably contributed more. 
 
 [2762] Is Nonnus right in taking xiv. 7 yivwo-Kere imperatively? 
 The answer depends partly on the general Greek use, and the 
 particular Johannine use, of yu'wo-Kere, partly on the place assigned 
 by John to "knowing" in his theory of revelation and redemption. 
 Nonnus renders it by the subjunctive io-aOpyjo-rjTt in xiv. 17, where 
 the subjunctive is difficult to explain as an imperative but perhaps 
 
 592 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2763] 
 
 more difficult as an indicative 1 . In xiii. 12 where W.H. punctuate 
 
 yU'WCTK€Te Tt TTiTToiiqKa VfXLV; NonnUS haS €LTT€V €019 eTa'pot? yiVWO-K€T€ 
 
 toCto Kal auVoi punctuated by Passow interrogatively but probably 
 imperative, "Understand this ye, too, [my disciples]," implying a 
 precept to understand it even as, or in the sense in which, their 
 Master understands it". In xv. 18 yucoo-KCTe on lp.k...p.(.p.i(jy\K(.v, 
 
 NonnUS has To?to xa/xaryei'eW yn'oxTKere /Aaprvpes Ipyttiv. This is 
 
 ambiguous, but p-dprvpes suits best with an imperative rendering, " I 
 call on you to bear witness and to recognise that they persecuted 
 me": and it is so taken by the Latin versions and SS. Nonnus, 
 then, in two out of four instances certainly renders yivwo-KCTc by an 
 imperative or subjunctive ; in two, where he retains ywaxTKere, he 
 probably intends the imperative. 
 
 [2763] ruwK€Te occurs only twice in Aristophanes, once inter- 
 rogative, once doubtful 3 . In Demosthenes it occurs four times 
 indicatively (but in such a context as to present no ambiguity) and 
 always in connexion with the ''''recognition''' of character, good or 
 bad; once imperatively, at the end of a speech, bidding the jurors 
 recognise or decide that which is just 4 . In Epictetus, there is 
 
 1 [2762 (7] xiv. 1 7 vfxeh yivdxrKere avrb, otl Trap' vp.lv p.iveL Kal iv vp.lv iariv 
 (marg. &rrcu): Nonnus, (i) ^uadp-qo-rjTe be /aovvol 'Tpels tvQeov elbos ddrjriToio TrpoirujTrov 
 "Ottl ped' vpeioov peveeL Kal bpbcrToXov Herat 'Tplv, iravras %x ov foepbv obpov.... 
 Nonnus must have read pevel (not ptvei) (1960 a). This is parall. to xiv. 19 
 vfiels be dewpeiri pe, 6tl eyiLi jiS Kal v/xus ^rjcrere, which Nonnus paraphrases thus, 
 (2) 'AW epe povvoL Aevcrffere Kal perd yalav del fuwv otl p.lpvu), Kal Sl epe ^vp-Travres 
 del jwoire Kal vpels. AetVcrere, a poetic word, seems alw. imperative, e.g. Soph. 
 Oed. R. 1524, Ant. 940, Eurip. Or. g'j-j, Med. 161, and prob. (see p. 678 note 1) 
 Iliad i. 120 (comp. Odyss. xxiii. 124 ravrd ye Xevaae). Nonnus seems to mean 
 ( 1 ) " But ye [I pray] do ye — alone and apart from the world— -fix your eyes on the 
 divine form of the invisible Person [and perceive] that it will abide with you as in 
 a home," (2) "But do ye \_I firay] — alone and apart from the world — behold me 
 even after [my life on] earth how that ever living I abide," taking otl, after the verbs 
 of "seeing," as "that" (not " because ") as in iv. 35 "behold the fields... that." 
 
 [2762//] In xiv. 17, Chrys., as printed by Migne and Cramer, has pivei, but 
 a great part of the comment is consistent with the hypothesis that he wrote p.evel. 
 Chrys. also twice repeats p.bvoL, as Nonnus does, ehrev otl IIpos v/j.ds pbvovs 
 Hpxerai, and again, " Lest they should say, How then saidst thou to the Jews, 
 From henceforth ye shall not see n/e? — He destroys the [apparent] contradiction 
 by saying To you alone (\vei ttjv dvTideaiv elircbv, Upbs vpds pbvovs)" 
 
 " [2762 6] Chrys. and Origen give no guidance on this point. Nor do the 
 Latin vss. SS has the interrogative. 
 
 :i Thesm. 606 interrog., Fragm. 203 (meaning doubtful). 
 
 4 Demosth. (Preuss) Indie, xviii. 10, 276, xxiv. 59, xxxix. 2. Imper. 
 xxxiii. 38 vfieis odv, Kara tovs vbp-ovs, yivd>crKeTe to. SiKaLa. 
 
 a. VI. 593 38 
 
[2763] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 abundant use of the aorist, and of yvw#i a-avrov, but Schenkl's Index 
 under "yu'wo-Kw c. accus." gives no instance of any form of the 
 present. On the other hand, Plato, while emphasizing, as the great 
 precept of life, yvdOi aeavrov, insists repeatedly on to eavrbv ywwcrKeLV 
 as being the fulfilment of this precept, and connects the phrases with 
 a distinction between material and spiritual knowledge of oneself 1 . 
 The Fourth Gospel teaches that " eternal life " consists (xvii. 3) in the 
 "knowledge (yivwo-Kwcriv) " of the true God and of Jesus Christ. It is 
 hardly possible that the evangelist was ignorant that he thus came 
 into collision with the doctrine taught by the successors of Plato and 
 popularised by his own contemporary, Epictetus, and it is almost 
 certain that the collision was deliberate. It may be asked why the 
 evangelist, if he wished to record a precept of Christ about "knowing," 
 did not use the unambiguous aorist, but it has been pointed out (1626) 
 
 1 [2763 a] Comp. Plato Phileb. 48 c — I) yvQidt aavrbv ...tovvolvt'iov prc]v iKHvu> 
 8rj\ov otl to /n7]8afj.y ytvwaKeiv avTbv, I Ale. 131 A o'o-m apa twv tov cru)/xor6s n 
 yivuxTKei to. avTou aXXa oux olvtov Zyvwuev ...ov8eh dpa tQv iovrpCiv eavrbf yivwo-Kei, 
 Kad' 6<jov taroos, where the first words mean "whosoever recognises, or knows 
 intelligently, something of his bodily system, has obtained the knowledge of his 
 possessions, not of himself." In 1 Ale. 133 B — D it is said that the soul, if it is 
 to know itself, "must look to {fikeirTe'ov els) the soul, and especially to that 
 province (tottov) of the soul wherein exists the soul's [constituent] virtue," that 
 nothing belonging to the soul "is more divine than this the centre of knowledge 
 and wisdom (deioTepov rj tovto irepl o to eiSevai re kcli tppoveiv eo-TtV)," and "the 
 intelligent knowledge of oneself we agree in calling heal thy mindedness (t6 8e 
 yiviho~Keiv avrbv bp.o\oyodfxev ffuxppoavvrjv elvai)." In Charm. 164 D, 165 B, it is 
 said that awcppbvei. not x aL P € i ls tne ^ ,est greeting, and that awcppbvei means yvdOi 
 o~avTbv : then follows <r%e56^ yap ti ^7^76 cu'rd rovrb <pr]p.i elvai ao}<ppo<rvvr]v, to 
 yivwaKeiv eavTbv. This gnosis is subsequently connected with olSa thus, ib. 167 A 
 6 &pa auxppwv fxbvos av 70s re eavTbv yvwaerai ko.1 olbs re farou e^erdcrcu H Te Tvy%dvei 
 elSics /cat tL /xr), /cat tovs a\\ovs...eino~Koireiv tL tis olSe xal olerai, elirep olbc, kcu tI 
 at tis otfTdi p.ev elSivai, ol8e 8' ov...Kal fan 5f/ tovto. ..to eavrbv avrbv yivwcrKeiv, 
 to elSkvai a re olde /cai a /xr/ olSev. 
 
 [2763/'] Vlvwg-kco, in connexion with " knowing " other persons than oneself, 
 and as distinct from " seeing " these persons, is discussed at great length by Plato, 
 beginning with eiriyLvwaKU) thus, 7'heaet. 193, ZwKp&Ttis e iriyiv dxr Kei QebSupov ko.1 
 QealTrjTov, bpq. 8k p.r]8kTepov, ixi)8e &\\ij ataQ-qais ai>T(2 irapeGTi irepl clvtwv. After 
 this first hypothesis, a second, and its consequence, are stated thus, AetWepov rolvvv, 
 '6ti t8v p.iv yiviJ)o-KU)v v/jlQv, rbv Si p.r\ yivwaKwv, aladavbfxevos 8k fj.r/8iTepov, ovk dv 
 iroTe aii oii)0ti-qv 8v oloa elvai 8v /u.77 618a. In a third hypothesis this collocation of 
 oloa and yivueKoi is repeated ; and the two verbs are manifestly intended to be 
 distinguished. Applied to facts of science, ytvuxricu means "recognise" or "know 
 intelligently" in Jen 537 e, " I recognise that these fingers are five : you recognise 
 the same facts. ..we both recognise them by arithmetic." 
 
 594 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2765] 
 
 that John expressly distinguishes the aorist from the present as though 
 the latter represented a higher stage than the former; and he may also 
 have been influenced by the use of the aorist in Jeremiah (xxxi. 34) 
 quoted in the Epistle to the Hebrews (viii. 11) "They shall no more 
 teach... saying Know (yvQOi) the Lord." The Fourth Gospel is full of 
 subtle distinctions between jlvuxtku and 618a that could not have 
 originated from Aramaic utterance, if exactly translated 1 , but may 
 well have originated from Greek paraphrase. A priori it is quite 
 reasonable to suppose that John represented Christ as holding up to 
 His disciples " the Father " and not " yourselves " as the object of the 
 highest knowledge, and that the precept to "know" was expressed 
 so as to exclude the Delphic "know once for ail" yvwOi, and to imply 
 "knowing by degrees" or "growing in recognition and sympathy" 
 yivwo-K-ere. In the absence of help from Origen and Clement of 
 Alexandria the conclusion must be left uncertain, but it is not 
 improbable that Nonnus is right in his imperative rendering of this 
 ambiguous form. 
 
 [2764] Of course, the fact that John's expression of the doctrine 
 of "knowing" God is in part Greek and Platonic, is not inconsistent 
 with the fact that the thought is Jewish, or Hebrew, and Biblical. 
 In John, " knowing " and " seeing " go together, and therefore the 
 " knowing " may be illustrated by v. 38 outc c!8os clvtov ewpaKare, an 
 amazing phrase — " ye have neither seen his form (c?8os) " — con- 
 sidering that "his " means the Father's ! Chrysostom's explanation 
 is, in effect, " Ye have not seen his form, because there was no form to 
 see" \ God, he urges, is "above all outward fashion." Nor will he 
 accept the notion of a spiritual form : " He means, not that God has 
 a form but not a visible one (ov Otarov 8c), but that none of these things 
 concerns God (a'AX' 6Vt ovSev tovtwv irepi Btov)." At the same time he 
 dismisses the statements that Moses heard the voice of God and that 
 Isaiah saw Him, and represents Christ as "goading the Jeivs into 
 philosophic dogma (et? <£iA.ocro<£oi/ avrovs ivdyei 80'y/m)." 
 
 [2765] But the fact appears to be that "form" here alludes to the 
 ancient Jewish tradition about Penuel, the Kace of God, twice called 
 by the LXX the Form (eTSos) of God, a phrase unique in the whole of 
 
 1 [2763 c] There do not exist in Heb. two words corresponding to oT5a and 
 yivw<TKW. In Jerem. xxxi. 34 -yvCodi tov Kipiov...wdvTes eldrjcrovaiv fx.e, the Heb. of 
 "know" is the same word in both cases. It is not therefore exactly translated 
 by LXX. 
 
 595 38— 2 
 
[2766] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 the Bible 1 . It was there that Jacob said " 1 have seen God face to face " ; 
 and from this fact Philo, though erroneously, explains the name of 
 "Israel," there given to Jacob, as Seeing God. Those who took this 
 view would discern in the words addressed to Nathanael, i. 47 "Behold 
 an Israelite indeed," the meaning, " Behold one that sees God," and 
 would find an appropriateness between this and the following words, 
 (i. 50) "Thou shalt see greater things than these..." followed by an 
 allusion to the ladder of heaven and the angels ascending and de- 
 scending over the head of Jacob. 
 
 [2766] Again it was said of Moses that (Ex. xxxiii. n) "the Lord 
 spake tmto Moses face to face." Combining this with Jacob's "seeing 
 the Lord face to face" we can understand how our Lord, in a spiritual 
 sense, not casting away the traditions of His nation, but interpreting 
 them, while condemning the Scribes and Pharisees for degenerating 
 from the true Israel, might say something that might be paraphrased 
 for Greeks thus "Ye are not genuine sons of Israel, who ' saw the 
 forfn of God' ; ye are not genuine disciples of Moses, who ' heard the 
 voice of God 1 ; ye have neither heard his voice at any time nor seen 
 his form 2 ." 
 On xi. 47 ti ttoioymcn ; (2493) 
 
 [2766 (i)] As regards the distinction between ti iroiovftev} and 
 ti TroiTja-tti/Aev ; it may be illustrated from Epictetus, who — besides 
 frequently using ri iroiyjo-w ; parall. to deliberat. subjunct. (i. 27. 7, 
 iv. 10. 1 etc.) so that it is proved to be subjunctive, and (i. 22. 17) 
 ti ovv iroLrjo-w/xev ; — has the indicative in a passage where he is 
 maintaining that "man is born for faithfulness (71750s tv'kjtw yeyovcv)." 
 An intruder (d 8e) s , notorious for adultery, ironically replies (ii. 4. 2) 
 
 aAA' ttV..., a^)€l'T€S TOVTO TO 7TICTTOV 7TpOS 6 7Te(f>VKafX€l', e7n/3ol>A£t'W/A€l' TTj 
 
 yviai/a tov yciToi/os, ri Troiov/j-ev ; Presumably the man means " What 
 
 1 [2765 a] Gen. xxxii. 30 — 1. Aquila (once at all events) has wpbauwov 
 Iffxvpov the literal rendering. Clem. Alex. 132 has tldos deov. Both he and 
 Origen (on Gen. xxxii. 30) explain the "angel" or "face of God" as being the 
 Logos, and represent the "wrestling with \cvfnra\aiui)" as "wrestling on tin- 
 side of" meaning that He assisted facob in wrestling against Satan — Clem, 
 at least certainly, Origen probably. In LXX, "the form of the glory of God" etc. 
 may be found elsewhere, but not " the form of God." 
 
 - [2766 a] See 1716 // for another allusive phrase (in connexion with theophanies) 
 in the use of (^(pavl'cw occurring in xiv. 21 — 22, and in one passage of the 
 Pentateuch Ex. xxxiii. 13 — 18 where Moses >ay^ to God i/jKpavt<r6v fxoi (reavrdv. 
 
 '■'■ O 84, in Epict. (Schenkl) means some one replying to a speech or Utter. Hut 
 here it ma)- mean Epictetus replying to the intrusion. If so, lie himself utters 
 
 dX\' $v...rl iroiovfxtv ; See context. 
 
 596 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2767] 
 
 are we doing, in effect [except disproving this fine theory about 
 natural faithfulness, since our conduct shews that men are naturally 
 unfaithful] ? " The sequel is, " Why, what else [are we doing] (ti 
 yap a\\o) except destroying and slaying ? " " Whom ? " " The [ideal] 
 man of faith [within us]." In ii. 3. 5 eVi Sc tov fiiov rl ttol(2 ; 
 vvv fj.ev Xc'yo) dyaOov, vvv 8e kokoV, the meaning is " What am I in the 
 habit of doing?" But the context suggests " What [good] am I 
 doing?" — as in i. 25. 29 "revile a stone — and what [good] will you 
 do [by it] (kcli ti ttoit/'o-cis) ' ? " 
 On x. 29 oyAeic Ay'natai ApnAzeiN (2496 1>) 
 
 [2767] In X. 28 — 9 ovx dpirdcreL tis. . .ouSels SvvaraL dpivd^ztv the 
 difference intended between dpwda-u and Bvvarat dpTrd&iv (if the 
 latter is correct) must depend to some extent upon the whole 
 context (2740 — 4), and especially on the object of dpird£eiv, which 
 is implied in W.H/s text, but inserted by Chrys. and Latin versions 2 . 
 
 1 [2766 (i) n] Another Epictetian use of rt's, illustrative of a v.r. in Jn, is ri 
 doKdre ; tI doKels ; introducing an absurd hypothesis, e.g. i. 26. 5 e 7 ^' r( doiceis ; 
 ori^diXuv irepnriTTTo} \-a\-y ;.. .p.r} ytvot-TO, iv. 8. 26 ri doKeire ;.../xi] yevocro, ii. 2. 15 
 e7ret rl SoKefc ; 0TL...de\(A>i> EojKpdT7]s...av e\eyei>... ; This may explain the reading 
 of D (2184) TiJSo/feTTe 6Vt...in Jn xi. 56 ri SoKei v/xiv ; on ov p.rj tXdy... A scribe 
 may have thought that the context introduced an absurd hypothesis and that ti 
 BoKtire Sn was the correct phrase for this. D, however, by retaining ov fir/, gives 
 the meaning " What think ye ? [Anything so absurd as] that he will not come to 
 the feast ? " — which is probably the opposite of what is intended. Ti SoKel vpuv, if 
 the text is correct, seems to mean " what is your serious opinion ? " and so 
 Nonnus, TyuiV (ppa^o/xeuoiaL ri (paiverai; The original may have been ri doKeire ; 
 ov fxi] ^\6rj... If doKeire, spelt ckwarac, came to be regarded as two words, it might 
 lead to doKei otl and to the insertion of Vfuv before or after doxei (as Origen 
 variously places it). 
 
 [2766 (i) />] The questions put by the Jews to the Baptist i. 19 — 21 <ri» ri? a ; . . . 
 [<rt)] 'HXetas ei; may be illustrated by Epict. iii. 1. 22 — 3 crv odv rls el...\eye avru, 
 av vol 56£t7, 2u b~k rls el ..., uri 5rj Xeye rq> e^aiperw, 'Zv ovv tis ef, where the 
 Athenians are supposed to put this question rudely to Socrates — whom they dislike 
 for attempting to reform them — and to be rebuked for it. So, too, there is rude 
 abruptness in iii. 22. 91 o~v el 6 AioyevTjs, 6 /mij oiop-evos elvat deovs ; and it elicits 
 a rebuke. It illustrates the abruptness of Pilate's first question to Christ, xviii. 33 
 cv el 6 j3affi\evs rQiv 'lovSaiwv ; 
 
 '-' [2767 (?] Chrys. quotes ovdels dvvarai apirdfeiv cuVd e k rr/s x- T - ira-Tp6s /xov, 
 having previously read 6 irar-rip 8s (for o) ib^Ki /xoi. He means by avrd the sheep 
 of the flock (called avrd in the preceding verse). But a, £,_/having read 6' ("pater 
 quod dedit mihi ") supply the neut. sing, avro ("nemo potest rapere illud"). 
 Previously, Chrys. has ov8eis SvvaTtxi raura dpirdaai (for ovx o.pTrdo~ei ns avrd) 
 4k ttjs x ei pb* / x01 ') paraphrasing "no one will snatch" as "no one can possibly 
 
 597 
 
[2768] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 Chrys. confuses together the clauses about " snatching " from the 
 Son and "snatching" from the Father; and Nonnus blends them 
 into one ("Nor could anyone snatch my flock that knows [me] from 
 our hand 1 "). Origen in two passages omits Svvarai and has ouSels 
 apird^ei £k rrjs ^etpos tov TraTpos, or e« rwi' x* l P<*> v avrov, and in one of 
 these, while repeating ovSeU aprra.£ei, he explains it as meaning ovSeU 
 SuVon-cu 7;/xa9 \a(3eh> 2 . SS also omits 8vvarai ("There is no one that 
 doth snatch away from the hand of the Father"). In the LXX, the 
 present infinitive, after Swcn-cu, occurs rarely as compared with the 
 aorist, and, when it does occur, mostly implies continuance". But 
 continuance is out of the question in x. 29. In some cases, 
 LXX adds Swarai to express the Hebrew interrogative, e.g. " Shall 
 I bear?" (i.e. "Shall I be able to bear?") "Did he deliver?" 
 (i.e. "Was he able to deliver 4 ?"). So, where Matthew has (vii. 4) 
 " How wilt thou say (xcos ipels) to thy brother?" Luke has (vi. 42) 
 " How canst thou say (ttw<; SuVao-ai A.«'yetv) ? " Probably x. 29 (W.H.) 
 is corrupt, and we should read dpird^L for owareu apird^tv. 
 On xii. 28 rrATep, Ao'Iaco'n coy to onoma (2512 c) 
 
 [2768] After SdtWov, B has an abbreviated Moy (V-) at the end 
 of a line, and toonoma at the beginning of the next: L has coy at 
 
 snatch"; but a little later on, he writes as if the phrase ovdeis dpTrdi'ei were applied 
 to the Father (tl ovv; el did rr/v 8vi>a.fj.t.v tov irarpbs " ovdeis dpwdfci "...) and also 
 applied to the Son (e'nrcov on Ovdeis dpTrdi^e t avrd — no longer ravra — iic rrjs x eL P ^ 
 ixov), and then argues as though he had read dpird'<;eiv in connexion with the 
 Father: el yap fir/ rovro, &k6\ov0ov r)v elwelv on "'0 trar^p 5s edwKe fxoi fxeifav 
 w&vtuv ecrri /ecu ovdeis dvvarai apird'^eiv avrd 4k rrjs x €l P 0S f-ov." AW ovk elirev 
 
 OVTWS d\X' " tK TTJS X^'POS TOV IDXTpOS fJLOV." 
 
 1 [2767 />] Ovde tls apwd^eiev i/mr/v Trivvrbcppova Troi/xvrjv Xeipbs d<f> rnxeriprjs. 
 Nonnus probably means "no one could [possibly] snatch" to be emphatic. 
 
 2 [2767 c] Lomni. ii. i 44 and xv. 318 (comm. Jerem.). This is important as 
 indicating that, in Origen's view, if dvvarai had been inserted, the aorist infm., not 
 the pres., should have followed. 
 
 :1 [2767 </] When pres., it mostly denotes continuance or habit, as in Gen. xiii. 6 
 ovk ibvvavro KaroiKelv, xxxvi. 7 ovk edvvaro 17 yr)...(pe'petv avrovs, xxxvii. 4 ovk 
 eSvvavro \a\eiv, xliii. 32 ov ydp idvvavro . . . awe crdleiv, xlv. 1 ovk rjdvvaTo... 
 dvexfo-dai, xlviii. 10 ovk r)dvvaro (i\(Treiv (where e"n might very well have been 
 inserted as it is in Ex. ii. 3 ovk rjdvvavro avrb Zti Kpvirreiv), xviii. 1S ov dvv^o-rj 
 iroieiv, "you will not be able to continue doing" etc. 
 
 4 1 2767 (? J Deut. i. 12 ttQs dvvrjcrofxai /xbvos (ptpeiv ; Heb. (lit.) "How shall 
 1 bear!" Com p. 2 K. xviii. 24 dwoo-rpi^/ere with the parall. Is. xxxvi. 9 Svva<rde 
 airoo-Tptfai, and 2 K. xviii. 34 e£,ei\avro with the parall. Is. xxxvi. 19 eSvvavro 
 pvaao-Oai., where there is no "able" in the Heb. of either passage. 
 
 59« 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2771] 
 
 the end of a line and tonyn i.e. tov vlov at the beginning of the next : 
 N has coy at the end of a line, and toonoma at the beginning of the 
 next. D has onoma at the end of a line, and adds ev ttj So^ t/ etx«v 
 
 irapa vol 71730 tov tov KoafJiov yeveo-Oai (see xvii. 5). Nonnus follows 
 
 L, having Yla tcov KvSaive, and this is the reading of a MS. in the 
 Ferrar group (iraTep aytc oo£ao-oV aov tov vlov ). Resch ad loc. quotes 
 Augustine, "clarified me ea claritate.-.mundus fieret " and Jerome 
 " glorifica me gloria... mundus esset," as being uttered immediately 
 before the Voice from heaven ; and Aphraates, "jesus said — I have 
 glorified it and will glorify it." 
 
 [2769] SS, which agrees with W.H. up to "glorify thy name," 
 proceeds "And in the same hoar was heard" (instead of " there came 
 therefore"), D has ko.1 iyivf.ro for rj\$€v ovv and Nonnus has 7re'A.e. 
 The facts indicate that there was early confusion as to the words 
 that followed 86$ao-ov. The causes may have been, in part, a desire 
 to paraphrase for Greeks the meaning of " Name," and to shew that 
 "glorify thy Name" meant in effect "glorify thy Son"; in part, from 
 an early confusion caused by Greek corruption of the letters tonyn 
 and toonoma. If, in some early mss., toonoma was written toynoma 
 — by crasis, as in Mt. xxvii. 57 — toyn, at the end of a line, might 
 easily be read as toyn, "the Son." 
 
 [2770] Origen, commenting on Christ's recognition of the 
 ordinance of all things by the Father in accordance with the set 
 "hour," says, " Dicit in aliquo loco ad matrem suam Nondum venit 
 hora mea. Item, JVi/nc anima mea .. .propter hoc veiii in Jianc horam. 
 Item, Pater, venit hora, clarifica Filiunt tuiim ut et Filius tints clarified 
 te\" If the second "item" were omitted, this would place the 
 words " Glorify thy Son " immediately after that utterance of Christ 
 which preceded the Voice from heaven, in such a way as to lead 
 readers to take the two separate sayings as a single continuous one. 
 This indicates another way in which to explain the extraordinary 
 misquotation of Augustine and Jerome. They may have been 
 influenced by some collection of Christ's sayings about the "hour." 
 Some confusion arising from the repetition of wpa may perhaps 
 account for the phrase in SS, "and in the same hour." 
 On can with indicative (2515 (i)) 
 
 [2771] Deissmann (p. 201) calls attention to the fact that Bed. 
 
 1 On Mt. xxvi. 1 (Lomm. iv. 388). 
 
 599 
 
[2772] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 Pap. 48. 13 (which he dates 2nd — 3rd cent, a.d.) has idv with the 
 indie, and also thrice with the subjunct. The sentence with the 
 
 indie, runs thus, idv 8e croi 86£rj k<xi irepi tojv cpioYwv, idv 8k /at) ivrjv 
 
 e'p[i](Ha, [^]apti' 7rotcras 7r[e']p.i//eis p.oi...i.e. "If you would be pleased 
 [to do this] also in the matter of the fleeces [I should be obliged], 
 but, if it should turn out that the fleeces were not practicable, kindly 
 send...." The first subjunctive is idv ovv 80*07 aoi, the third is idv 
 avafirjs rfj ioprfj (2715 d). Deissmann gives another instance of idv with 
 
 yv from Berl. Pap. 300. 5 (148 A.D.) airatTijaavTa toijs fUo-6Was, kuv 
 
 8iov ryv fjLMxOuio-avTa. y avTovpyijcravTa. Here, as above, the meaning is 
 
 "and, if it slwuld turn out to have been needful." The ms. is illiterate. 
 
 But there seems a fair probability that the writer really meant, not 
 
 kolv 77 " even if it be," but kuv 77V, which he intended to be taken as 
 
 above. 
 
 On iota subscript (2515 (i) b) 
 
 [2772] PhrynicllUS says ys iv dyopa cto'Aoikov. Xiye ovv yo-Qa. He 
 then adds — according to the printed text — " but the [person] saying 
 idv 77s iv dyopa. would use [17s] more correctly" opOorepov 8k XP<$ T0 dv 
 o Xeyuiv, idv 17s iv dyopa. But how can what is absolutely correct, idv 
 77s, be described as " more correct" — and, more amazing still, "more 
 correct" than what is described as o-oAoikov? Dr Rutherford (p. 240) 
 calls attention to this language as indicating "uncertainty," which he 
 justly calls "surprising." Coming from Phrynichus, not a lenient 
 critic, it is incredible. But Lobeck adds a note that suggests a 
 corruption in Phrynichus's text, " Ex Ed. Pr. et Phavor. restitui dv, 
 quod Nunnesius praetermisit. Vulgo opdiorepov." 
 
 [2773] Omitting dv, we obtain xparroo. Now Phrynichus, in his 
 Ecloga, when he tells his readers what to say, uses Ae'yt, epcls, most 
 frequently, and XPV Aeyciv rarely, but never xp^to with or without dv. 
 On the other hand he has (Lobeck p. 37) t<3 aTretpt xp™, and (p. 175) 
 to pu7riap.a ovk iv xpV°~ eL ' XP^ °^'' Tt ? xpeiTrovi. A priori, then, ^p<5 
 tw is more likely here than xp^ to - And, if we accept xpw, we reject 
 dv, with " Nunnesius." 
 
 (2774] To this it may be objected that the text has xp ^ not 
 XpoiTio. But the text (according to Lobeck "vulgo") also has 
 6p6(x)T€pov for opOorepov, indicating that the scribe, like the farmer 
 Gemellus (2691), confounded and a>, an extremely frequent error. 
 And Jann. Gk Gr. par. 20° alleges "to for tuh H. Rohl 503 twice," 
 and also quotes " Strabo 14, 41 77-oAAoi ^ojpis tov i ypdcpovai tos 
 
 8oTLKa<i Kai (add vTroTaKTiKas) ii<(3uXXov<TL 8k TO l#os <j>vaiKyv ahiav ovk 
 
 600 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2776] 
 
 Zx ov " i- e - " Many write the datives and [add subjunctives] without 
 the iota" [i.e. the iota commonly called subscript] " and reject the 
 custom, having [indeed] no reason in nature." 
 
 [2775] These facts suggest that the real question in Phrynichus's 
 mind is not of a grammatical nature — whether Vo.v rjs is " more 
 correct " grammatically than the "soloecism" 77s. It is a question 
 of orthography — whether hc, when subjunctive, should be written with, 
 or without, the iota subscript. Strabo, as alleged above, seems to 
 have disliked the use of the iota subscript, and indeed the papyri 
 indicate that it was greatly abused 1 . But the use of the iota in rjs 
 subjunctive was certainly convenient, and Phrynichus seems to have 
 come to the conclusion that it was also "more correct-." According 
 to this view, the text of Phrynichus must be read, opOorzpov Se xp™ 
 ™ 1 Ae'ywv, 'Ear ^s Iv dyopa, " But when you mean, ' If you be in the 
 marketq^lace,' use the iota, [thus writing] more correctly [than those 
 who do not use //]." 
 On the Possessive Genitive (2558 — 69) 
 
 [2776] The vernacular possessive genitive' 1 — called hereafter, for 
 brevity, the vernacular possessive, or vernacular genitive — is not only 
 unemphatic, but, so to speak, under-emphasized, in order to emphasize 
 the context. It occurs in Plato's Phaedo (117 b) where, in answer to 
 the question of Socrates " what must one do [after taking the hem- 
 
 1 [2775a] Comp., as one of many specimens, Fayiliu Pap. (ist cent.) 137 OeQii 
 fxe(ya)\o fieyakwi. xp-qp-ariGov p.01, rj neivu}i...ri /xe\(\)w ivrvvxaviv ; tovtoh ep.ol 
 XPV/J-d-Tiaov (answer me this). This also illustrates wi for o (in rovrut). 
 
 - [2775/;] It has been suggested to me that opdorepov — instead of implying 
 that two views of -qs are more or less right — may be a "litotes," or under-state- 
 ment, like Kemble's reproof to George IV., " It would better become your Royal 
 Highness's mouth to say 'oblige' (instead of obleege)," meaning that " obleege " 
 was not " becoming" at all. But opdorepov Xeyeiv is used by Plato 165 B, 362 A, 
 Aristot. Pliys. Aitsc. iv. 13. 8, of " the more correct" of two assertions, and 
 Phrynichus himself says (Lobeck p. 235) At.bGKovpoL, opObrepov AtbaKopoi. It is 
 true that he adds yeXdaeis ovv rovs avv ry v X^yovras. But he must have known 
 that both were right, since Plato and Thucydides (Lobeck) use the form at which 
 he says his readers may laugh as not being the usual Attic one. 
 
 3 [2776 a] i.e. for example, (1) avrod coming before the article and the noun, avrov 
 i] Ke<j>a.\ri, as distinct from (2) the possessive genitive in the order usual in the 
 Synoptists and in the LXX i) Ke<pa\ri avrov, and from (3) the very rare emphatic 
 genitive 7/ avrov K€<pa\r), see 2558. It may be in some slight degree illustrated 
 by "me" and "to me" in English, where "me" may be either emphatic or 
 unemphatic ("Give me the book," or "Give me the book"), but "to me" is 
 necessarily emphatic ("Give the book to me"). 
 
 601 
 
[2777] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 lock] ? " the jailer replies " you must just drink it off and walk about, 
 till you feel a weight in your legs (ecus dv aov /3apos eV tois aneXeac 
 yivrjTai) " : also Symp. 2 1 5 e where it is parallel to the unemphatic 
 dativus commodi fx.01, " When I am in the act of listening to Socrates 
 my heart leaps up with more than corybantic bounds (ttoXv p,ot 
 p.dXXov rj tcov Kopv/3avTLO)i'T(i>v r/ re KapSia 7n]Ba.). . .but listening to 
 
 Pericles... I used to feel nothing like this, and [though my outer man 
 was moved] my soul was not [thus] instantaneously whirled away 
 (ot>Se TeOopvftrjro jxov rj if/vx>]) ■ ■ ■ ■" It might fairly be called a genitimis 
 commodi or iucommodi. So, the innkeeper in Aristophanes uses aov 
 and /jlov as genitivus iucommodi in Ra?i. 572 — 3 "How dearly I 
 should love to smash your grinders with a stone (cos ^rje'ws o\v aov 
 Xtdw Tots yofxtpLovs Ko-n-Toifx dv) for gobbling up in)- property (ols p.ov 
 
 Kare'cpayes to. cpopTta)," ib. 1198 — 1 200 ov kolt e7ros ye. aov Kviaw to 
 prj/A exacTTOi', aAA.a...a7ro XrjKvdiOV aov tovs 7rpoA.dyous Siacpdepw 1 . 
 
 [2777] The same use of an unemphatic pronoun, in order to 
 throw the emphasis on other words in the context, is noticeable in 
 the position of tre in adjurations, Soph. Phil. 468 7rpo's vvv ae 7raTpds 
 . . . iKi'ovfxai, Oed. C. 1333 7rpds vvv ere Kprji'dv. ..alrdi. The speaker 
 merely touches the personality and passes from it to dwell on some 
 circumstance of the person. It is particularly convenient where 
 more than one noun is connected with the pronoun, as in the 
 sarcastic Athenian utterance to the poor trustful Melians (Thuc. 
 v. 105) "But as for your fanciful way of looking to Lacedaemonians, 
 which makes you trust that their fear of disgrace will force them to 
 help you — while congratulating your innocence we do not envy 
 
 [your] insanity (paxapio-avTes vpwv to direipoKaKOv ov t,7]Xovp.ev to 
 u(f>pov)." 
 
 [2778] The vernacular possessive is a frequent characteristic of 
 Epictetus. The following shews that p,ov and aov for example are 
 used, not to mean "belonging to me, or to you," but to emphasize 
 the context, while merely indicating the personality: — i. 4. 13 2i> ovv 
 
 ii'TavOa p.01 8ei£6v aov Trjv irpoKoirr'/v. KaOdvep, el dOXrjrrj 81eA.eyop.77i', 
 Aet£oV p.01 tovs oipous- etra eXeyev eVeii'os, T8e p-ov rovs d/Vn^pas. 1 he 
 preceding context is about " progress," TrpoKmrrj. The student has 
 
 1 [2776/'] In Aristoph. Ran. 1201 d-rro \ijkv61ov; av: tcws e/uotfs; would 
 perhaps be an exaggeration of the true punctuation, but it would be truer than 
 Dindorfs d. \t)kv0iov av t. {.; The av is initial, emphatic, and insulting, as 
 in il>. 1 20 i ioov, av 5ef^eis; 
 
 602 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2779] 
 
 boasted of his progress — "in Chrysippus." So many treatises! He 
 can now read Chrysippus by himself ! Epictetus replies, I don't 
 want progress " in Chrysippus " but progress in right thought and 
 right action. " Do you, then, in these points shew me your progress." 
 In what follows (8eit6v p.ot tovs w/aovs) he could not say Sei£oV p.01 aov 
 t. o). because that would have emphasized the two pronouns by 
 juxtaposition (2564, 2783). So he omits o-ov. But here the unem- 
 phatic juoi helps to throw emphasis on toijs oj/aovs. Similarly in the 
 pseudo-athlete's answer the emphasis is thrown forward from the 
 unemphatic "my" to the following noun, "Look at my dumb-bells." 
 The poor creature has no acts on view — only preparations for acting. 
 Similarly in i. 18. 16 dird>\co-d p.ov to Ifidnov is parallel to d\y<2 ttjv 
 K€cf>a\tjv where no pronoun is inserted 1 . 
 
 [2779] The ordinary possessive genitive after the noun, in 
 Epictetus, is more emphatic, or, at all events, not unemphatic. It 
 maybe illustrated by i. i. 23 "'I will bind you.' 'Man! what do 
 you mean? Me? My leg you will bind (to o-kc'Aos f*-ov 8770-cis)," — 
 that is, " the leg that belongs to me, a possession of mine, not my very 
 self." In the next sentence, he does not say j^v Trpoaipto-iv pov, 
 for that would be an admission that the " will," like the " leg," was a 
 mere possession ; so he continues, tt/v Trpoaipeo-a' Se ovS' 6 Ztvs 
 I'lK-rjaou Svvarai, "But the will not even Zeus can conquer'-." "The 
 leg my possession " resembles " the corpse my possession " — which 
 cannot be expressed in English — in i. 19. 9 "'I will shew you I 
 am [your] master.' ' You ? Impossible ! — But you are master of 
 my corpse (tov vexpov Se p.ov Kvpios el). Take it ! ' " A querulous 
 egoist complains i. 6. 30 cu fxv£ou p.ov piovcri, " my nose is running," 
 and Epictetus, imagining himself an egoist, says (ii. 18. 17) "I stroke 
 my [<?«'//] head (Karaif/iZ tt/v Kopv<prjv /jlov) and say, ' Well done, 
 Epictetus ! ' Again, the exceptional creature says to its censor 
 iii. 1.23" Don't require me to be like the rest. Or, if you must blame, 
 blame my [inherent] nature (tt/ (pvaei /aov) 3 ." 
 
 1 Comp. i. 4. 24 and 29, i. 11. 4, and many more instances in Schenkl's Index 
 under "Eyw. 
 
 - [2779a] The "will," or Trpoaipetris, is the man himself, iii. 1. 40 "You are 
 not flesh, or hair, but will {irpoalpe<rts)," iv. 5. 11 "Are you a mere utensil? No, 
 you are will (oi), d\\a irpoalpeais)." 
 
 3 For instances of the possessive fiov after its noun, see Schenkl's Index, in 
 which there are fewer of these than of the vernacular genitive. 
 
 603 
 
[2780] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 [2780] The vernacular and unemphatic avrov and avrwv is 
 also frequent in Epictetus, and, in some of these instances, 
 emphasis appears to be laid on what precedes as well as on 
 what follows, e.g. i. 19. 4 "What! Do I not attend to my 
 donkey ? Do I not wash his feet (ov viima avrov rovs 7ro'Sa?) ? " 
 ii. 8. 26 " Does the statue of Zeus in Olympia draw up [his] eyebrow ? 
 
 On the contrary his look is fixed (dAAa irtir-qytv avrov to /3\eufj.a)"— 
 
 where the parallelism shews the pronoun to be unemphatic, iii. 20. 14 
 " what will you make of sickness ? I will reveal its nature (Sei£w at/r^s 
 rrjv <f>vo-iv)," iii. 22. 75 "See how low (7roti) we are bringing down our 
 Cynic ! after what a fashion we are despoiling him of his kingdom 
 (7ra>s avrov tt/v fiao-iXtiav d^aipov/xeOa) ! ' 
 
 1 [2780 a] Comp. ii. 18. 22 8iaira.l£ovra avrov rr\v iipav, ii. 21. 15 and many 
 other instances in Schenkl : iii. 5. 12 'AAV t) p.rjTrjp fxov tt)v KecpaXijv voctovvtos 
 ov Kparrjo-tL. "Aindi rolvvv -rrpos rr\v p.r]T€pa. is placed by Schenkl as an instance of 
 precedent p-ov, but the Latin has " mea mater." Probably Schenkl is right, and, 
 as tt\v p-yrepa means "[your] mother,"' so 7) pv t VP means "[my] mother" — 
 " Mother will not hold my head when it aches." 
 
 [2780<^] Eor r)p.G>v as a vernacular genitive see Epict. ii. 12. 11 — 12 "We are 
 absolutely unable to move him by these means, and consequently, as is natural, 
 perceiving this inability of ours (ravr-qs i]p.u>i> rrjs aovvapias) we give the matter 
 up," where rjpQv is so unemphatic that Mrs Carter's transl. omits it in English. 
 The difference between the moderately emphatic t/mw" m 0L iroXtrai 7]p.wi> and the 
 vernacular and unemphatic TjpQv in TjpGiv ol woXirai is neatly illustrated in ii. 20. 
 22 — 4 where a philosopher is first requested to prove that religion is a good thing 
 "in order that the citizens of our state (ol iroXirai i)p.Qv) may honour the divine 
 Being": then, after being thanked for the proof, he offers to prove the contrary, 
 and having done so, is thanked ironically, thus, "Well done, Mr Philosopher! 
 You have done a service to our citizens (rjpu>f rovs iro\Lras)" — almost equivalent to 
 "you have done the citizens a service for us, or, at our request." Another instance 
 of the unemphatic rjp.Qi> when citizens speak of "our city" — in a context that has 
 previously implied "our" — contains also the unemphatic nov and the emphatic to 
 ifti. The philosopher is describing the castle of his mind, iv. 5. 24 — 5 "These 
 reptiles [dvopdiroda ravra, i.e. the mocking world] do not know in the least either 
 who I am or where I find the Good and the Evil (ovot nov /xov to dyadbv ko.1 to 
 ko,k6v): for they have no way of getting at what is really mine (otl ov 7rpo<ro5os 
 avroU irpbs to. ip.d). Just so, those who dwell in a strong city mock at their 
 besiegers: ['Yesterday,' they say, 'things might have been different,] but, as it is 
 (vvv 5'), what trouble these fellows are taking— and all for nothing! Our wall 
 is secured (d<r<pa\ts icTiv i)p.Qi> t6 reixos), we have food for any length of time, and 
 every preparation made.' 
 
 I 2780 r I 'Tfxuif is a vernacular genitive following an emphatic bfUiS in iii. 16. 13 
 "The physicians send away their chronic patients for change of air (a\\oi> dtpa). 
 And they 'lo right. You, too, [must do the same]. Make a thorough change of 
 habits, fix your fundamental conceptions (irri^aTe vpQv rds iVoX^i/'eis)."' 
 
 604 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2781] 
 
 [2781] This vernacular genitive may be frequent in some authors 
 and rare in others. In the LXX, for example, in such language as 
 "I know their sorrows, their imagination, thy rebellion and thy stiff 
 neck, thy pride and the naughtiness of thine heart, your thoughts, 
 their works and their thoughts, your manifold transgressions," the 
 possessives are all represented (Ex. iii. 7, Deut. xxxi. 21, 27, 1 S. xvii. 
 28, Job xxi. 27 (Symm.), Is. lxvi. 18, Amos v. 12) by the ordinary 
 genitive. But in Rev. ii. 9 " I know thy tribulation and poverty," 
 ii. to '• I know thy works and love and...," and iii. 1, 8, 15 " I know 
 thy works," the vernacular genitive is used. It follows that in N.T. 
 books in which LXX style is prominent — e.g. in the Acts and some 
 portions of Luke that are in the literary style, or else moulded on 
 the LXX — the vernacular genitive must not be expected 1 . 
 
 [2780^] But vfiQv is emphasized by antithesis in the following contrast drawn 
 by Epictetus between men of the world and his pupils ("you") in their present 
 undeveloped state. He asks them, first, whether they have the power of Socrates, 
 to twist people round to his own view, iii. 16. 6 — 7 "How could you possibly 
 have it (irbdev vp2v)l Nay, it cannot be but the men of the world will twist yozt 
 round. Why then are they your superiors (4 new 01 u/i&v lax v f > ° Te P 0i f 2564, 2783)? 
 Because they talk their rotten [stuff] from convictions [of the heart]. But you 
 [preach] your healthy [doctrine] from the lips, for which cause it is nerveless 
 and dead ; and it is sickening to listen to your sermons [vp-Civ rovs irpoTpewTiKovs). 
 Thus you are vanquished by the men of the world." There is an intervening verb 
 between ripuv and its noun in the following, and ri/xuv is emphasized by an 
 antithesis carried on from the context which describes how, when we were children 
 and fell down, "the nurse would not scold us but would beat the stone," iii. 19. 5 
 '• Again [in boyhood] if we don't find a meal ready, the moment we come from the 
 bath, the private tutor never dreams of checking our greediness (ovdewod' rjpQv 
 KaratTreWei ri]v iiridvp.lav 6 vaibaywybs) but gives the cook a Hogging." 
 
 1 [2781 a] The non-use of the vernacular genitive may sometimes result in a 
 want of clearness as to emphasis. For example, Luke uses the ordinary possessive 
 sometimes where it is certainly unemphatic Acts i. 9 fiXewbvrwv avrwv en-qpOr) k. 
 ve<pfKrj inre\a(3ev avrbv airb twv b<p8a.\p.uv avru)u, i. 18 e^exi'^V navTa ra o-rr\dyxva. 
 clutov, but sometimes where it might well be emphatic as in i. 19 dicrre KXrjOrivai... 
 7-77 SLaX^KTif avrQv, i. 20 (LXX) tt)v eTnuKoiri-jv avTOu Xa/3erw erepos. [Of course 
 p.ov in Acts i. 8 Zcreade p-ov p.dpTupes is quite distinct from the vernacular genitive. 
 There is no article, and p.ov p.dprvpes is predicative.] 
 
 [2781 b] Contrast Rev. x. 9 wLKpavel gov tt\v koCKiov d\X' iv rip arbp.a.r'1 o~ov 
 ZcTai y\vKv, id. xiv. 18 irep-xj/ov aov to bpi-rravov to b£v, xviii. 4 — 5 €^e\t)aT€...iua /xtj 
 <TvvK0ivwvr)0"r)Te reus d^aprtats ai)r^?...ort eKoW-qd-qcrav ai'T^s at ap.apTiai d'xP' tou 
 ovpavov— all of which allude to LXX, but the reader will find no vernacular 
 genitives in the LXX passages indicated by W.H. (comp. 2562 a). 
 
 [2781c] In the Gospel, Lk. has the vernacular genitive in vii. 48 acptuvraL 
 crov at a.fj.apTlai, xv. 30 ovtos b Ka.Ta.<pay<J]v cov tov (ilov, xvi. 6 5e£ai ffov to. 
 
 605 
 
[2782J NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 [2782] In the Synoptists, the vernacular genitive manifestly 
 throws emphasis on the context in Mk ix. 24 fioijdei jnou rfj dino-TLa, 
 
 and probably in Mt. xvi. 18 £7ri tolvty) rfj Trirpa oiKoZop.rjo'iii fxov ttjv 
 iKKX-ncriav. In Mt. ii. 2 (i8op.ei> yap auToG tov darepa, the Magi 
 
 assume that " the [great blazing] star" pointed to the expected King, 
 so that they ask, in effect, " Where is the King ? Eor we have 
 seen the star that is his sign." These, and three instances in Luke 
 (2781 e), are peculiar to single evangelists. See also 2558 a. 
 
 [2783] In the Pauline epistles the vernacular /xov is frequent when 
 the Apostle assumes that his disciples will be kind to him but wishes 
 them to be kind in a certain way and so subordinates the personal 
 pronoun to the noun of circumstance, Phil. ii. 2 " co?nplete my joy 
 (ir. [xov ttjv xapuv)," ib. iv. 14 " sharing in my affliction (<r. p.ov rfj 
 8\iif/ei)," Col. iv. 18 "remember my bonds (p.. p.ov twv Seap.wv)." 
 When he uses vjjlwv thus, there is sometimes an additional reason, 
 namely, that (besides throwing emphasis on the context) it is the 
 common precedent genitive of a number of nouns Col. ii. 5 /3AeVwi' 
 vliwv rr]v Ta$tv kolI to... Of course, however, where there is antithesis — 
 and especially where two pronouns are in juxtaposition (2564) — the 
 precedent pronoun may be emphatic 1 Cor. ix. 1 1 p.eya d r^eis vp.<Sv 
 
 to. aapKiKa. 8epio~op-tv ; 
 
 ypafi/jLara rep. xvi. 7. All these are peculiar to Luke, and in what may be called 
 his vernacular style. Lk. xix. 35 (wipixf/avTes avTuv rd ifidria is parall. to Mk xi. 7 
 eiripdXXovaiv aurw rd 1/j.d.Tia avrCov (v.r. cavrCiv and avrov), Mt. xxi. 7 eir€07]Kav eV 
 ainCiv ra. ifidria (v.r. +<xutu>v). This must he discussed in a future treatise. 
 
 [2781^] The vernacular possessive introducing a group of nouns is followed by 
 the ordinary possessive in Rev. ii. 19 olod aov to. Zpya ko.1 ttjv d. nai ttjv it. koX ttjv 
 5. /ecu ttjv viro/j.ovr)v aov /ecu rd <=pya aov rd e : o~x ara irXdova t€>v irpdiTwv, where 
 (1) the writer could not well have said ecu <rov , and (2) the twofold repetition (k. t. 
 v. aov k. t. L aov) shews that emphasis is intended — "the patience that you shew 
 and the deeds tliat you do." The vernacular is also followed by the ordinary 
 possessive in Rev. x. 9 koX iriKpavu aov ttjv KOiXlav dXV ev rep crrd/mari crov tcrrai 
 y\vKv ojs p-^Xi, where the un emphatic crov throws the emphasis on TriKpave? and rrjv 
 KOiKlav, but the writer could not have said dXX' iv crov rw aropari, and besides he 
 wished to throw the emphasis on yXvicv u>s p.iXt. The two passages shew that the 
 unemphatic aov is not likely to be used after an unemphatic word. 
 
 1 (2783 a I 2 Pet. iii. 1—2 Tavrr^v rj5r]...5€VTipav vp.iv ypdcpw iiriaToXr)v, iv ah 
 dieyelpw v/xuiv tv vwopLvr/aci ttjv eiXiKpivr) didvoiav, pn'7)a0r)vai tCov Trpociprjpivwv prj- 
 fidruv viro tQjv dyiicv Trpo<()rjTwv /ecu 7-775 r£)v diroaroXuv vp.Qiv ivToXf/s rod KVpLov kci'l 
 awTrjpos is such amazing Greek thai it is hard to say what precisely the writer meant. 
 But perhaps the first bfuuv is under-emphasized in order to emphasize the following 
 words. As for the second bfiuv, R.V. lenders it "your Apostles" an astonishing 
 
 606 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2784J 
 
 [2784] Space does not admit of a fuller discussion of the Pauline 
 distinction between the vernacular and the ordinary possessive 
 genitive. It is sufficient to have shewn that the former is characteristic 
 of Aristophanes, Paul, Epictetus, and, generally, of what may be 
 described as " spoken Greek." Often, it cannot be expressed in 
 English. But it adds greatly to the force of the Fourth Gospel, 
 and John's abundant use of it as well as of the ordinary genitive 
 should protect us from the danger of imagining that he uses the two 
 promiscuously. It is an instance of what Winer-Moulton calls " an 
 effort to throw an unemphatic word into the shade 1 " and what Blass 
 calls " the tendency which from early times exists in Greek as in 
 cognate languages, to bring unemphasized (enclitic) pronouns and 
 the like as near as possible to the beginning of the sentence (though 
 not to put them actually at the beginning) 2 ." 
 
 phrase. To take it as meaning ''your Lord and Saviour" would perhaps not be 
 much more astonishing. 
 
 1 [2784 a] Winer-Moulton p. 689. But in view of its use by the jailer in the 
 Phaedo and the inn-keepers in the Frogs, and in the perfectly spontaneous little 
 dialogues of Epictetus, and in the uncouth inartistic effusions of the author (or 
 authors) of Revelation, and in some of the most impassioned parts of the im- 
 passioned epistles of St Paul — combined with its extraordinary prevalence in the 
 Fourth Gospel, a work that breathes of a most divine inspiration — "effort" does 
 not seem to be the happiest of expressions for this very natural construction. Nor 
 is the unemphatic word exactly ''■thrown into the shade." It is in the shade, but 
 "the shade" is its natural place. For, being really not so much a genitive of 
 possession as a.genitivus commodi, it takes the place of the dativus commodi. 
 
 2 [2784(5] Blass p. 288 quotes Rom. i. 11 iVa tl peradw x"-P ia l J - a L V" y Trvevfiari- 
 kov, Acts xxvi. 24 to. iroWd ae ypappara eis paviav iripirpiiru, Heb. iv. 1 1 IV a /jltj 
 ii> ti2 avrQ tls inroodypa.Ti 71-6077, I Cor. v. 1 wcrre y waited Tiva. rod irarpbs exet-v. 
 On this last, he says that the object is "also to emphasize both yvv. and Trarpos.'' 
 I should extend this remark to his other instances, in all of which the context seems 
 to me to be emphasized by the unemphatic pronoun ; and this applies to Jn ix. 6 
 €TrixP L<Jev a-VTod tov irrfkbv evi tovs 6cpda\p.ovs, if (2569 c) the text is sound. 
 
 [2784 <] Blass includes xiii. 6 <rv p.ov viirreLS tovs Tr65as, in which however, 
 owing to the juxtaposition of pronouns (2564, 2783), pov (as well as trv) appears to 
 me to be emphasized. So too is v/ulQv by the context in Mt. xxiii. 8 {bis) " But be 
 not ye (vp.e1s) called Rabbi, for one is your teacher (ds yap ecmv v/xuiv 6 
 5i5cwKa\os) " 
 
 [2784 d~\ Blass adds " Lk. xviii. 18 Kal iir^pihr-rjuev tis avrov a.px uv X^yw. But 
 here again there is no obligation to use this order of words : thus we have 2 Cor. 
 xi. 16 Ka.v ws &<ppova Se^acrde p.e, where no doubt the object was to give de^acrde the 
 prior position." I should rather be disposed to explain it by the preceding words, 
 p.7] rts p.e do^r] acppova elvai, el 5e p.rjye kclv ws &<ppova 5ei;ao~de pie, 'iva nayw. ..the 
 personality being first under-emphasized and then, to some extent, emphasized, 
 
 607 
 
[2785] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 On the "epistolary aorist " (2691 rf) 
 
 [2785] Jerome comments on Gal. vi. n thus (Migne) : " Videte 
 qualibus litteris scripsi vobis ; non quod grandes litterae fuerint (hoc 
 quippe in Graeco sonat 707X1*01?), sed quod suae manus essent eis 
 nota vestigia." This (i) renders tt^Aikois by "qualibus" " of what 
 sort," (2) appears to deny that the "letters" were "great," or at any 
 rate that the "greatness" was the point to which attention was 
 called, (3) asserts that they were written by the Apostle's "own hand." 
 Later on, (4) he illustrates (or quotes 1 an illustration of) " mea raanu " 
 from Jerem. xxxvii. 2 " sermo Dei qui factus est in manu Jeremiae " 
 (where "manu" does not mean lit. "hand") and says (or quotes a 
 saying) that St Paul writes "grandes litteras " to-day to everybody — 
 giving both to "hand" and to "great" a spiritual significance — 
 "magnae sunt litterae quia in litteris magnus est sensus." 
 
 [2786] Between these two distinct interpretations Migne's edition 
 of Jerome inserts the following, " In hoc loco vir apprime nostris 
 temporibus eruditus 2 , miror quomodo rem ridiculam locutus sit 3 . 
 Paulus, inquit, Hebraeus erat et Graecas litteras nesciebat. Et quia 
 necessitas expetebat, ut manu sua epistolam subscriberet 4 , contra 
 consuetudinem curvos tramites litterarum, vix magnis apicibus 
 exprimebat : etiam in hoc suae ad Galatas indicia caritatis ostendens, 
 quod propter illos id quoque quod non poterat, facere conaretur. 
 Grandibus ergo Paulus litteris scripsit epistolam, quia sensus erat 
 grandis in illis...." If the text is correct, Jerome appears to be 
 sneering at, and parodying, the view held by Chrysostom, who 
 
 connects St Paul's writing with yvay KoiaOrj, arayKai'ws, tjvayKaaOrjv 
 
 (Jer. "necessitas") and who represents St Paul as saying "I do not 
 know how to write very well (arno-Ta) " — which Jerome parodies by 
 saying that he "attempted to do what he was not able to do." In 
 Jerome's last quoted sentence ("grandibus ergo Paulus... sensus erat 
 
 " receive me [as being your Father in Christ] that I, too, may....'* Comp. ib. xi. 
 1 6(pe\of avdxayde /xov nixpbv tl acppoavvw dXXct /ecu avix e<! ^^ M°"» where there is 
 first under-emphasis and then emphasis. 
 
 1 Most probably it is a quotation, and not Jerome's own view (see 2786>, but 
 the passage is very obscure. 
 
 - [2786rt| Migne has the following note "Quanquam hoc ferme Chrysostomus 
 sentiat, quod Hieron. impugnat, ilium tamen hie denotari non puto." Migne gives 
 no reasons for this opinion. 
 
 :; WetSt. omits the italicised words. 
 
 4 Wetst. has "scriberet." 
 
 608 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2788] 
 
 grandis ") the " ergo " introduces obscurity. It may mean " conse- 
 quently, as this 'vir eruditus ' says," or "consequently, I suppose, 
 this ' vir eruditus ' would infer." It can hardly mean " consequently, 
 as I infer from my own statement of the facts." 
 
 [2787] Jerome repeatedly says that the Apostle began to write 
 with his own hand from Gal. vi. n. But his evidence is discredited 
 ( i ) by the fact that he mistranslates one of the two words (-n-qXiKois;) 
 on which the argument turns. (2) He may have been misled as to 
 eypaipa by the Latin epistolary usage of the past tense. (3) There is 
 a tone of bitterness about his remarks indicating that the question 
 had become controversial, and not auguring well for a dispassionate 
 conclusion based on evidence. 
 
 [2788] Lightfoot (ad loc.) asks "Does he (i.e. St Paul), as 
 Chrysostom and others have supposed, point to the rude ill-formed 1 
 characters... as though he gloried in his imperfect knowledge of 
 Greek ? " I can find nothing in Migne's or Cramer's version 
 indicating that Chrysostom — whose name I have italicised above — - 
 supposed the apostle to have "gloried" in anything of the kind. 
 Cramer prints something of the kind as from Theodorus, but even his 
 words (2691 d) ovre atrbs IpvOpia do not refer to any such " imperfect 
 knowledge." Chrysostom says, ovSev d\\o alvLTTerai, aAX' on airros 
 
 eypaij/e txjv e7n.0-T0A.r7v airaaav o TroWrjs yvqu-LOT-qros (see Steph. and 
 
 comp. preceding yvrfcriwv "relations") o-qp-dov rjv i.e. "a sign of great 
 natural affection" and he adds that Paul wrote with his own hand, 
 partly to refute those who asserted that he did not really condemn 
 the Judaizing doctrine but partly " oioing to love (5Y dyd.Trr)v)." He 
 concludes, to (al. t<5) 0€ " TrrjXiKOis " i/xoi 8okcI ov to /u.e'ye#os, aAAa 
 T7)v apLOpcpLCLV Twr ypa/x/xaroiv ifJ.<paivow Xeyetv (al. \eyei) /xovovov^i 
 Ae'ywv, otl ovSk apuTTa ypdrfteiv etScos, o/xcus -qvay Kd.ad'qv hi i/xavrov 
 ypai/'cu ojctt€ (TVKocpavTwv ip.<ppa!;ai to (TTOfxa. These words do not 
 
 deny that the "letters" were "large"; they merely suggest that 
 the Apostle emphasized, not their largeness but their uneouthness, 
 saying in effect " I cannot write [in Greek characters] very well, but 
 yet I was constrained to write with my own hand so as to stop the 
 
 1 [2788(7] Lightf. says, " 7T7?Xikois denotes size only, not irregularity." But it 
 does not need much imagination to see that a large 0, or 0, or C, written by a 
 Jew, unaccustomed to the round characters of Greek writing, was likely to be 
 "irregular" in proportion to its "largeness" — very much like a child's "large 
 hand" in English, which he is taught to write "large" because the "largeness" 
 brings out the "irregularity" that has to be corrected. 
 
 A. vi. 609 39 
 
[2789] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 mouth of slanderers." The whole of the context implies that there 
 is no "glorying," but an affectionate allusion to his inability to write 
 Greek in anything but a laborious, uncouth " large hand." 
 
 [2789] In Jerome, the interpretation that explains 7tt;Aikois by 
 "grandis sensus " — supposing it to be, not Jerome's, but one 
 ridiculed by him — may be explained as part of the view adopted by 
 Chrysostom and perhaps borrowed by Chrysostom from Origen, 
 whose commentary on this Epistle was freely used by Jerome. 
 Origen may have said that St Paul's " large letters " were not o?ily 
 literally large but also a sign of the largeness of his affection and 
 spiritual sympathy with the Galatians. Chrysostom expresses the 
 same thing, only without this symbolism. Jerome literalises and 
 laughs at it. If Origen had taken Jerome's view of the epistolary 
 aorist, it seems probable that, on a point of this controversial 
 character, the Latin Father would have appealed to one Greek 
 Father against the rest. At the outset of his Galatian commentary, 
 Jerome expressly says that he has read that of Origen 1 . In one 
 passage he extracts nearly two columns from it continuously 2 . In 
 another he quotes a passage of some length without acknowledg- 
 ment 3 . In a third, he assails the opinions of Origen 4 . Not 
 improbably Jerome is here again dissenting from Origen as well as 
 Chrysostom — under cover of a " vir apprime nostris temporibus 
 eruditus," who, whether he is Chrysostom or not, appears to have 
 expressed Chrysostom's view with considerable verbal similarity. It 
 may be added that when Jerome wrote this commentary (388 a.d.) 
 he had only recently commenced his long residence in Palestine 
 (which began in 386 a.d.) 5 . 
 
 1 [2789^] Jerome pp. 369 — 70 (Migne pp. 332 — 3) "Quid igitur, ergo (? ego) 
 stultus aut temerarius qui id pollicear quod illo (? ille) non potuit ? Minime. Quin 
 potius in eo, ut mihi videor, cautior atque timidior quod, imbecillitatem viriuni 
 mearum sentiens, Origenis Commcntarios sum secutus. Scripsit enim ille vir in 
 Kpistolam Pauli ad Galatas quinque proprie volumina, et...tractatus quoque varios 
 ...legi haec omnia." 
 
 '-' Migne pp. 434 — 6. 
 
 3 See Migne's note, p. 391 n., " Haec ex Origine [sic) pene ad verbum descrip- 
 sit," and Migne appends more than a dozen lines from Origen. 
 
 4 See Migne's note, p. 349 n., " Haec, ut et inferior totus contextus, Origenem 
 ejusque asseclas verissime petunt : hanc enim ille (sc. Origenes) blasphemiam 
 incurrit...." 
 
 Diet. Christ. Biogr. " llieionymus," vol. iii. p. 4S. 
 
 6lO 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2792] 
 [2790] Wetst. on Gal. vi. 1 1 quotes " Plotinus de Porphyrio, 
 
 kypacpe 8k ovSe eis koiAAos a7TOTU7rou/X€VOS to. ypap.p.a.Ta, ovre euo-77/Aws ras 
 o~vAAa/3as oViipuii', ovt€ t»/s 6p8oypa(f>Las (ppoi'Ti^wv, aAAu p.6vov tov vov 
 
 e^d/xei'os," and Suetonius says of Augustus (§ 88) " Orthographiam, id 
 est formulam rationemque scribendi a grammaticis institutam non 
 adeo custodit ac videtur eorum potius sequi opinionem qui perinde 
 scribendum ac loquainur existitnent..." 
 On aAAoc in Epictetus and John (2730) 
 
 [2791] The use of aAAosin v. 32 aAAos iarlv 6 ixapTvpuJv to mean 
 the Father may be illustrated by its use in Epictetus to denote God, 
 whom he regards as the Friend and Father of all good men, 
 providing for His children all that they need, so that the philosopher 
 may say (iii. 13. 13 — 14) "Now no evil can possibly befall me... all is 
 peace, all is calm, . . .Another, who makes [my wants] His care, 
 supplies food, Another [not myself, gives me] raiment, Another gave 
 [me] perceptions, Another gave [me] [mental] anticipations : and 
 when at any moment I find Him stopping this continual supply of 
 the necessaries [of life] [then, I know] He is sounding the retreat, 
 He has opened (rjvo^e) the door and He is saying, 'Come'" ; iii. 1. 
 42 — 3 "But mark what Socrates says...' Equip thy will, eradicate 
 base convictions.' ' What about the body, then ? ' ' [Deal with it] 
 according to its nature. These things Another has made His care ; 
 leave them in His hands.' " 
 
 [2792] This Being, whom Epictetus (iii. 3. 1 — 10) reverentially 
 calls " Another," "AAAos, is not Different, "ETepos, from men — any 
 more than Caesar is "different" from his subjects. He is the Good 
 (to dyaOov) and He has stamped His image on " goodness " as His 
 "current coin (v6p.iap.a)" and has given this current coin to man so 
 that he can keep it if he pleases. Not even Zeus can take it from 
 him. Man can keep it as Zeus keeps it '. As the banker or the 
 greengrocer cannot refuse the legal "good coin," namely, Cpesar's 
 coinage, so, in the spiritual world, the bad and the good cannot refuse 
 that coinage which represents, for them, " the good 2 ." If a bad man 
 
 1 [2792a] Epict. iii. 3. 5 — 10 ovtw yap neipvKa' tovt6 fxoi to po/xiafia de'duKev 
 6 Geos. ,.4k Tavrqs yap tt}s ouaias rls dvvarai eKfiaXeiv ; ovo , 6 Zei;s. ovde yap ijdiXricrev. 
 d\X' e7r' ifiol avro evoirjcre, koX HduKev olov el^ec avros — atcwXvTov, av av ay Kaa tov, 
 aTrapairboicFTOv . 
 
 2 [2792 b~\ Epict. iii. 3. 3 cis yap to tov Kaiaapos vop.iap.a ovk i^eaTiv awoboKi- 
 fidaai. Tip TpairefiTr) ovde Tip XaxavoiruiXr), d\X' ac delays — O^Xet. ov 6iXei — irpoecrOai 
 ainbv del to &vt' ai/Tov TruiXovfMevov, ovtws 'ix eL Kat ^ 7r ' T V S x l /v X'i''- 
 
 611 39 — 2 
 
[2793] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 chooses a bad coinage — he is constrained by the Law to take that. 
 A thievish proconsul comes into your province; you capture him with 
 money : an adulterer, with women. They must perforce take the 
 bribe. To a sportsman you offer a fine horse or hound: "Cursing 
 and groaning [at his fate] he will sell you for it what you will. For 
 Another constrains him in his heart (eawOev), He that hath appointed 
 this curretit coin (6 to voixin-fxa tovto Tera^ajs)'." Elsewhere (i. 25. 13), 
 when the philosopher is asked by a controversialist to "suppose 
 himself" to be "in evils (iv /caKots)," he replies that he cannot suppose 
 this — meaning that he, a son of God (2799 e), never deserted by 
 God, cannot be in real "evils" — and he phrases it thus, "Another 
 prevents me." And, in case any of his pupils should be brought 
 before kings and rulers to testify for the truth, he prepares them 
 thus : " When thou art going into [the judgment hall of] some one 
 in power remember that there is also Another noting fro?n above all 
 that goes on, and that thou must please Him rather than the man 
 in power 2 ." 
 
 [2793] We pass to the Johannine use of aAAos. In xiv. 16 "If 
 ye love me ye will keep my commandments : and I will request the 
 Father and he will give you another Paraclete (aAXov -rrapaKk-qTov owaa 
 v/alv)" SS has "another, the Paraclete." A Paraclete (1720) meant 
 a "friend in court," an "alter ego," an unpaid advocate. "We know 
 not how to pray as we ought," says the Epistle to the Romans (viii. 
 26), " but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us " ; and Mark 
 
 1 [2792 c] Epict. iii. 3. i3*AXXos yap clvt'ov dvayKa^ei ?<rw$ei> 6 rd vo/J-HTfia tovto 
 TfTaxws. Schweig. " Is alius, quem dicit (cf. iii. 1. 43 n.) Deus est ; qui talem 
 naturam constituit hominis ut qua in re is suum Bonum ponit, ei rei non possit non 
 caetera omnia postponere... Est autem hominis culpa, si ibi Bonum suum ponit ubi 
 Deus illucl non posuit." 
 
 - [2792 f/] Epict. i. 30. 1. Comp. Acts iv. 19 "But Peter and John answered 
 and said unto them," i.e. to the Jewish rulers sitting in judgment, "Whether it be 
 right in the sight of God to hearken unto you rather than unto God, judge ye." 
 Steph. (who indeed does not quote any of these instances) does not appear to 
 contain any use of dXXos in this Epictetian sense. It can hardly lie Hebraic. 
 "Other" and "another," in O.T., when connected with God or man, are 
 generally used in a bad sense, e.g. " they followed after other Hods," "my glory 
 I will not give to another." "there is no other God" etc. The notion of '■'another" 
 world, "another" judgment, might naturally be developed in Gk literature out 
 of such passages as Aesch. Supp. 22S — 31 ovM fir] V ' AiSov Oavtliv $vyr) fidTaiov 
 curias 7r/)di;as Ta.de. KaKel dac&fet. Tdfj.ir\aKT)fxa6' , <i>s \6yos, Zees dXXos iv Ka/xovaiv 
 iVraTas okas. Hut I have found no such use of fiXXos. 
 
 6l2 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2794] 
 
 has, " It is not ye that are the speakers but the Holy Spirit 1 ." Hence 
 a Christian, speaking in the reverential language of Epictetus, might 
 say, " I do not know how to pray, Another teaches me," or " I do not 
 know how to speak before princes and rulers, Another speaks for me 
 and in me." Paraclete, or Parclete, was recognised as an Aramaic 
 word and may have been used sometimes as a proper name, some- 
 times as a common noun. This is the first place where it is 
 mentioned in N.T. and the meaning, according to SS, may be 
 paraphrased thus : " If ye do your part, ye will not be left unaided. 
 The Father will send you Another, a Spirit like yours but beyond 
 yours, [as] Paraclete [to you]." This removes a difficulty that 
 attends the ordinary translation " He will give you another Paraclete 
 besides myself" or "in the place of myself." For the latter assumes 
 that Christ has called Himself a Paraclete in the previous context. 
 This is not the case. Without any such previous mention it is 
 difficult to attach any great force to "another" in the sense "another 
 than myself" : but it is both appropriate and forcible if it means 
 " other than yourselves " — promising the disciples that they will not be 
 left to their own unaided efforts-. 
 
 [2794] Origen quotes xiv. 16 thus (Lorara. x. 127, about the 
 "well" in Numb. xxi. 16) " Et rursus tertium puto videri puteum 
 posse, cognitionem Spiritus Sancti. Alius enim et ipse est a Patre, 
 et Filio, sicut et de ipso nihilominus in Evangelio dicitur Mittet 
 vobis Pater alium paracletmn spiritum veritatis" where " mittet " 
 represents Swo-et and "Pater" is supplied from the context. Before 
 this, Origen says, "Alius enim a Patre Filius, et non idem Filius qui 
 
 1 [2793a] Mk xiii. n, parall. Mt. x. 20 "but the Spirit of your Father that 
 speaketh in you," parall. Lk. xii. 12 " For the Holy Spirit shall teach you..." (see 
 Sy nop t icon p. 127 a). 
 
 2 [2793 b] The passage is quoted inaccurately (Resch) by Ephrem, Epiph. 
 (thrice) and Eusebius. To his instances add Origen (Lomm. x. 127) "mittet 
 vobis alium paracletum. " Chrys. and Nonnus both lay stress on aWov, as 
 meaning "another like myself," Chrys. ws ep.e, Nonn. Xpio-rip crvyyovov aWov 
 o/aouov. Chrys. also lays stress on it as indicating " the difference of hypostasis," 
 and he uses it against " those infected with the Sabellian disease." 
 
 [2793 c] The Greeks seem to have regarded Hercules as the type of "the 
 friend in need," and, besides calling a friend &\\os eyd), they had the proverb 
 #\Aos'HpaK\7?s, aXXos ovtos (? avrds). Comp. Aristot. Eth. Magn. ii. 15 (Weise) 
 aXXos outos'H. d\\os <pi\os (7)eyw, Eth. Eudein. vii. (viii.) 12 (Weise) 6 yap 0iXos 
 fiovKerai dvai, woirep 77 ira.potfj.ia. (p-qcriv, aXXos H., aXXos ovtos. Is there some 
 allusion to the story that Hercules helps those who help themselves? 
 
 613 
 
[2795] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 et Pater, sicut ipse in Evangeliis dick : Alius est qui et testimonium 
 de me dicit, Pater." For this, Lommatzsch's footnote refers the reader 
 to viii. 1 8 "I am he that beareth witness about myself and the 
 Father that sent me beareth witness." But more probably the reference 
 is to v. 32 "Another is he that beareth witness concerning me" and 
 "Pater," as in xiv. 16, is supplied for sense. It was shewn above 
 (2730) that aAAo? in v. 32 was taken by Chrysostom and Nonnus as 
 referring to John the Baptist, but by Cyprian as referring to the 
 Father. Origen, it would seem, takes the latter view. 
 
 [2795] In accordance with the difference of context, "another" 
 means "another than myself" in v. 32, and "Another than yourselves" 
 in xiv. 16 — in both cases, however, referring to a supernatural power. 
 In iv. 37 aAAos iarlv o aircifXDv Kai aAAos 6 #€pt'£wj/, the meaning of 
 aAAos is defined (1) by the following aAAos, (2) by the statement that 
 it is a "proverb." Hence aAAos is here correctly rendered "one," 
 and refers primarily to man and to the facts of social life, "one 
 soweth, another reapeth." But Christ goes on to say that this 
 worldly proverb is " really and genuinely true " in another interpreta- 
 tion, and that a spiritual one, namely referring to the spiritual harvest 
 (1727/). Hence it is not fanciful to see a latent allusion to the 
 invisible " Sower," the Holy Spirit : " He that soweth is Another 
 [one without whom all human sowing by prophets and apostles 
 would be vain]." 
 
 [2796] What is the meaning of "another" in the prediction of 
 Peter's martyrdom xxi. 18 "Another (aAAos) shall gird thee"? 
 Several authorities and mss. read the plural aAAoi. And indeed, if 
 the " girding " and the following words allude — as everyone admits — 
 to Peter's crucifixion, how can the plural be dispensed with ? Even 
 if one man could perform the binding, how could one man perform 
 the lifting up on the cross or the carrying to the cross 1 ? The sense 
 seems to demand, " Others shall bind thee round the loins and carry 
 thee where thou wouldst not be [i.e. to the cross]' 2 ." But what 
 if the evangelist here again uses "Another" to mean "One stronger 
 than thyself," namely, Christ, or the Spirit of Christ, which constrains 
 
 1 [2796(7] Oi'crei has been altered by N to iroi^ffovffiv, and by D to a-rrayovcriv 
 (comp. Mk xv. 22 fopovatv avrbv iwl rbv VoXyoOav t6ttoi>, where Mt.-Lk. differ). 
 
 - [2796/'] Nonnus, 'Ot/^ 5£ yripaoKiov Tavvaus ffto x^P ai avdyKri Kai ffe 
 irfpL(T(/)ly^ovatv d(/>fi5^es dvcpes a\\ot, Eh Tiva x&pov Ayovrcs ov ov ato 0vp.6s avwyei. 
 
 614 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2798] 
 
 the Apostle to go on the Path of the Cross 1 , and which "girds" him 
 for the conflict — as the Psalmist (xviii. 32) says, "It is God that 
 girdeth me zvith strength " ? 
 
 [2797] Chrysostom takes pains to explain the final words in 
 " shall carry thee where thou wouldest not" as implying " weakness 
 after the flesh." In the Martyrium Petri et Pauli and the Acta 
 Petri et Pauli, Peter is described as retiring from Rome, and Christ 
 as commanding him to return, in order to be crucified, saying 
 " Follow me " and " Fear not, because I am with thee 2 ." Thus, in 
 effect, Christ "girds" him with strength and "carries" him 
 "whither he would not." Perhaps, however, in the Johannine 
 tradition, there is no reference to a temporary weakness of the 
 Apostle just before his martyrdom, but the meaning of the whole is 
 an antithesis — rather implied than clearly expressed — between "doing 
 one's own will" in youth, and "doing the will of Another" in old 
 age : " When thou wast young thou wast strong [as thou didst 
 suppose] in thine own strength and didst walk according to thine own 
 will ; but when thou shalt be old thou shalt stretch out thy hands 
 [on the cross] :! , and Another shall gird thee [for thy martyrdom] and 
 shall cany thee [to the cross, obedient now to His will] where 
 according to thine own [present] will thou wouldest not (oi QiXui) be 
 carried 4 ." 
 On "authority" in Epictetus (2740—4) 
 
 [2798] Epictetus looks forward to the hour of death when he 
 will stretch his hands up to God and say " Because thou (emph.) 
 didst beget me I give thee thanks for the things thou gavest...take 
 them back again and dispose them in what place thou wilt : for they 
 were all thine; thou (emph.) hast given them to me." The things 
 
 1 Comp. 2 Cor. v. 14 "the love of Christ constraineth us" and other passages 
 in which Christ is said to "apprehend" i.e. take captive, or lead in triumph, His 
 disciples (Phil. iii. 12, 2 Cor. ii. 14). 
 
 - [2797 a] Acta Petri et Pauli % 82, sim. Mart. P. et P. § 61. 
 
 3 [2797(5] SS, "thou wilt lift up thine hands," suggests prayer rather than 
 crucifixion. The "spreading out of the hands" on the cross was regarded in 
 ancient times as typifying prayer or intercession. 
 
 4 [2797 c] Instead of OTToyoyeeAeic, D has OTToycyeeAeic (with a small oy 
 above SeAeic) which would mean "Another shall carry thee whither [in thy 
 present love for thy Lord] — thou desirest to go." This is an intelligible and a 
 beautiful meaning. But it is almost certainly a corruption arising from (1) a casual 
 confusion of oy and cy, (2) a desire to remove the difficulty explained by Chry- 
 sostom. 
 
 615 
 
[2798] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 given are described in the context as "perceptions" and "pre- 
 conceptions," " helps received from thee that I might understand 
 thy ordinance [of the universe] and might follow it 1 ." Over this 
 internal and spiritual realm the philosopher has "authority," un- 
 shackled, unhindered 2 . No one can take it from him — this "authority" 
 to be virtuous, temperate, courageous, untroubled. No doubt, 
 occasionally, Epictetus suggests that this absolute fearlessness and 
 rectitude of conscience gives the philosopher some " authority " over 
 others. This comes out clearly in a passage where he proclaims the 
 superiority of Diogenes, the natural king — the wielder of the sceptre 3 
 
 1 [2798(7] Epict. iv. io. 14 — 16 as 4\af3ov d<popp.as irapa crov irpbs rb aiad^adat. 
 aov rr}s 5ioiKr)<Tfws teal a.Ko\ov0ij(TaL avrfj, tovtwv ovk ri/j. A^cra . . ."On /xe ai' eyefyrjcras 
 X&pi-v f'x^ w Hdwuas- i<p' ouov expV^o-^V" T o?^ cro?j apice? /xoi. ndXiv avra aTrbXafie 
 Kal Karara^ov els ijv ai> 64Xrjs ^aipae . era yap tjv wavm, crv p.01 aiVa 5e5wKa s. These 
 last words remind us of Jn xvii. 6 " Thine they were and thou gavest them to me.'' 
 But, in John, "thine" is masc. and means "the disciples." In Epictetus, "thine" 
 is neut. and means the will and the power to be virtuous. No doubt, in John 
 also, " all that thou hast given me" is frequently neuter. But, even when neuter, 
 it includes the thought of the Church as partaking in the spiritual unity of the 
 Father and the Son (2740 — 4). 
 
 - [2798/i] Epict. Ench. i. 1 — 2 4<f> r\jxiv fxkv inr6Xr]\pis, 6p/j.rj, 6pei;i.s, (-kkXiitis... 
 teal ra [xh icp' ij/xLv eari. cpuaei eXetiOepa, aKwXvra, aTrapatrbbiara. The self-con- 
 trolled movements of the mind are (id.) " our own works (-qtiirepa Zpya)" and are 
 " in our power (i(p' rj/uv)," and the philosopher says, iv. 10. 30, apKei /xoi wv ?x w 
 e^ovffiav, "sufficient to me are those things over which I have authority" iii. 3. 
 9- — 10 " can anyone defraud me of my trustworthiness or of my love for my 
 brethren ? This is an estate from which none can eject me — not even Zeus ! Not 
 that He would desire it for a moment. Nay, He has placed this at my own 
 disposal, and gave it to me even as He Himself possessed it — unhindered, uncon- 
 strained, unshackled." 
 
 ■'■ [2798 <-] See iii. 22. 57 "the sceptre of Diogenes," ib. 63 " the sceptre and 
 the kingdom "of the Cynic. The whole chapter deals with the essential nature of 
 royalty, which belongs to the Cynic because men recognise in him both their 
 unselfish Benefactor and their natural Master. How is it possible, asks the pupil, 
 that a naked, homeless, squalid creature — without a slave to attend him, or a 
 country to call his own — can live a life of equable happiness ? To which Epictetus 
 replies, iii. 22. 46 — 50 "Behold, God hath sent unto you the man that .shall 
 demonstrate in act this possibility. Behold, [all of] you, that I am without 
 country, home, possessions, slaves, making my bed on the ground — no wife, no 
 children, no paltry palace, only the earth and the sky and one poor cloak ! And 
 what do I want? Am I not painless! Am I not fearless? Am I not free? 
 When saw ye me missing anything that I longed for? Or falling into any evil that 
 I shunned? What fault found 1 ever, either with God or man? When did I 
 accuse anyone? Saw ever anyone my face clouded with gloom? How do I 
 confront the great men before whom you stand frightened and abashed ? Do 
 
 6l6 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2799] 
 
 of man's conscience — to Nero, Sardanapalus, Agamemnon, and 
 Alexander: "These kings and tyrants were wont to receive 1 from 
 their armed guards the [privilege of] rebuking this man or that and 
 the [brute] power of even inflicting punishment on offenders — and 
 this though they themselves were bad : but on the Cynic this 
 authority is bestowed not by arms and guards but by the conscience" 
 — i.e. the consciousness 2 of being a disinterested toiler for mankind, 
 of being a friend of Zeus, and of knowing men (whom he counts as 
 his brethren or children), as a general knows his soldiers, so that he 
 may reprove them freely :! . Still, this "authority" is shackled and 
 hindered. The only absolute " authority " given to man is over his 
 own heart. 
 
 [2799] On the other hand there is the false "authority" of the 
 despot, which so imposes on the pseudo-philosopher that he cries 
 
 I not treat them as [cringing] slaves (di>Spair63oi.s) ? Who that sees me does not 
 think that he beholds his own [true] King and Master ? " — This, says Epictetus, is 
 the Cynic's message, this is his true character. 
 
 1 [2798 V] iii. 22. 94 Lit. '■'■were wont to supply to these kings." Mrs Carter's 
 transl. has the pres. "give." But Epictetus is looking back at the long line of 
 kings of the old dispensation (comp. Jn x. 8 "all that came before me are thieves 
 and robbers") including (iii. 22. 30) Agamemnon, "though he was better than 
 Sardanapalus and Nero." Not that Epictetus denies Agamemnon the title of 
 "shepherd." " Shepherd in truth," he says (iii. 22. 35), "for you weep like the 
 shepherds, when a wolf has snatched away one of their sheep !" The "shepherd" 
 as fighting for the sheep against the wolf is not considered by Epictetus. He 
 dislikes the metaphor: "And these [Greeks]," he says, "are sheep indeed, who 
 are ruled over by you." As for the true Cynic, he is to abstain — at all events 
 (iii. 22. 67) during the present state of society — from the distractions of wife and 
 children so that he may devote himself wholly to his subjects, who include the 
 whole human race, and may play his part as the king {Iliad ii. 25) " to whom the 
 nations are entrusted and [the burden of] so many cares," going about the world 
 and doing good as Ruler and as Healer (iii. 22. 72). 
 
 2 [2798 e] "The consciousness," txt iii. 22. 95 brav idy otl inrtp-qypvirv^Kev 
 vwep dvdpthnwv. But the sense is improved by reading eiAH. It has been shewn 
 (2659 c) that X sometimes uses 1 for 61. Moreover B — which frequently uses e I 
 for long 1 — sometimes uses 61 for short 1 as (2654 /<) in Jn i. 9 aKrjdnvov, Jas iii. 7 
 avOpwireLVT), id. iv. 14 arrets. And, in Epictetus itself, Schweig. Index testifies 
 that £dv eiSQ, sciam, "interdum perperam cum eav idoi permutatur." See also 
 2515 (i) e. By reading orav eidrj here (" Knowing as he does," or "conscious as he 
 is ") we shall keep the connexion between eidrj and the preceding awudos. It is 
 the Cynic's own " conscience " — as well as the conscience of those whom he 
 controls — that gives him a kingly power over his subjects. 
 
 :; [2798/] iii. 22. 96 "speak freely," diari p.ii dapprjcrrj irappricnd^effda^ rrpos 
 roi'S d5e\(povs tovs eavrov, rrpbs rd re/cva, dirXQs irpbs roi'is crvyyeveh ; On the 
 prominence of Trapp-qata in Jn see 1917 (i) — (vi). 
 
 617 
 
[2799] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 out "But he has authority to kill me 1 !" To this Epictetus replies 
 elsewhere that the despot has " authority " over our body and other 
 possessions but not over our will. To the objection "So you 
 philosophers teach people to despise kings ! " he replies, " God 
 forbid ! Which of us teaches [anyone] to lay claim, in rivalry with 
 them, to the things over which they have authority ? Take my body 
 — [we say] — take goods, take reputation, take my friends and 
 relations...' Yes,' [says the despot], 'but I desire also to rule your 
 [inmost] convictions.' And who gave you this authority 2 }" It 
 follows that the despot's "authority" is a mere vapour 3 , and that the 
 pupils of Epictetus might ask to be allowed to release themselves 
 from it by self-slaughter : " Here [on earth, are] robbers and thieves 
 and courts of justice and so-called despots, who fancy they have 
 some sort of authority over us — simply because of [their hold on] 
 our paltry body and its possessions. Suffer us [O Epictetus] to shew 
 them that they have authority over nothing 4 ." According to 
 
 1 [2799 a] Epict. ii. 13. 22 — 3. The immediate reply to this is that such a 
 man must not pretend to be a philosopher : "As long as you give people this grip 
 on you through your body your course must be always to follow the stronger (a.Ko\ovt)ei 
 wavrl to5 laxi'porepqi) " i.e. not the good and wise, but the strong, the tyrant. The 
 bitter phrase, "follow the stronger," helps us to understand why Jn would prefer 
 i. 15 irpQrds fiov to the Synoptic iaxvporepos fiov (2667). 
 
 2 [2799 6] Epict. i. 29. 9 — 11. Did God, then, give the tyrant this 
 " authority " — transient and unreal though it is — over the bodies of men ? 
 Epictetu^ implies that He did, in a passage (iii. 22. 5 foil.) where God is repre- 
 sented as allotting their several parts to the sun, to the heifer (which has to run 
 away from the lion), to the bull (which has to right), to Agamemnon and to 
 Achilles : but he never says that God assigned a part to Thersites. The burden 
 of this difficulty is thrown (iv. 1. 100 — 1 ) on the bpfids — the " tides," or "motions," 
 of < lod's universe, which we must carefully consider : "Our will is unshackled," 
 but " the body of clay — how was He able to make that unshackled ? Therefore 
 He made subject to the [ever moving] circle of the universe (vTr^Ta^ew ovv 1-9 tuv 
 oXav TrepihSifi) possessions, utensils, house, children, wife. Why, then, should I 
 tight against God ? " 
 
 a [2799 f] Epictetus imagines his well-trained pupil, after an interview with 
 the "great man," the possessor of false " authority," exclaiming i. 30. 6—7 " Why 
 all these preparations to meet nothing at all ? Was this his authority? This, his 
 antechambers, his gentlemen of the chamber, his yeomen of the guard !.. .These 
 things were nothing, and I was preparing for things great." 
 
 4 [2799 d] Epict. i. 9. 15. Epictetus will not consent, he bids his pupils await 
 ( iod's sign. In iv. 10. 29, ra dWorpia 6\j/eTai avra 8s dv <plpy, tos dv diSwrai rrapd 
 rod ix oVT0 ' 5 ti;ovo~iav...dpKei p.01 wv ?x w i£ov<Tla,v...Ta. 8' &\\a ws av 0A?; 6 (Kdvwv 
 Kvpios, some have taken 6 tKelvuiv m'tpios as God. Jhil ni'pws is almost always used 
 
 61 8 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [ 2799 1 
 
 Epictetus, then, as also according to the Fourth Gospel, all men 
 that receive the Logos of God receive authority over the will within 
 them, which enables them to conform their will to His and to become 
 His children ; and this — the authority to lead a virtuous life — is the 
 only real authority 1 . The authority to pronounce judgment is not 
 real authority unless the judge knows the truth 2 . That power which 
 has "authority" to bestow the greatest "profit" is "divine (0etoi')V 
 
 by Epict. in a bad sense. His advice everywhere is, in effect, " Call no man lord." 
 Here 6 ineivuv Kvpios means "the lord or master of those transient objects." 
 Comp. ii. 2. 25- — 6 "But if you gape after external objects, you must needs 
 wobble at the dictate of the lord (avo) /cat /cdrco nvKleadai. wpbs to (3ov\7]fia rod Kvpiov). 
 And who is ' lord ' (tLs icrl Kvpios) ? He that has [from time to time~\ authority 
 over the things that you covet or avoid." 
 
 1 [2799 e] Jn i. 12 " But as many as received him [the Logos or Light] to them 
 gave he authority to become children of God." Epictetus frequently describes the 
 Cynic as (i. 9. 6) " Son of God " (comp. i. 3. 2 " knowing that thou art son of 
 Zeus"), i. 19. 8 — 9 "When the tyrant says to anyone ' I will fetter your leg,' the 
 man that consistently honours (reTt^/i-cis) his leg says ' Don't, for pity's sake ! " 
 But the man [that honours] his own will says, ' If it appears advisable to you, 
 fetter it.' ' Won't you bend ? ' [says the tyrant]. ' I will not bend.' ' I will shew 
 you that I am lord (icvpids elp.i).' 1 'You ! Impossible! {wbdep aO ;) I have been 
 freed by Zeus. Do you really suppose that He would purpose to allow His mvn 
 Son {rbv i8ioi> vibv) to be made a slave ? But of my corpse you are lord. 
 Take it.' " 
 
 - [2799/] Epict. i. 29. 50 "'But,' say you, ' the authorities (6 ^x 03 " T V V 
 i^ovaiav) have given sentence [saying] / judge you [guilty] of impiety and profanity. ' 
 What [harm] is there [in that] for you ? " i. 29. 52 "This man, whoever he be, 
 that has authority to sentence you— does he know what piety or impiety is?" 
 Such "judgments" therefore are futile, i. 25. 2 " What can henceforth cause us 
 trouble or fear? Can it be any of the objects of our life? No one has any 
 authority over these. As for the things over which the others have authority, we 
 do not care a jot for them," ii. 13. 14 " Consequently, Zeno, for his part, felt no 
 anxiety when he was going before Antigonus. For what the former admired, the 
 latter had no authority over... but Antigonus was anxious at the prospect of 
 meeting Zeno," iii. 24. 48 " And further remember that [in going to a great man] 
 you have in effect gone to a shoemaker or greengrocer, to one that has no 
 authority over anything that is great or serious — though he may sell [his goods] at 
 a great price." These extracts have a bearing on Pilate's judgment. Pilate sat 
 as judge to decide the truth : but he confessed that he did not know what it was 
 ("what is truth?"). He also " was afraid," as Antigonus before Zeno. 
 
 3 [2799 £•] ' ' Profit," <L<pe\(ia (Epict. seldom uses auT-qpia except in a fashionable 
 asseveration). Comp. Epict. iv. 1. 61 evvoovfiev yap otl to ty " i^ovfflav tt)s 
 /j.eyiarr]s uxpe\eias delbv eari. But, says the context, we think the things of 
 greatest "profit" are wealth, office, etc. Then it follows that (ib. 59 — 60) "those 
 who have authority over these things are our lords" and " thus then we have 
 many lords (Kvpiovs) " because we have many worldly desires. It is assumed that 
 
 619 
 
[2799] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 These and many other passages indicate that educated Greeks at 
 the beginning of the first century must have been familiar with the 
 contrast between true authority and false so vividly exhibited in the 
 Fourth Gospel (1594). 
 
 the only true Lord is He that can bestow on us the only true "profit," namely, 
 virtue. In his doctrine about lordship, Epictetus had to deal with the difficulty 
 that ' ' lord" was regularly used in conversation to mean little more than " Sir." He 
 does not forbid the use of the word thus, provided that it be used merely as a form. 
 But iv. i. 57 "If you hear anyone say heartily and feelingly (Zewdev ko.1 e/c 
 ■rrdOovs) ' Lord,' then — though twelve fasces go before him — call him ' Slave.' 1 ' 
 
 [2799 (i)] Addendum on otc. Jn's use of 8re differs little from the Synoptic, 
 exc. in the frequency of the phrase "there cometh an hour. ..when (Are)...," iv. 21, 
 23, v. 25 (but v. 28 ev rj), xvi. 25. In ix. 4 "there cometh night, when," W.H. 
 make no pause; but a comma is required after vt>%, to distinguish it from " a night 
 when." In v. 25 Zpxerai u>pa, ko.1 vvv eariv, ore, a pause is also necessary, to 
 avoid the familiar juxtaposition tariv ore, and also for the sense, "there cometh an 
 hour [appointed by God], and even now it is [here], when...." Here "when" is 
 almost equivalent to eV rj "in which hour," or "in that hour"' (as in v. 28). In 
 xvi. 2, 32, "the hour cometh" is not followed by ore but by 'iva — probably because 
 here the phrase exceptionally introduces, not an "hour" of blessing or resurrection 
 but an "hour" of persecution or trial, and it is desired to emphasize the fact that 
 this trial is part of God's purpose, ordained "in order that" the trial may come 
 to pass. 
 
 [2799 (iij] Addendum on cyN. Jn agrees with Demosthenes and Epictetus in 
 hardly ever using cliv (while abundantly using fierd with gen.). ZOv is also non- 
 occurrent in Rev. These facts stamp aiv as belonging to literary as distinct from 
 spoken Greek. Accordingly ativ occurs in 1 Esdr. ii. 7, viii. 14 where p-erd occurs 
 in the parall. Ezr. i. 4, vii. 16; and the instances of avv in Luke (including Gospel 
 and Acts) as compared with all the rest of N.T. are as three to two. IMtv with 
 rieut. pi. " along with these things," may have various meanings (Lk. xxiv. 21 
 "along with" [i.e. in addition to] but Nehem. v. 18, Epict. Enck. xxxii. 3, 
 xxxiii. 13 " along with [and in spite of}"). -i'j> with persons regarded statistically 
 may mean "reckoned up with," contrasted with fieri which implies helpful 
 companionship, as in Epict. i. 24. 19 "/ reckon myself with the multitude 
 (avyKarardrro} epiavrbv avv rots woWois) and walk companionably with many 
 individuals uai peri iroWuv TrepiirarCi)." In avv Bey, avv rip 5iK<xl(p, ol avv avrui, 
 etc. the dat. mostly represents God, a Cause, a Leader on -whose side (not "by 
 whose side" irapd) one is fighting or working and witli whom one identifies oneself 
 (a^ with Christ in the Pauline Epistles). "L6v occurs thrice in Jn, xii. 2, xxi. 3 
 I which need no comment), xviii. I — 2 raOra eirrwv 'lyirovs £^ij\d(i' avv roh natiriTais 
 
 620 
 
NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS [2799] 
 
 avTov...uarj\dev a vrbs k. oi fiadriTai avTov ...avvrix^V I- c* 6 ' fiera tQiv fxadryrOv 
 avTov. Both here and elsewhere Christ is described by Jn as in helpful com- 
 panionship with (fJ-erd) the disciples, but not elsewhere as avv r. p.a8rjTals. 
 Nonnus omits the avv clause, and so does Chrysostom (exc. in the title of his 
 homily). But Origen quotes it. Doubtless it is genuine and bears upon Lk. xxii. 
 ^9 il according to the (to) custom ...there folio-wed him [also] the disciples." Did 
 space allow, it might be shewn that Lk. and Jn appear to take different views of 
 "the custom" — Tn interpreting it as referring to Christ's customary reception 
 of the disciples in a certain place. But the discussion of this point must be 
 deferred to a treatise on "Johannine Interventions.*' 
 
 [2799 (iii)] Addendum on Aoroc (sing, and defined) in Christ's words 
 (i) In the SYNOPTISTS. The first Synoptic mention is in the Parable of the 
 Sower Mk iv. 14 6 airdpuv tov Xbyov vrreipei, parall. Mt. xiii. 19 Travrbs clkovovtos 
 tov Xbyov rrjs /3acnAe/as, Lk. viii. n 6 o-rrbpos iarlv 6 Xbyos tov deo v (foil, by 
 Lk. viii. 21 fJ.7jTrip /jLov Kai o\SeX(pol fxov ovtoI doiv oi tov Xbyov tov deov axovovTes kcu 
 woiovvTes, which is parall. to Mk iii. 35 6s dv Troirjo-ri to OeX-qp-a tov Oeov, Mt. xii. 50 
 6'iTTts yap dv Trot.r)ffr] to 6iXrjfj.a t. waTpos fxov t. iv ovpavoh). The only other mention 
 in Lk. is xi. 28 (pec. to Luke) p.evovv p.a.K&pioi oi aKovovTes rbv \6yov r. deov /cat 
 (pv\ao-aovTts. Apart from the Sower and its explanation (and Mk vii. 29 "for this 
 saying go thy way") Christ's only use of 6 A670S, in Mk, is in the charge brought 
 against the Pharisees that they make void " the word of God" — which enjoins the 
 honouring of parents — for the sake of their tradition (Mk vii. 13, Mt. xv. 6 txt 
 " the word of God," but marg. "law of God"). The impression given by these 
 passages is that '•''the word" in Mk iv. 14 means the word of God as set forth in 
 the fundamental principles of the Law of Moses, interpreted and expanded in the 
 Sermon on the Mount — the law enjoining the love of God and of " neighbour" — 
 dealing primarily with motives, and claiming to override the sabbath in respect of 
 works of healing, but not as yet illustrated by Christ's Sacrifice on the Cross. 
 
 (2) In John, (a) " My word" " his word," " thy word" The first Johan- 
 nine mention of 6 \byos (apart from iv. 37 "the saying [about the harvest]") is in 
 v. 24 6 tov \6yov fiov aKovuv kclI TriaTevwv t<£ ir(p.\j/avTL fxe ?x fL 'S i0 V v a-'ubviov. 
 This is part of Christ's reply to the Jews, who first persecute and then desire to 
 kill Him for healing on the sabbath, and for saying " My Father worketh hitherto 
 and I [too] work." Chrysostom (twice, but varying with pi. and sing.) quotes this 
 as "my words" and so does Nonnus. But "the word" seems to mean the word 
 of the Son, which is also that of the Father — the word, or law, of love and kindness 
 exemplified in the healing on the sabbath — which is a principle, or seed, of 
 spiritual life, so that it abides in men, if they make room for it in their hearts by 
 "belief," as above stated, v. 24 "He that heareth my word and believeth him that 
 sent me hath eternal life," v. 38 " Ye have not his word abiding in you," viii. 37 
 " My word hath no place in you," viii. 51 — 2 (bis) "if any one keep my word" ; or 
 else men may be described as abiding in it, viii. 31 "If ye abide in my word." 
 Concerning this "word" of the Father, the Son says, viii. 55 ''I know him 
 [i.e. the Father] and I keep his word" In the Last Prayer He thrice calls it 
 "thy word''' thus, xvii. 6 "They have kept thy word" xvii. 14 "I have given 
 unto them thy word" xvii. 17 "thy word is truth" — which implies that the vital 
 recognition of the true relation between God and man, and between man and man, 
 has been implanted by the Son of God in the hearts of men His brethren. After 
 saying (xiv. 23) " If any one love me he will keep my word" Christ is represented 
 as implying the identity between the "word " of the Son and that of the Father in 
 
 621 
 
[2799] NOTES ON PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS 
 
 xiv. 24 " and the word that ye hear (or, are hearing) is not mine but [the word] of 
 the Father who sent me." 
 
 (b) " The -word of God" in Jn, occurs only in x. 35 " If he called them 'gods' 
 unto whom the word of God came (irpbs obs 6 \6yos r. deou eyivero)," referring to 
 Ps. lxxxii. 6 " I said ye are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High, never- 
 theless ye shall die like men." The Psalm is about "judges" to whom "the word 
 of the Lord came" — as it is freq. said to "come " to prophets ( Through Letter etc. 
 850 eyevero irpos) — to enable them to judge justly, as the Spirit of God was 
 imparted to the Seventy through Moses (Numb. xi. 25) for the same purpose. 
 The judges mentioned by the Psalmist judge unjustly. Nevertheless it is implied 
 that they had in themselves the potentiality to become "gods" and the "sons of 
 God " because He offered them His Word, i.e. the seed of spiritual life, though 
 they rejected it. See Origen (on Rom. iii. 4, Lomm. vi. 155 — 6). 
 
 (c) " The word that is in their own law, [there] written " occurs in xv. 25 
 referring to Ps. xxxv. 19 "They hated me without a cause." On viii. 43 "my 
 speech.. .my word" see 2251, and on xv. 20 "the word that I said unto you" 
 see 2405—6. 
 
 (</) " The word that I spake (6 X. tv e\d\T]<ra) — that (eKt'ivos) shall judge him" 
 (xii. 48), describes "the word" as rejected, so that it can no longer be an internal 
 source of life, a friendly ally, but is forced to become an external judge. This 
 must be contrasted with xv. 3 "Already are ye clean because of the word that I 
 have spoken (XeXaX^/ca) to you: abide in me, and I too in you" — where "the word" 
 is the new Law of Love inculcated in the Washing of Feet. This "word" has 
 been taken by the disciples into their souls. Judas indeed rejected it ; but 
 concerning the rest it is afterwards said, xvii. 6 "they have kept thy word." 
 The cleansing influence of the Logos may be illustrated from Epictetus, who says, 
 iv. 11. 4 "But since it is impossible that man's (airrw) being should be completely 
 clean (Ka9apav)...the word, received from [God], so far as is possible, attempts to 
 make it cleanly (6 \6yos, rrapa\r](pdeis, eis to evBex^f^evov, Tavrrji' Kad&ptov aTroreXelv 
 ■treipaTai)." But Epictetus regards 6 \6yos as little more than "reason." John 
 uses 6 X670S in the words of Christ to represent not only the word announcing the 
 sonship of man to God, but also the thought of sonship, so taken into man's 
 heart that the personal Son enters along with the thought, as into a home, and 
 makes His abode there — or else so rejected that it becomes a Judge. 
 
 (e) " Their word" — Christ's last mention of X670S — occurs in xvii. 20 "I 
 pray... for them that believe on me through their word" contemplating a time 
 when "the word" of the Son, transmitted to the disciples and assimilated by them 
 so that it becomes "their word," will be a power diffusing belief in the Son 
 throughout the world. 
 
INDICES 
 
INDICES 
 
 TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 PAGE 
 
 I. New Testament Passages 625 
 
 II. Subject-Matter (English) 641 
 
 III. Words (Greek) 646 
 
 TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 I. New Testament Passages ..... 652 
 
 II. Subject-Matter (English) 666 
 
 III. Words (Greek) 677 
 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 I. NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 [The references are to paragraphs, indicated by black numbers, which, 
 in this Index, run from 1438 to 1885. To save space, the thousand 
 figure is not printed.^ 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 I'AR. 
 
 
 
 FAR. 
 
 
 
 
 I'AR. 
 
 1 20 
 
 749 c 
 
 4 16 
 
 
 710 c, 
 
 863 a 
 
 G 28 
 
 
 859 
 
 21 
 
 865 
 
 iS 
 
 
 725/' 
 
 
 29 
 
 
 864 
 
 2 3 
 
 728 / 
 
 5 3- 
 
 1 1 
 
 859 c 
 
 
 7 1 
 
 
 714 ,/, 859 a 
 
 H 
 
 865 
 
 4 
 
 
 674 
 
 
 3" 
 
 ■5 
 
 851^ 
 
 2 2 
 
 641/' 
 
 6 
 
 
 750 /', 
 
 854/' 
 
 7" 
 
 -8 
 
 852/ 
 
 3 
 
 644, 727 b 
 
 8 
 
 
 857 c 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 764, 810,7 
 
 4 
 
 863 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 554 
 
 
 r6 
 
 
 864 
 
 6 
 
 682/, 862 
 
 12 
 
 
 851/' 
 
 
 2 2 
 
 
 478,7 
 
 7 
 
 749, 
 
 '4 
 
 
 748 
 
 
 2 2- 
 
 -3 
 
 484, 764 a 
 
 8 
 
 644, 675^,751 
 
 14- 
 
 16 
 
 715 g 
 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 862 
 
 9 
 
 725,/ 
 
 15 
 
 
 858 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 862-3 
 
 1 1 
 
 644, 754 
 
 16 
 
 
 728// 
 
 
 2 7~ 
 
 "9 
 
 573-4 
 
 13 
 
 749 c 
 
 18 
 
 
 860 
 
 
 28 
 
 
 865/' 
 
 16 
 
 686 
 
 19 
 
 
 708/ 
 
 
 29 
 
 
 562 
 
 18 
 
 674 
 
 22 
 
 
 682« 
 
 
 8 2 
 
 
 644 
 
 [ 9 
 
 749 c 
 
 23- 
 
 4 
 
 851,/ 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 695 />, 833 e, 
 
 2 3 
 
 860 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 565, 
 
 714 c, 
 
 
 
 885,7 
 
 3 2 
 
 690 a 
 
 
 
 719//, 852 c 
 
 5~ 
 
 6 
 
 862 />, c 
 
 3 
 
 726 
 
 37 
 
 
 753 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 862 a, b, c 
 
 6 
 
 678,/, 861 a 
 
 44 
 
 
 856, 885/ 
 
 9 
 
 
 574,/, 718c, 855 
 
 8 
 
 852 
 
 47 
 
 
 753 
 
 
 IO 
 
 
 477 />, 673^ 
 
 9 
 
 851 a 
 
 6 9 
 
 
 851 ,?] 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 851 ,7, 856 
 
 IO 
 
 858 
 
 14- 
 
 15 
 
 711,7 
 
 
 J 3 
 
 
 477,7, 862/*,, 
 
 i r 
 
 686 /", 833 d 
 
 17 
 
 
 728,7 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 834 a-b 
 
 16 
 
 866 (iv) 
 
 19- 
 
 20 
 
 858 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 679 ,/, 724 ,7. 
 
 4 i-i i 
 
 854 a 
 
 2 3 
 
 
 864,7, 
 
 866 
 
 
 
 853 
 
 6 
 
 863 
 
 2 4 
 
 
 854,/ 
 
 
 '9 
 
 
 839 foil. 
 
 9 
 
 565, 643 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 865 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 452-8, 609 b, 
 
 IO 
 
 643 
 
 26 
 
 
 856 
 
 
 
 
 839 foil., 
 
 15 
 
 714/' 
 
 27 
 
 
 856, 862 
 
 
 
 858 a 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438 — 885). 
 A. VI. 625 • 40 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 8 22 
 
 720/' 
 
 11 6 
 
 859 e 
 
 13 
 
 58 
 
 673,/ 
 
 24 
 
 680(7 
 
 7 
 
 604 a, 689,', 
 
 14 
 
 5 
 
 708 < 
 
 26 
 
 477/' 
 
 
 856 
 
 
 14 
 
 763// 
 
 34 
 
 755 
 
 8 
 
 755 
 
 
 20 
 
 692, 
 
 9 2 
 
 834 a-b 
 
 10 
 
 681,7 
 
 
 21 
 
 693, 
 
 6 
 
 562. 575. 594 c 
 
 1 1 
 
 683// 
 
 
 22 
 
 735(7 
 
 8 
 
 575 
 
 1.3 
 
 860 
 
 
 23 
 
 718/, 813(7 
 
 9 
 
 604(7 
 
 16 
 
 861 
 
 
 24 
 
 813 ,/, 833 b, 
 
 r 1 
 
 718 a 
 
 17 
 
 857 
 
 
 
 864 
 
 16 
 
 815,/ 
 
 l 9 
 
 775/7,854,864, 
 
 
 25 
 
 718/ 
 
 17 
 
 751/-, 853 a 
 
 
 866// 
 
 
 26 
 
 727/ 
 
 18 
 
 644. 765 fl, 
 
 20 
 
 708 c 
 
 
 27 
 
 713//, 811 < 
 
 
 852,- 
 
 22 
 
 859/ 
 
 
 33 
 
 644, 727/ 
 
 22 
 
 477 b, 864 
 
 23 
 
 851, 866/7 
 
 15 
 
 2 
 
 728/7 
 
 23 
 
 852, 
 
 24 
 
 859// 
 
 
 3 
 
 714//, 824-31 
 
 27-30 
 
 742 
 
 25 
 
 678,7,852,860, 
 
 
 14 
 
 861 
 
 28 
 
 477,7 
 
 
 864-5 
 
 
 17 
 
 817,7 
 
 29 
 
 477/' 
 
 26 
 
 852 
 
 
 22 
 
 713// 
 
 3° 
 
 713 , . 811 b, 
 
 27 
 
 810,-, 852 
 
 
 24 
 
 723/ 
 
 
 885,7 
 
 28 
 
 810, 
 
 
 25 
 
 644 
 
 36 
 
 708, 
 
 29 
 
 865 a 
 
 
 28 
 
 477/', 533 
 
 38 
 
 853 
 
 12 13 
 
 728 e 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 721//, 728/ 
 
 16 1 
 
 580,/ 
 
 14 
 
 695/ 
 
 
 18 
 
 709,7 
 
 2 
 
 709,7 
 
 1 5 
 
 810 
 
 
 23 
 
 864// 
 
 3 
 
 714, 
 
 16 
 
 752/ 
 
 
 24 
 
 792/^, 842 
 
 5 
 
 863 
 
 18 
 
 674 
 
 
 27 
 
 712/ 
 
 6 
 
 723/ 
 
 J 9 
 
 752 b foil. 
 
 
 28 
 
 530,7, 710, 
 
 8 
 
 751 a 
 
 20 
 
 689,, 751 
 
 17 
 
 8 
 
 855 
 
 10 
 
 852 
 
 21 
 
 855 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 634/' 
 
 1 1 
 
 707 ,7, 751 
 
 3° 
 
 863 
 
 
 '4 
 
 862,/ 
 
 13 
 
 853,/ 
 
 34 
 
 864 
 
 
 18 
 
 862,/ 
 
 15-16 
 
 859 
 
 4 1 
 
 859/ 
 
 
 20 
 
 477// 
 
 18 
 
 695/, 725, 
 
 42 
 
 859/', 864 
 
 
 26 
 
 712 e, 751 /' 
 
 20 
 
 720 k 
 
 45 
 
 856,?, 858 
 
 18 
 
 *t 
 
 793 
 
 2 1 
 
 679 
 
 48-9 
 
 749,7 
 
 
 
 
 
 676,7, 865/7 
 
 22 
 
 713/ 
 
 5° 
 
 728,4' 
 
 
 4 
 
 865(7 
 
 24 
 
 723 h-i 
 
 13 10 
 
 720,7,/', 802,/ 
 
 
 6 
 
 686/' 
 
 24-S 
 
 775,7, 784^92 
 
 11-13 
 
 721, 
 
 
 8 
 
 734/ 
 
 2.S 
 
 723 h-i 
 
 13 
 
 612-3, 724/ 
 
 
 9 
 
 682(7 
 
 26 
 
 716 i, 738 77, 
 
 15 
 
 683 e 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 692, 
 
 
 852, 859 d 
 
 16 
 
 560, 859, 
 
 
 15 
 
 851 ,/, 852 ,7. 
 
 27 
 
 863,/. 866 
 
 '9 
 
 854,7 
 
 
 
 855 
 
 28 
 
 565 6 
 
 2 1 
 
 811/ 
 
 
 16 
 
 696,, 707,. 
 
 $1 
 
 861,7 
 
 22 
 
 676 
 
 
 
 725, 
 
 34 
 
 854, 
 
 24 
 
 692 /' 
 
 
 20 
 
 793 
 
 35 
 
 860 
 
 28-48 
 
 864 
 
 
 2 1 
 
 779 ,/, 781, 
 
 36 
 
 787,/, 792 a 
 
 3' 
 
 692/ 
 
 
 
 852,/ 
 
 37 
 
 450. 792 a, 
 
 35 
 
 721 r 
 
 
 26 
 
 644 
 
 
 866/ 
 
 39 
 
 854(7 
 
 
 31 
 
 720/ 
 
 38 
 
 792/ 
 
 46 
 
 753 
 
 l'.l 
 
 1 
 
 865/ 
 
 •4° 
 
 671 /', 721/ 
 
 53 
 
 865/' 
 
 
 4 
 
 708,/ 
 
 40-1 
 
 825 31 
 
 54 
 
 696,/, 720//, 
 
 
 8 
 
 708// 
 
 4 2 
 
 728/ 
 
 
 864 
 
 
 16 
 
 852, 
 
 11 1 
 
 865 b 
 
 55 
 
 714,. 777 
 
 
 '7 
 
 714// 
 
 3 
 
 632, 856,/ 
 
 5 7 
 
 720// 
 
 
 28 
 
 859,/ 
 
 This ///,/■> extends from 1438 /,- 1885 (/•/ 7/7 /<•(/ 438— 8851. 
 
 r,j(, 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 
 PAK. 
 
 4 
 
 691c 
 
 
 23 
 
 34 
 
 678, 854 c 
 
 i i 
 
 449 a 
 
 718 a, 
 
 
 35 
 
 860 
 
 
 853 
 
 
 37 
 
 674, 682/, 859 
 
 '9 
 
 678 
 
 
 
 39 
 
 633 
 
 20 
 
 644 
 
 
 24 
 
 6 
 
 719a, 728/ 
 
 21 
 
 712 i, 
 
 753 
 
 
 7 
 
 680 a, 687 a, 
 
 2 2-3 
 
 678 c 
 
 
 
 
 718 d 
 
 -5 
 
 570-1 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 708,/ 
 
 26 
 
 717 d- 
 
 -e-f 
 
 
 9 
 
 713/ 
 
 17 
 
 717/, 
 
 723// 
 
 
 12 
 
 716,, 851c 
 
 28 
 
 579 
 
 
 
 '4 
 
 695/ 
 
 30 
 
 737a, 
 
 813 
 
 
 21 
 
 708,/ 
 
 3 2 
 
 725 /'- 
 
 -c 
 
 
 23 
 
 477 a 
 
 34 
 
 477/' 
 
 
 
 26 
 
 477 a 
 
 r 
 
 775 c 
 
 
 
 27 
 
 866 
 
 2-7 
 
 861/' 
 
 
 
 3° 
 
 712/ 
 
 5 
 
 456 a, 
 
 634, 
 
 
 3i 
 
 682/' 
 
 
 754 a, 757 
 
 
 38 
 
 680/', 710//, 
 
 8 
 
 720/' 
 
 
 
 
 755 a 
 
 9 
 
 633, 816/' 
 
 
 42-4 
 
 634 a 
 
 12 
 
 812(5 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 858 
 
 1=; 
 
 816/' 
 
 
 
 45 
 
 862 c, 866 
 
 16 
 
 860 
 
 
 
 46 
 
 859 c 
 
 19 
 
 712 a? 
 
 
 
 47 
 
 865 
 
 21 
 
 467 
 
 
 
 49 
 
 752 
 
 2 3-7 
 
 562 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 856 
 
 24 
 
 857/' 
 
 
 
 5 1 
 
 860 
 
 25 
 
 477a 
 
 
 25 
 
 1 
 
 720/, 755 
 
 27 
 
 841 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 720/ 
 
 32 
 
 477rt 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 720/' 
 
 42 
 
 722 c, 
 
 8iic 
 
 
 9 
 
 852 
 
 43 
 
 687 a, 
 
 718d 
 
 
 *9 
 
 634/' 
 
 7 
 
 861 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 862 c 
 
 8 
 
 853 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 862 c 
 
 1 1 
 
 604 a, 
 
 853 
 
 
 24 
 
 754 
 
 12 
 
 853 
 
 
 
 24-6 
 
 856 
 
 15 
 
 695 c, 
 
 723(5 
 
 
 35 
 
 750,6 
 
 16 
 
 727 d, 
 
 m 
 
 
 36 
 
 810/ 
 
 24 
 
 721c 
 
 
 
 37 
 
 750/' 
 
 27 
 
 866 
 
 
 
 38-44 
 
 810/' 
 
 29 
 
 722,/ 
 
 
 
 4° 
 
 749 a 
 
 32 
 
 851a 
 
 
 
 41 
 
 854a 
 
 36 
 
 860 
 
 
 
 42 
 
 750/' 
 
 44 
 
 680, 856 
 
 
 44 
 
 750/ 
 
 3 
 
 714 h 
 
 
 26 
 
 1 
 
 865/' 
 
 6-7 
 
 866/' 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 678 
 
 1 1 
 
 717 d- 
 
 e 
 
 
 4 
 
 723/', 811 
 
 12 
 
 865 a, 
 
 866 a 
 
 
 5 
 
 711c 
 
 23 
 
 477/6, 
 
 697, 
 
 
 8 
 
 810a 
 
 
 716 c, 851c, 
 
 
 9 
 
 742 a. 814 a 
 
 
 859/' 
 
 
 10 
 
 728/ 
 
 26 
 
 857, 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 734c, 751c 
 
 27 
 
 861 
 
 
 
 r8 
 
 834 c 
 
 28 
 
 753 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 653, 713 a. 
 
 31 
 
 859 
 
 
 
 
 816 a 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 25 
 
 696, 
 
 28 
 
 690 a 
 
 30 
 
 794 
 
 3i 
 
 862 
 
 33 
 
 438 a 
 
 34 
 
 718 i 
 
 36 
 
 634 
 
 38 
 
 707 a 
 
 39 
 
 716/', 728,?- 
 
 40 
 
 634 
 
 44 
 
 695 c 
 
 45 
 
 634 
 
 48 
 
 716 -. 866(6 
 
 50 
 
 862 
 
 5' 
 
 738/', 866 c 
 
 54 
 
 722 d 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 857 
 
 ^ 
 
 722,/ 
 
 59 
 
 695 c 
 
 61 
 
 675 c 
 
 64 
 
 713/ 
 
 67 
 
 737 c 
 
 7i 
 
 860 
 
 73 
 
 716/', 727/ 
 
 1 
 
 754 
 
 6, 9 
 
 755 
 
 1 1 
 
 725 c-e 
 
 15 
 
 711c, 735// 
 
 19 
 
 745, 750 
 
 27 
 
 814c, 815c 
 
 28 
 
 805-6 
 
 29 
 
 689 c, 734 a, 
 
 
 805-6, 
 
 
 814/' 
 
 3° 
 
 689 c 
 
 33 
 
 807, 810 
 
 40 
 
 675 c 
 
 44 
 
 817 c 
 
 45 
 
 710/' 
 
 48 
 
 689c, 813c 
 
 49 
 
 756 
 
 5° 
 
 752,/ 
 
 51 
 
 707 c 
 
 52 
 
 693 a, 858 
 
 53 
 
 716// 
 
 54 
 
 727/ 
 
 59 
 
 716 a, 857 c, 
 
 
 866(i)-(iv) 
 
 62 
 
 717// 
 
 66 
 
 754 
 
 1-2 
 
 680 a. 832/' 
 
 5 
 
 681,/ 
 
 6 
 
 858 
 
 7 
 
 802 a 
 
 8 
 
 675/' 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 (printed 438 —885). 
 
 6? 7 40 — 2 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 8 9 
 
 644 
 
 IO 
 
 749 
 
 '3 
 
 858 
 
 15 
 
 713 w 
 
 l 7 
 
 644 
 
 18 
 
 562, 590 
 
 r 9 
 
 485 « 
 
 20 
 
 793 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 1 I 
 
 708/" 
 
 2 
 
 681rt 
 
 4 
 
 690a, 734t" 
 
 5 
 
 678a, 861a 
 
 7 
 
 686/, 8337/ 
 
 IO 
 
 852/7, 866 (iv) 
 
 15 
 
 467, 480a 
 
 16 
 
 725/' 
 
 l 9 
 
 716/' 
 
 20 
 
 736/' 
 
 22 
 
 562 
 
 22- 
 
 7 572-4 
 
 24 
 
 835 
 
 3° 
 
 834,7 
 
 39 
 
 884 c 
 
 43 
 
 713 c, 811 /-c 
 
 44 
 
 653, 695 /, 
 
 
 833,', 885,7 
 
 4 5 
 
 738 
 
 2 1 
 
 884,- 
 
 4 
 
 834 a, 884,7 
 
 4" 
 
 12 673,736,7.834,7 
 
 10 
 
 525 a, 562, 
 
 
 575, 594, 
 
 1 1 
 
 653 
 
 12 
 
 575 
 
 '4 
 
 604,7 
 
 15 
 
 834/' 
 
 16 
 
 718,7 
 
 2 r 
 
 815,/, 853 a 
 
 28 
 
 525 ,7 
 
 3 3 
 
 793 
 
 6 
 
 695, 
 
 7 
 
 810, 834, 
 
 8 
 
 834, 
 
 15 
 
 562. 580a 
 
 .6 
 
 709,7 
 
 l8 
 
 714, , 726 
 
 20 
 
 634,/ 
 
 1 9 
 
 712,/ 
 
 3' 
 
 725,7, 737 
 
 33 
 
 4 749,7 
 
 35 
 
 728- 
 
 1 10 
 
 720,/ !>, 802,7 
 
 1 1 
 
 530,7 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 4 11- 
 
 12 612-13, 721c 
 
 7 4 
 
 689, 
 
 15 
 
 854 a 
 
 5 
 
 677/' 
 
 17 
 
 811/ 
 
 6 
 
 688 a 
 
 19 
 
 676", 833 c 
 
 9 
 
 714/7, 824-31 
 
 21 
 
 715,7/ 
 
 13 
 
 824 a 
 
 22 
 
 686 , , 716 i, 
 
 22 
 
 811 
 
 
 738a, 859,/ 
 
 23 
 
 677/' 
 
 26- 
 
 8 515 
 
 26 
 
 713/ 
 
 30 
 
 686 a 
 
 29 
 
 477 77 
 
 33 
 
 721 c 
 
 33 
 
 693,/, 737/; 
 
 34 
 
 720,7-,/, 721 ,- 
 
 35 
 
 852/ 
 
 39 
 
 832 c 
 
 8 6- 
 
 7 692/ 
 
 40 
 
 477 b, 728/ 
 
 17 
 
 728/, 737, 
 
 4 1 
 
 681, 
 
 18 
 
 721/7 
 
 5 6 
 
 644 
 
 21 
 
 728/ 
 
 12 
 
 723,/ 
 
 23 
 
 693,/, 737/7 
 
 14 
 
 675/' 
 
 32 
 
 712/. 744 (xi) a 
 
 r 9 
 
 653, 675/' 
 
 34 
 
 792/', 842 
 
 22 
 
 765a, 852 7- 
 
 35 
 
 720/' 
 
 29 
 
 736, 
 
 38 
 
 697,711 a, 712 7 
 
 33 
 
 727/77 
 
 9 1 
 
 530,7, 710, 
 
 34 
 
 477 /', 653, 
 
 12 
 
 634 £ 
 
 
 7286', 854 e 
 
 n 
 
 862,/ 
 
 36 
 
 477 ,7, 507 a, 
 
 i,s 
 
 735,' 
 
 
 533 
 
 23 
 
 533 
 
 41 
 
 728 /o 
 
 24 
 
 862,/ 
 
 6 1 
 
 634 a", 720/7 
 
 34 
 
 570,/, 683/ 
 
 2 
 
 696,/, 864 
 
 35 
 
 717 oV 
 
 3 
 
 686, 714,, 777 
 
 36 
 
 721V, 793 
 
 4 
 
 720A h 
 
 37 
 
 721/, 826-31 
 
 6 
 
 673,/ 
 
 4° 
 
 885/ 
 
 / 
 
 562. 580a 
 
 4 1 
 
 691/', 728/ 
 
 IO 
 
 707a 
 
 42 
 
 686/' 
 
 1 1 
 
 695/' 
 
 43- 
 
 45 734/ 
 
 l 9 
 
 735/; 
 
 10 1 
 
 634a 
 
 20 
 
 832 
 
 6 
 
 708,/ 
 
 21 
 
 738 
 
 15 
 
 865 a 
 
 26 
 
 832 a 
 
 17 
 
 852,- 
 
 3° 
 
 675/' 
 
 21 
 
 716a, 744 (i)- 
 
 31 
 
 716/', 810 c 
 
 
 (xi) 
 
 34 
 
 763/' 
 
 34 
 
 686 
 
 37 
 
 710 7', 734 7/ 
 
 37 
 
 712/ 
 
 4' 
 
 692/ 
 
 38- 
 
 <) 678 c 
 
 42 
 
 692, 
 
 42 
 
 570 1, 594,/ 
 
 45 
 
 735a 
 
 42- 
 
 5 683,7 
 
 47 
 
 7187, 813a 
 
 43 
 
 810 
 
 48 
 
 634 a, 718 /, 
 
 43- 
 
 4 717,/-^- 
 
 
 735/'-7-, 
 
 44 
 
 723/7 
 
 
 833/7 
 
 45 
 
 579 
 
 5° 
 
 713 //, 727 /', 
 
 46 
 
 737a 
 
 
 8116' 
 
 4 9 
 
 725/ C 
 
 5 2 
 
 737, 
 
 5 1 
 
 737,/ 
 
 5 p 
 
 673, 736 a 
 
 5: 
 
 477/ 
 
 7 2 
 
 677/' 
 
 11 I 
 
 775, 
 
 3 
 
 713/77. 728a 
 
 2 
 
 653, 728/ 
 
 Thh Index extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438—885) 
 
 62. S 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 FAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 11 2- 
 
 7 861 /' 
 
 14 6 
 
 728/ 
 
 1G u 
 
 604 a, 856 
 
 7 
 
 720/ 
 
 8 
 
 734c, 751 C 
 
 1 2 
 
 597 />, 686 c, 
 
 9 
 
 816/' 
 
 1 1 
 
 686 
 
 
 687(',716/, 
 
 IO 
 
 633(7, 816/' 
 
 13 
 
 653, 728/', 
 
 
 738(7,856(7 
 
 12 
 
 717// 
 
 
 834 e 
 
 '4 
 
 597 /', 686 /', 
 
 '4 
 
 712 d 
 
 17 
 
 634<7 
 
 
 708,, 716/', 
 
 IS 
 
 812/; 
 
 21 
 
 653, 713 a, 
 
 
 738(7, 856 
 
 17 
 
 675 
 
 
 816,7 
 
 16- 
 
 1 7 477 (7, 487 
 
 18 
 
 739-40 
 
 26 
 
 794 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 467 
 
 29 
 
 438(7 
 
 
 LUKE 
 
 2 5 
 
 697, 711 a, 
 
 3° 
 
 718/ 
 
 
 
 
 725 a, 737 
 
 34 
 
 707/z 
 
 1 2 
 
 708 /, 719 h 
 
 28 
 
 594 
 
 35 
 
 716/' 
 
 3 
 
 707 /• 
 
 28- 
 
 33 562 
 
 36 
 
 697, 711 a, 
 
 6 
 
 734 ( 
 
 -9 
 
 857/' 
 
 
 728 g 
 
 9 
 
 770 
 
 3i 
 
 477 a 
 
 37 
 
 634(7 
 
 12 
 
 727/' 
 
 3- 
 
 688^ 
 
 4 1 
 
 634 <7, 695 e 
 
 13 
 
 708/' 
 
 12 2 
 
 723// 
 
 44 
 
 716,!,', 866 b 
 
 17 
 
 501 a 
 
 4 
 
 723//, 832 
 
 47 
 
 738 b 
 
 30 
 
 775 c 
 
 10 
 
 722 c 
 
 49 
 
 722 (/foil. 
 
 3i 
 
 865 
 
 1 1 
 
 811 e 
 
 5 I_ 
 
 2 810 /' 
 
 33 
 
 712 (/ 
 
 13 
 
 723 b 
 
 54 
 
 711/ 715 g, 
 
 47 
 
 774//, 851 b 
 
 14 
 
 727 d, /// 
 
 
 735// 
 
 5 1 
 
 766 
 
 i/ 
 
 687 
 
 58 
 
 675 c, 679 (5 
 
 5 2 
 
 865(7 
 
 22 
 
 866 
 
 62 
 
 713/ 
 
 53 
 
 768 
 
 24 
 
 722 d 
 
 63 
 
 696 t 
 
 55 
 
 712 (/ 
 
 26 
 
 684, 837</, 
 
 65 
 
 737 e 
 
 57 
 
 708/' 
 
 
 851 a 
 
 67 
 
 735// 
 
 59 
 
 709, 
 
 3°" 
 
 33 716// 
 
 7° 
 
 716 /', 727y 
 
 69- 
 
 77 774/' 
 
 32 
 
 727 /// 
 
 15 1 
 
 815/' 
 
 75 
 
 854/7 
 
 36 
 
 680, 856 
 
 6 
 
 711 e 
 
 79 
 
 710 c 
 
 37 
 
 739-40 
 
 12 
 
 707 g 
 
 2 3 
 
 720/ 
 
 40 
 
 834// 
 
 ifi 
 
 814 c, 815 / 
 
 8 
 
 862 
 
 44 
 
 715/ 
 
 17 
 
 734(7. 805-6, 
 
 1 1 
 
 774,7 
 
 13 2 
 
 679/' 
 
 
 814/' 
 
 21 
 
 709 c 
 
 7 
 
 719 (?, 728 / 
 
 r 9 
 
 644, 689 e 
 
 22 
 
 833 c 
 
 8 
 
 680,7, 687(7, 
 
 20 
 
 686 
 
 2 ^ 
 
 734 c 
 
 
 708//, 718// 
 
 22 
 
 728/.,, 807, 810 
 
 34 
 
 764 
 
 9 
 
 695 /', 725 c 
 
 29 
 
 675 c 
 
 36 
 
 734 c 
 
 1 1 
 
 720/' 
 
 3i 
 
 686 
 
 39 
 
 720/ 
 
 12 
 
 679 
 
 32 
 
 817 ( 
 
 40 
 
 775c 
 
 13 
 
 713/ 
 
 33 
 
 710 /', 864 a 
 
 4 1 " 
 
 2 711 c 
 
 '9 
 
 708// 
 
 34 
 
 728 / 2 , 
 
 43 
 
 774 e 
 
 20 
 
 592, 709/' 
 
 36 
 
 689 e, 813 c 
 
 44 
 
 767 
 
 2 1 
 
 477(7 
 
 38 
 
 707 c 
 
 46 
 
 857 
 
 26 
 
 712/ 
 
 39 
 
 727 / 
 
 5 2 
 
 775 c 
 
 27 
 
 682/ 
 
 46 
 
 691. 716 a. 
 
 3 2 
 
 764/', 857 
 
 3 2 
 
 697, 711 a 
 
 
 857 , , 866 
 
 3 
 
 690/7 
 
 34 
 
 723//, 728// 
 
 
 (i)-(iv) 
 
 6 
 
 592 
 
 14 1 
 
 723 b, 811 
 
 16 1 
 
 832/) 
 
 8 
 
 851 a, 852 
 
 2 
 
 688/7, 711/' 
 
 1 
 
 815(7 
 
 9 
 
 858 
 
 3 
 
 736 «/, 834 /' 
 
 6 
 
 858 
 
 12 
 
 690/ 
 
 4 
 
 810/7 
 
 7 
 
 802 a 
 
 13 
 
 772/' 
 
 5 
 
 710 /% 738. 811 
 
 9 
 
 815/7 
 
 14 
 
 690/, 852 
 
 
 a-c, 814 /z 
 
 10 
 
 802c 
 
 15 
 
 885/' 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438—885) 
 
 629 
 

 INDICES TO 
 
 "JOH. 
 
 \NNINE VO 
 
 CABU1 
 
 .ARY " 
 
 
 LUKE 
 
 
 LUKE 
 
 
 LUKE 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 3 i6 
 
 
 686/, 833,/. 899 
 
 6 28 
 
 885/ 
 
 9 1 
 
 580 a 
 
 18 
 
 
 674 
 
 32-4 
 
 775.- 
 
 4 
 
 707 a 
 
 J 9 
 
 
 855 
 
 35 
 
 856 
 
 5 
 
 695/' 
 
 21 
 
 
 866 (iv) 
 
 37 
 
 714,/, 859 a 
 
 8 
 
 749, 
 
 22 
 
 
 767 
 
 38 
 
 769 
 
 12 
 
 858 a 
 
 4 i 
 
 
 772 a 
 
 39 
 
 861 
 
 14 
 
 693, 
 
 2- 
 
 13 
 
 854 a 
 
 40 
 
 723 k, 775 a, 
 
 16 
 
 692/ 
 
 6- 
 
 7 
 
 565 
 
 
 784 92 
 
 17 
 
 692, 
 
 7" 
 
 8 
 
 643 
 
 41-2 
 
 851 a' 
 
 23 
 
 792 b, 842 
 
 i i 
 
 
 863 
 
 43 
 
 707- 
 
 26 
 
 712/ 
 
 16 
 
 
 778 
 
 44-5 
 
 864 
 
 27 
 
 530 a, 696 a, 
 
 i7- 
 
 -19 
 
 690/' 
 
 7 1- 10 862/' 
 
 
 710,, 727/ 
 
 '9 
 
 
 768 
 
 2 
 
 862/; 
 
 29 
 
 767, 769 
 
 20 
 
 
 719// 
 
 3 
 
 713 in 
 
 32 
 
 802 a, 865 
 
 21 
 
 
 722 c 
 
 5 
 
 687 a, 718 e 
 
 35 
 
 833 a 
 
 22 
 
 
 775 c, 777-8, 
 
 7 
 
 862 a, b 
 
 38 
 
 771, 862 d 
 
 
 
 857 a, 859 
 
 7-8 
 
 718 c, 855 
 
 42 
 
 862,/ 
 
 23 
 
 
 778 
 
 9 
 
 477 /', 673 d, 
 
 47 
 
 793 a 
 
 24 
 
 
 720/, h 
 
 
 864 ^ 
 
 48 
 
 717 e, 721/ 
 
 25 
 
 
 727 111 
 
 12 
 
 771, 775 e 
 
 
 826-31 
 
 29 
 
 
 606 a 
 
 x 3 
 
 779 a 
 
 50 
 
 885/ 
 
 32 
 
 
 562 
 
 r 9 
 
 632, 779 a, 
 
 55 
 
 8643 
 
 32- 
 
 6 
 
 572-4 
 
 
 856 a 
 
 56 
 
 692 1- 
 
 34 
 
 
 835 
 
 23 
 
 859.- 
 
 57 
 
 839 foil. 
 
 38 
 
 
 834 a 
 
 24 
 
 604 a, 689 £, 
 
 58 
 
 452-8, 609 /', 
 
 5 1 
 
 
 725 l>, 769 
 
 
 856 
 
 
 839 foil., 
 
 2 
 
 
 736 e 
 
 25 
 
 769 
 
 
 858 a 
 
 2- 
 
 6 
 
 763 
 
 27 
 
 681a 
 
 60 
 
 720/' 
 
 3 
 
 
 716 b 
 
 28 
 
 683/; 
 
 10 1 
 
 779a 
 
 4 
 
 
 763 a, 775, 
 
 32 
 
 857, 861 
 
 2 
 
 853 
 
 6, 
 
 8 
 
 834 r, 835/' 
 
 34 
 
 775 a, 866 b 
 
 3 
 
 859 
 
 '4 
 
 
 695 A, 833 e, 
 
 35 
 
 854, 864 
 
 6 
 
 853 a 
 
 
 
 885 a 
 
 37 
 
 834/ 
 
 7 
 
 707 a. 852. 
 
 l 9 
 
 
 884 a 
 
 38 
 
 768 a 
 
 
 860 
 
 24 
 
 
 562, 575, 594. 
 
 44 
 
 728 /', 768 a, 
 
 8 
 
 692/ 
 
 25 
 
 
 834 a 
 
 
 864/' 
 
 12, 
 
 14 859/' 
 
 26 
 
 
 575 
 
 47 
 
 560 a 
 
 «5 
 
 851, 866 a 
 
 27 
 
 
 604 a 
 
 8 9 
 
 720 a, /', 802 a 
 
 16 
 
 671/', 825-31, 
 
 29 
 
 
 834/' 
 
 10 
 
 612 3, 721 c 
 
 
 832 a 
 
 30 
 
 
 449 a, 718 a, 
 
 12 
 
 854 a 
 
 17 
 
 478 a 
 
 
 
 853 
 
 13 
 
 811/ 
 
 17- 
 
 20 589 
 
 36- 
 
 7 
 
 853 a 
 
 '4 
 
 676, 715/ 
 
 19 
 
 567, 580 a 
 
 37 
 
 
 751/' 
 
 '7 
 
 716 /, 738 a, 
 
 2 I 
 
 678 a, 851/», 
 
 6 8 
 
 
 793 
 
 
 859,/ 
 
 
 860, 864-5 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 695. 
 
 l 9 
 
 884 a 
 
 2 I- 
 
 2 852 
 
 '3 
 
 
 833 a 
 
 21 
 
 728v, 749 a 
 
 11 
 
 810, 
 
 U 
 
 
 709 a 
 
 24 
 
 832, 
 
 23 
 
 560. 859 , , 
 
 15 
 
 
 726 
 
 *5 
 
 477/' 
 
 
 864/' 
 
 [6 
 
 
 714, 
 
 28 
 
 644 
 
 26 
 
 860 
 
 '7 
 
 
 725/ 
 
 29 
 
 833/' 
 
 32 
 
 770 
 
 20- 
 
 2 
 
 859,' 
 
 4' 
 
 765 a, 852, 
 
 38 
 
 771a 
 
 21 
 
 
 750 //, 854 /' 
 
 42 
 
 771 
 
 39 
 
 717 /', 771 />, 
 
 22 
 
 
 554 
 
 48 
 
 477/' 
 
 
 779 a 
 
 25 
 
 
 768 
 
 50 
 
 477 a. 507 a, 
 
 40 
 
 717 a. <•, 771a 
 
 27 
 
 
 856 
 
 
 533 
 
 4 1 
 
 771a, 779 a 
 
 Thii Index extends from 1438 to 1885 (printed 438— 8851. 
 
 63O 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 LUKE 
 
 PAR. 
 
 10 42 709/', 771//, 
 
 833 a 
 
 11 2 851 a 1 
 6 692/ 
 9 852(5 
 
 1 o 852 b 
 
 2 1 720 f 
 
 2 2 771 c 
 
 23 863 
 
 26 856 a, 858 
 
 28 859 £ 
 
 31 864 
 
 31-2 859/' 
 
 35 864 a, 866 
 
 36 775 
 '39 779 a 
 
 41 857 c 
 
 42 477 /\ 697, 
 
 716 c, 
 851 c, 
 859/ 
 
 49 854 c 
 
 S 1 860 
 
 12 2 738 a, 852, 
 
 859./ 
 784, 863 a, 
 
 866 
 565, 723 z, 
 
 775 a, b, 
 
 784-92 
 565 
 861 a 
 
 567(7, 569 ,? 
 718/ 
 884 c 
 865 
 856 
 
 856, 862 
 859, 864 
 858 
 
 712 g, 858 
 712 g 
 858 
 779,?, 862 c, 
 
 866 
 859 c 
 696 a, 727 /, 
 
 865 
 752 
 
 856. 860 
 692/ 
 854c 
 860 
 862 
 691V, 714^,/ 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 1 1 
 20 
 2 1 
 2 3 
 24 
 25 
 27 
 15 
 35 
 .37 
 39 
 42 
 
 43 
 44 
 
 45 
 4^ 
 48 
 5 1 
 
 53 
 
 5 *■ 
 5 7 
 
 LUKE 
 
 LUKE 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 12 
 
 58 
 
 565-6, 569 (/. 
 714c, 775c, 
 852 c 
 
 
 59 
 
 566 
 
 13 
 
 1 
 
 862 
 
 
 4 
 
 773 
 
 
 '4 
 
 728/ 
 
 
 ts 
 
 779 a, 861/' 
 
 
 ■9 
 
 720/ 
 
 
 20 
 
 707? 
 
 
 24 
 
 764 
 
 
 27 
 
 764 a 
 
 
 28 
 
 851a 
 
 
 29 
 
 856 
 
 
 32 
 
 774 e 
 
 
 34 
 
 674. 682 /, 
 720 /', 859 
 
 
 35 
 
 633 
 
 14 
 
 1 
 
 765 a 
 
 
 7 
 
 833(7 
 
 
 n 
 
 865 a, 866 a 
 
 
 21 
 
 861 
 
 
 25 
 
 864/ 
 
 
 26 
 
 450, 713/, 
 720/ 792(7 
 
 
 27 
 
 720 A 792 b 
 
 
 29 
 
 686 
 
 
 ?>5 
 
 720/ 
 
 15 
 
 2 
 
 718(7 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 715/ 
 
 
 20 
 
 720/ 
 
 
 30 
 
 715/ 
 
 16 
 
 4 
 
 720/ 
 
 
 5 
 
 720/ 
 
 
 6 
 
 767 
 
 
 7 
 
 767 
 
 
 8 
 
 715 ;', 720 A 
 782-3, 866 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 727/ 764 
 
 
 12 
 
 851 
 
 
 13 
 
 854 (/ 
 
 
 16-17 
 
 860 
 
 
 20-5 
 
 770 
 
 
 2 2—^ 
 
 769 
 
 
 24 
 
 728 /', 765 
 
 
 2 5 
 
 674, 715/ 
 719,4 
 
 17 
 
 2 
 
 686/ 
 
 
 3 
 
 851 d 
 
 
 3-4 
 
 852(7 
 
 
 4 
 
 781 
 
 
 5 
 
 781, 779 a 
 
 
 6 
 
 467. 477 /', 
 779(7 
 
 
 7 
 
 862 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 17 
 
 s 
 
 712? 
 
 
 9 
 
 775 ( 
 
 
 10 
 
 723 h, 861 
 
 
 24 
 
 866 
 
 
 T — 
 
 - i 
 
 710// 
 
 
 y- 
 
 721// 
 
 
 34 
 
 718/ 
 
 18 
 
 6 
 
 779(7 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 725 d, 866 
 
 
 13 
 
 720 A 725 (/, 
 760 
 
 
 •4 
 
 865 a, 866 a 
 
 
 18 
 
 852 < 
 
 
 35 
 
 737(7 
 
 
 37 
 
 860 
 
 
 40 
 
 725 b, c 
 
 
 42 
 
 477 /' 
 
 19 
 
 7 
 
 718(7 
 
 
 8 
 
 779(7 
 
 
 9 
 
 774/ 
 
 
 10 
 
 692 (/ 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 531, 693 c 
 
 
 13 
 
 720/ 
 
 
 '7 
 
 862c 
 
 
 20 
 
 760 
 
 
 21-2 
 
 856 
 
 
 23 
 
 772/7 
 
 
 2 9 
 
 775,' 
 
 
 30-5 
 
 861// 
 
 
 36 
 
 720/ 
 
 
 38 
 
 633 e, 816 b 
 
 
 42 
 
 719 /', 859 c 
 
 
 48 
 
 739 
 
 20 
 
 2-8 
 
 562 
 
 
 3 
 
 857/ 
 
 
 5 
 
 477(7 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 672. 832 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 672 
 
 
 [7 
 
 722 c 
 
 
 20 
 
 567,/, 569(7, 
 
 723/ 
 
 
 21 
 
 727 (/, m 
 
 
 29 
 
 721? 
 
 
 32 
 
 866 
 
 
 37 
 
 771, 775 c, 
 851 (/ 
 
 
 43 
 
 680, 856 
 
 
 46 
 
 866// 
 
 
 47 
 
 834 (/ 
 
 21 
 
 
 696 a, 727 j 
 
 
 4 
 
 715 /" 
 
 
 9 
 
 719(7 
 
 
 10 
 
 687(7, 718 7/ 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 680(7 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 725, 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 [printed 438—885) 
 
 63I 
 

 INDICES TO 
 
 "JOH 
 
 ANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 
 LIKE 
 
 
 
 LUKE 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 21 i 3 
 
 695/'. 
 
 763/' 
 
 •23 4 S 
 
 760 
 
 1 ii 
 
 624,7, 637,7, 
 
 15 
 
 720/;- 
 
 
 49 
 
 767 
 
 
 720 (/, 735/ 
 
 i6 
 
 679 
 
 
 5i 
 
 544, 713 m 
 
 12 
 
 481, 483-7, 
 
 '7 
 
 713/' 
 
 
 53 
 
 716,7, 719 a, 
 
 
 576, 676a, 
 
 20 
 
 770 
 
 
 
 728/, 857 c, 
 
 
 721/" 
 
 27 
 
 712 i 
 
 
 
 866 (i)-(iv) 
 
 L3 
 
 484. 708/-, 
 
 36 
 
 725 d 
 
 
 56 
 
 832/' 
 
 
 728^ 
 
 22 1 
 
 711,' 
 
 
 24 1 
 
 765, 832/ 
 
 '4 
 
 604. 712 /, 
 
 1 
 
 723 b 
 
 
 3 
 
 779,/, 801/) 
 
 
 744 (x) (?,' 
 
 3 
 
 692/'. 
 
 765 
 
 4 
 
 832 
 
 
 771, 772/7, 
 
 5 
 
 774 
 
 
 5 
 
 858,7 
 
 
 885 e, 885 
 
 6 
 
 678'/ 
 
 
 9 
 
 802,7 
 
 
 (iik 
 
 10 
 
 728 /'. 
 
 834 6' 
 
 12 
 
 600 b, 673 c, 
 
 M- 
 
 17 727;/, 775c 
 
 15 
 
 833, 
 
 
 
 716,7,726/), 
 
 15 
 
 635, 885jr 
 
 i> 
 
 721/ 
 
 
 
 772, 798- 
 
 16 
 
 727// 
 
 19- 
 
 20 885/" 
 
 
 
 804, 866 
 
 18 
 
 604 /'. 605. 769. 
 
 22 
 
 653! 
 
 713 a, 
 
 
 (iii)a 
 
 
 771, 884,- 
 
 
 816/7 
 
 13 
 
 798 loll. -804, 
 
 l 9 
 
 688. 770 
 
 23 
 
 772 b 
 
 
 
 864 
 
 20 
 
 679-80 
 
 25 
 
 570-1 
 
 . 594 (/ 
 
 1 7 
 
 725// 
 
 21 
 
 885// 
 
 26 
 
 717,, 
 
 /'. 810 
 
 20 
 
 765,/ 
 
 22 
 
 723 c, 885 (/ 
 
 3° 
 
 859,7 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 802 
 
 23 
 
 696 c, 728 /". 
 
 31 
 
 779 a 
 
 
 24 
 
 802,/ 
 
 
 885 fii) ,7 
 
 3 2 
 
 695// 
 
 
 25 
 
 477,/ 
 
 2 5 
 
 680, 885// 
 
 33 
 
 438,7. 
 
 843 
 
 26 
 
 722 6' foil. 
 
 26 
 
 725(7,-, 737, 
 
 37 
 
 770 
 
 
 27 
 
 722,' foil., / 
 
 
 796 
 
 42 
 
 728 s - 
 
 
 29 
 
 858,7 
 
 26- 
 
 7 635 
 
 45 
 
 713,/, 
 
 771, 858 
 
 3 2 
 
 722,' foil., /, 
 
 27 
 
 635, 686 /', 
 
 47 
 
 716- 
 
 866/' 
 
 
 775,' 
 
 
 833//. 852 
 
 5° 
 
 738 6 
 
 
 34 
 
 560 
 
 28 
 
 708- 
 
 51 
 
 738/'. 
 
 866 ( 
 
 35 
 
 769 
 
 29 
 
 607.635,717//. 
 
 53 
 
 567 
 
 
 36 
 
 725 b, 793-7, 
 
 
 885(ii)« 
 
 55 
 
 711/ 
 
 
 
 804,7, 884 c, 
 
 30 
 
 635, 885- 
 
 56 
 
 711 /, 
 
 715 g 
 
 
 854, 
 
 31 
 
 684 c, 716/ 
 
 59 
 
 727 111 
 
 
 36- 
 
 43 794-7 
 
 32 
 
 604. 707 a 
 
 60 
 
 693,' 
 
 
 38 
 
 727/' 
 
 33 
 
 707a, 723 e 
 
 r.i 
 
 779,7. 
 
 864/- 
 
 39 
 
 713;, 861 
 
 34 
 
 606, 676 c 
 
 63 
 
 737, 
 
 
 40 
 
 804(2 
 
 1? 
 
 717// 
 
 66 
 
 692 
 
 
 41 
 
 796,7 
 
 36 
 
 885 nil (7 
 
 70 
 
 713/ 
 
 
 43 
 
 768/ 
 
 37 
 
 720 111 
 
 23 2 
 
 687,7, 
 
 718 e 
 
 44 
 
 724/', 722 c 
 
 38 
 
 604. 694 c, 
 
 7 
 
 567,? 
 
 
 45 
 
 722,, / 
 
 
 720 m, 
 
 1 1 
 
 676,/. 
 
 806 a 
 
 52 
 
 644 
 
 
 728//, /.., 
 
 13 
 
 765,7 
 
 
 
 
 
 864/' 
 
 1 5 
 20 
 
 772/ 
 
 707- 
 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 39 
 
 598. 609,/. 610, 
 885,/ 
 
 22 
 
 695- 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 708/ 
 
 4' 
 
 717c, 720,. i, 
 
 2 3 
 
 769 
 
 
 I— 
 
 ; 443 
 
 
 w. 728 /., 
 
 2S 
 
 864 / 
 
 
 5 
 
 735 e-h, 885 
 
 42 
 
 439.675,709/7. 
 
 29 
 
 708/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 714,7,728/, 
 
 3 
 
 807, 1 
 
 310 
 
 6 
 
 734,. 885c 
 
 43 
 
 717//, 720 m 
 
 35 
 
 676,. 
 
 765,7 
 
 7 
 
 464. 481-2 
 
 45 
 
 720 >n. 778 
 
 4' 
 
 772 b 
 
 
 8 
 
 708/. 748,/ 
 
 46 
 
 598,/, 609 
 
 44 
 
 710 /• 
 
 
 9 
 
 635. 727- 775 
 
 47 
 
 702,/. 713. 
 
 .'' 
 
 692/ 
 
 
 9- 
 
 n 483 
 
 
 727 /, 811 
 
 t tendi from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438— 885). 
 632 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 1 47- 
 
 PAR. 
 
 50 610 
 
 3 16 
 
 PAR. 
 
 693/', 716 e, 744 
 
 4 24 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 647 
 
 48 
 
 885/ 
 
 
 (vi) foil., 
 
 25 
 
 
 635, 717; 
 
 49 
 
 684 c 
 
 
 771 
 
 27 
 
 
 673,7 
 
 50 
 
 464, 481, 488, 
 
 16- 
 
 18 498 
 
 28 
 
 
 885 (ii);- 
 
 
 598, 885? 
 
 16- 
 
 21 497,7 
 
 3 1 
 
 
 860 
 
 51 
 
 524, 598, 672, 
 
 17 
 
 581 5, 677 d, 
 
 34 
 
 
 456, 774, 
 
 
 852 /', 866 
 
 
 692/ 
 
 35 
 
 
 604,608,674/', 
 
 
 (iv), 884,/ 
 
 18 
 
 486, 502, 582- 
 
 
 
 885(ii)r 
 
 2 1 
 
 686 d, 695 d, 
 
 
 5, 677 ,/, 
 
 36 
 
 
 691 ,', 727 a 
 
 
 853 
 
 
 771 
 
 36- 
 
 7 
 
 693 
 
 2 
 
 675, 686 d, 
 
 •9 
 
 582-5, 710 a, 
 
 36- 
 
 8 
 
 856 
 
 
 853 
 
 
 716 e, 728//, 
 
 37 
 
 
 727/ 
 
 4 
 
 719,7, 728/ 
 
 
 744 (vi) a, 
 
 39" 
 
 42 
 
 503 -7 
 
 5 
 
 717;/ 
 
 
 859/; 
 
 42 
 
 
 727/-, 774 a 
 
 6 
 
 833 e, 885 (ii) 
 
 20 
 
 728 //, 772 /', 
 
 43 
 
 
 777-8 
 
 
 b,c 
 
 
 885(ii)<- 
 
 44 
 
 
 720/;, 755, 777 
 
 7 
 
 707 ,/, 728 /', 
 
 2 1 
 
 728//, 772/' 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 885 (ii)f 
 
 22 
 
 481, 493, 885 
 
 45 
 
 
 606 ,7, 689 , , 
 
 8 
 
 719,/, 885 (ii) a 
 
 
 (ii)a 
 
 
 
 721/ 
 
 9 
 
 717;/, 885 (ii) a 
 
 ^3 
 
 707 /, 721 // 
 
 46 
 
 
 885 (11) a 
 
 10 
 
 752, 885(ii)« 
 
 24 
 
 438/', 688 
 
 47 
 
 
 683 e 
 
 1 1 
 
 464, 489-90, 
 
 712/ 
 
 25 
 
 713 /, 833 e, 
 885 (ii) b 
 
 48 
 
 
 464, 508-9, 
 524 a, 533 
 
 J 4 
 
 885 (ii) * 
 
 28 
 
 681 a 
 
 49 
 
 
 676/', 885(ii);7 
 
 15 
 
 686,751/\812/;, 
 
 29 
 
 860 
 
 50 
 
 
 508 9 
 
 
 885(ii);7-c 
 
 3° 
 
 684, 885 (ii) a 
 
 51 
 
 
 862,7 
 
 16 
 
 885 (ii) a 
 
 3 r 
 
 635, 707 e 
 
 52 
 
 
 863.885(ii)rt,£ 
 
 '7 
 
 721/, 860. 885 
 
 3 2 
 
 606 
 
 53 
 
 
 464. 509, 684,7 
 
 
 (»)* 
 
 i?> 
 
 727;/ foil., 754 
 
 5 2 
 
 
 708/;, 713^-, 
 
 18 
 
 885,/ 
 
 35 
 
 716 e 
 
 
 
 885 (ii) a-c 
 
 l 9 
 
 679 b, 708 i, 
 
 tf 
 
 501, 885 (ii) a 
 
 2- 
 
 7 
 
 720/7 
 
 
 122 k 
 
 4 1 
 
 780 
 
 3 
 
 
 685,, 834;7, c 
 
 20 
 
 675,. 885;/ 
 
 1- 
 
 3 493 
 
 4 
 
 
 128 c 
 
 21 
 
 507 
 
 2 
 
 481, 853 a 
 
 5 
 
 
 683;/ 
 
 22 
 
 491, 721/, 722 
 
 5 
 
 687,, 726 
 
 6 
 
 
 610, 834;7 
 
 
 a, /, 860 
 
 6 
 
 885 (ii)/; 
 
 6- 
 
 -15 
 
 728, 
 
 2 3 
 
 483-4, 493 a, 
 
 6- 
 
 14 736," 
 
 8- 
 
 1 1 
 
 673, 736 a 
 
 
 598 
 
 8 
 
 865 
 
 10 
 
 
 683;/-,', 685 
 
 23- 
 
 4 464. 481 
 
 9 
 
 713/, 863, 885 
 
 13 
 
 
 683,-, 885 (ii) a 
 
 24- 
 
 5 626 
 
 
 (ii)' 
 
 '4 
 
 
 852,; 
 
 3 r 
 
 734 c, 765 a, 
 
 10 
 
 682,;-, 885 (ii) a 
 
 16 
 
 
 854, 
 
 
 852," 
 
 10- 
 
 15 728/' 
 
 18 
 
 
 673 /', 708 i 
 
 2 
 
 544, 718/ 
 
 1 1 
 
 765, 885;/ 
 
 19 
 
 
 607 
 
 3 
 
 676 a, 685,7, 
 
 12 
 
 683,-, 885 (ii)/' 
 
 20 
 
 
 596, 673 /', ,-, 
 
 
 707 e 
 
 14 
 
 712,/, 885 (ii) a 
 
 
 
 716 c, 728/ 
 
 4 
 
 885 (ii);* 
 
 16 
 
 652,7 
 
 21 
 
 
 716 
 
 5 
 
 685,7, 728/' 
 
 18 
 
 719,/ 
 
 2 1- 
 
 -3 
 
 581-5 
 
 7 
 
 673,7, 707 6> 
 
 '9 
 
 598 
 
 24 
 
 
 614 /', 710 ;/, 
 
 8 
 
 614/', 655, 728 
 
 20 
 
 647 
 
 
 
 860 
 
 
 c, d, 862 
 
 20- 
 
 4 640, 647-51 
 
 "24- 
 
 -47 
 
 510-11 
 
 to 
 
 684, 
 
 21 
 
 464, 503-7 
 
 25 
 
 
 719; 
 
 12 
 
 464, 494, 520 a, 
 
 22 
 
 647 8, 713 ///, 
 
 25- 
 
 -8 
 
 614,. 710,/ 
 
 
 885(ii)rt 
 
 
 ll\b 
 
 26- 
 
 "7 
 
 576-8, 581 
 
 '4 
 
 494, 524, 728/, 
 
 23 
 
 719,-, 885 (ii)/' 
 
 27 
 
 
 581-5 
 
 
 866 a 
 
 23- 
 
 4 640-51, 727/ 
 
 28 
 
 
 673,7 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438—885) 
 
 6- 
 
 >33 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 3° 
 
 34 
 35 
 
 37 
 38 
 39 
 
 43 
 
 44 
 45 
 46 
 
 47 
 6 1 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 1 r 
 12 
 '3 
 H 
 15 
 t6 
 
 1 7 
 18 
 
 '9 
 
 20 
 
 22 
 2 3 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 26- 
 
 27 
 
 29 
 
 3° 
 
 :r- 
 33 
 
 JOHN 
 
 PAR. 
 
 585 a, 772 /', 
 
 859 b, 885 
 
 (ii); 
 581-5, 691 e, 
 
 728?- 
 692 £" 
 685 ,/, 748 a, 
 
 851 /', 858, 
 
 885 (ii) c 
 774,' 
 
 605, 614/', 767 
 520,7, 707,7 
 492, 722 v, 885 
 
 (ii)a 
 720/ 
 885 e 
 855 
 492 
 
 492, 767 
 726,', 811,/ 
 598. 605 ,7, 
 
 606 a 
 885 (ii) a 
 604, 608 
 695,7 
 710 ,', 734 d, 
 
 852 
 708. 885 (ii) 6 
 765 
 735/; 
 768 
 
 708. 885 (ii), 7 
 635, 727/ 
 810 
 
 718/, 813 a' 
 710 b, 718 i, j 
 683,;, 832,', 
 
 862 
 598. 833/', 864 
 681,/, 713/7,/-, 
 
 8116' 
 
 652 ,7. 721/ 
 735/, , 
 
 885 (ii) c 
 
 726,. 736,'. 
 780 
 
 736, 
 
 692, 
 36 512 16 
 
 707,7, 754 
 
 512 13, 547 
 
 513 
 
 717, 728 / 
 
 727// 
 
 512,7 
 
 joiin 
 
 TOHN 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 6 35 
 
 517, 684 
 
 7 21 
 
 673 a 
 
 36 
 
 512 />, 532, 605 
 
 22 
 
 709, 
 
 37 
 
 752/ 
 
 1 3 
 
 708 /, 709 , , 
 
 38 
 
 728 g 
 
 
 728 c, 
 
 39 
 
 721 e 
 
 
 885 (ii)c 
 
 40 
 
 517, 598, 721 e 
 
 24 
 
 691 e, 714/, 
 
 41 
 
 718/* 
 
 
 859 ,7, 
 
 42 
 
 624, 719 d, 
 
 
 885 (ii) 3 
 
 
 777, 857 a 
 
 26 
 
 727 /-, 765 ,?, 
 
 43 
 
 718/; 
 
 
 885/ 
 
 44 
 
 517, 710 g, 
 
 27 
 
 624 5, 635 
 
 
 721c 
 
 27-s 
 
 728,- 
 
 45 
 
 885t>, 885 (ii)a 
 
 28 
 
 624, 727 h, 
 
 46 
 
 605, 885 c- 
 
 
 1b2f 
 
 47 
 
 518 a 
 
 30 
 
 728/ 
 
 49 
 
 717, 728/' 
 
 31 
 
 464. 521 
 
 50 
 
 710/ 
 
 33 
 
 655, 716 /' 
 
 5 1 
 
 712,/ 
 
 35 
 
 702, 713 *, 
 
 51-63 
 
 712/' 
 
 
 728,/ 
 
 52 
 
 885 (ii) b 
 
 37 
 
 683 ,7, 725/, g 
 
 54 
 
 518 ,7, 721 e 
 
 37-8 
 
 521, 722/ 
 
 54~' s 
 
 710/7 
 
 38 
 
 728/', 885 (ii) <r 
 
 55 
 
 727,', 885 (ii)/; 
 
 39 
 
 521,7, 637/' 
 
 56 
 
 707,7 
 
 40 
 
 614 , . 727 k 
 
 57 
 
 884/' 
 
 4- 1 
 
 635. 679 a, 
 
 58 
 
 712,/ 
 
 
 692?//, 
 
 59 
 
 694/, 777 
 
 
 696 /', 
 
 60 
 
 754 
 
 
 722 /•, 853 
 
 61 
 
 694,7, 718/ 
 
 4-3 
 
 815,/, 884 a 
 
 62 
 
 885,/ 
 
 44 
 
 735/' 
 
 63 
 
 519, 716 
 
 48 
 
 520. 765 a 
 
 64 
 
 520,7 
 
 49 
 
 885 (ii) « 
 
 64-70 
 
 464 
 
 51 
 
 765,7 
 
 r >7 
 
 652 ,7, 695 /, 
 
 52 
 
 885 (ii) a 
 
 
 835/ 
 
 8 3-4 
 
 735// 
 
 68 
 
 519 
 
 4 
 
 694,' 
 
 69 
 
 519, 629. 835 
 
 5 
 
 726,7 
 
 70 
 
 695 /, 709 /', 
 
 9 
 
 884 
 
 
 854,7 
 
 1 1 
 
 852,7 
 
 7' 
 
 695/, 724,' 
 
 1 2 
 
 748,7 
 
 7 2 
 
 885 (ii) r 
 
 14 
 
 624.637,7,655, 
 
 3 
 
 652 ,7, 860 
 
 
 728 c-d 
 
 5 
 
 520 
 
 15 
 
 581-5, 714/ 
 
 6 
 
 688, 719 a, 
 
 
 859,/ 
 
 
 728/, 862 
 
 16 
 
 661, 714/, 
 
 6 8 
 
 695/ 
 
 
 727// 
 
 7 
 
 728/7 
 
 17 
 
 696 , . 707 c, 
 
 8 
 
 719,? 
 
 
 715/' 
 
 10 
 
 738 
 
 18 
 
 522 
 
 1 2 
 
 682 
 
 [9 
 
 624. 626 
 
 13 
 
 681, 
 
 :o 
 
 728/ 
 
 '4 
 
 885 (ii)/ 
 
 M 
 
 522. 713 k, 
 
 1 5 
 
 673,7, 767 
 
 
 885,/ 
 
 IS 
 
 720 /, 727 d 
 
 25 
 
 708, 
 
 
 foil.. 764,/ 
 
 16 
 
 727 d foil. 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438-885). 
 
 6.34 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 8 28 
 
 
 713 /•, 866 a 
 
 9 21 
 
 
 719 d, 856 
 
 11 3 
 
 29 
 
 
 885 (ii) a 
 
 22 
 
 
 726, 774, 861 a 
 
 4 
 
 30 
 
 
 464 
 
 1 3 
 
 
 672 c, 856 
 
 
 3°" 
 
 -1 
 
 523 
 
 2 4" 
 
 "5 
 
 693 
 
 5 
 
 31 
 
 
 707 a, 121 1 
 
 28 
 
 
 885 (ii) /> 
 
 
 3 2 
 
 
 111 q-r 
 
 29 
 
 
 625, 728r 
 
 8 
 
 3 2 " 
 
 -6 
 
 712 c 
 
 3° 
 
 
 728 /-, 811 e 
 
 
 53 
 
 
 692//, 854// 
 
 3 1 
 
 
 693, 885 (ii)/> 
 
 9 
 
 33- 
 
 ■6 
 
 751// 
 
 32 
 
 
 672 a, 728/- 
 
 10 
 
 33" 
 
 -58 851 a 
 
 35- 
 
 -8 
 
 524 5 
 
 1 1 
 
 34" 
 
 "5 
 
 723/ 
 
 38 
 
 
 464, 647 
 
 
 35 
 
 
 684 a, 712 // 
 
 39 
 
 
 581-5, 594, 
 
 1 2 
 
 36 
 
 
 885// 
 
 
 
 637 a 
 
 13 
 
 37 
 
 
 692/$, 817 a 
 
 39" 
 
 41 
 
 607 
 
 
 38 
 
 
 885// 
 
 41 
 
 
 707 a, 719// 
 
 14 
 
 39 
 
 
 676 a, 728// 
 
 10 1- 
 
 5 
 
 721a 
 
 15 
 
 40 
 
 
 719/^ 
 
 1- 
 
 10 
 
 858 
 
 16 
 
 4 1 
 
 
 728// 
 
 3 
 
 
 601, 614 a, c, 
 
 18 
 
 42 
 
 
 637 a, 856 
 
 
 
 852/' 
 
 19 
 
 43 
 
 
 614 
 
 4 
 
 
 601 
 
 20 
 
 44 
 
 
 708 e, 711 d, 
 
 5 
 
 
 682, 
 
 21-2 
 
 
 
 725 a, 
 
 6 
 
 
 594, 721a 
 
 23 
 
 
 
 121 p, 737, 
 
 9 
 
 
 692^ 
 
 23-6 
 
 
 
 833 c, 
 
 10 
 
 
 637 a, 753 
 
 25 
 
 
 
 854 a, 
 
 1 r 
 
 
 715// 
 
 26 
 
 
 
 885 (ii) a, <r 
 
 12 
 
 
 682 c, 736 b, 
 
 
 45- 
 
 6 
 
 522 
 
 
 
 863 
 
 n 
 
 47 
 
 
 614 b, d 
 
 13 
 
 
 736/ 
 
 28 
 
 49 
 
 
 832 
 
 14 
 
 
 626. 885/ 
 
 3° 
 
 5° 
 
 
 582 
 
 15 
 
 
 626, 715// 
 
 31 
 
 5 1 " 
 
 2 
 
 710 d, 712 //, 
 714// 
 
 16 
 
 
 614 a,/-, 723/, 
 862 
 
 33 
 
 53 
 
 
 683 ,-, 885 <' 
 
 17- 
 
 18 
 
 587-9, 715 d 
 
 
 55 
 
 
 624, 686 a, 
 
 18 
 
 
 576-8 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 714//, 861, 
 
 r 9 
 
 
 815 </ 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 885 (ii)/" 
 
 20 
 
 
 885 (ii) 
 
 36 
 
 56 
 
 
 478, 610, 851 b 
 
 21 
 
 
 679 z- 
 
 38 
 
 59 
 
 
 726//, 859/ 
 
 2 2 
 
 
 885 (ii)a 
 
 
 9 1 
 
 
 610, 687, 813, 
 
 23 
 
 
 864, 885 (u)c 
 
 39 
 
 
 
 885 (ii) a 
 
 2 4 
 
 
 770 
 
 40 
 
 2 — 
 
 3 
 
 852 </ 
 
 28 
 
 
 112 d 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 718//, 735 a 
 
 29 
 
 
 683/ 
 
 41 
 
 5 
 
 
 748// 
 
 3i- 
 
 3 
 
 726 a 
 
 4 2 
 
 6 
 
 
 693 //, 737 //, 
 
 33 
 
 
 674 
 
 43 
 
 
 
 885 (ii) //, c 
 
 34 
 
 
 715 b, 722 k 
 
 44 
 
 6- 
 
 15 
 
 709 
 
 35 
 
 
 708 /', 722 k 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 652//, 720;/, 
 
 36 
 
 
 674, 835 a 
 
 45 
 
 
 
 728 /o 
 
 37" 
 
 3 
 
 526 
 
 47 
 
 7~ 
 
 1 1 
 
 773 
 
 38 
 
 
 626 
 
 48 
 
 7- 
 
 25 
 
 607 
 
 4° 
 
 
 527 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 737 a, 885 (ii)// 
 
 4 2 
 
 
 527 
 
 49 
 
 9 
 
 
 686,/. 861 
 
 11 1 
 
 
 696 b, 734 c, 
 
 50 
 
 1 r 
 
 
 652//, 885 (ii) a 
 
 
 
 770,771a, // 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 693, 815// 
 
 2 
 
 
 734 c, 768 a. 
 
 50-2 
 
 18 
 
 
 526 
 
 
 
 780 
 
 51 
 
 JOHN 
 
 PAR. 
 
 716 <•, 728 o-p 
 529, 710 d, 
 
 112; 
 728 /, 744 (vi) 
 
 foil. 
 527 a, 652 a, 
 
 719- 726a 
 607, 863 
 718//, 863 
 652,, 693 a, 
 
 858 
 693 a, 858 
 710 //, 865, 
 
 885 (ii) b 
 528 
 
 528, 545 
 710, 885 (ii) C 
 864 
 
 885 (ii)/' 
 636, 771 / 
 
 529, 719 c 
 534 
 
 529 34 
 
 534 
 
 507 />, 529 a, 
 
 710/, 712 d 
 464, 636 
 535, 862 
 696A 
 
 684a, 885 (ii) b 
 466, 610, 713c, 
 
 727 //, 
 
 811 b, c 
 609 
 
 885 (ii)a 
 716 c, 728/ 
 636, 713, , 769, 
 
 811 />, c 
 885 (ii)//, c 
 529-34, 598, 
 
 712/ 
 608 
 
 528, 885 (ii) ^ 
 683 a, 752 a,/ 
 652 a, 760, 
 
 885 (ii)b 
 604 
 692 
 536, 702, 718/, 
 
 721/' 
 768 
 688 a, 718/, 
 
 770 
 885// 
 768 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 [printed 438 — 885). 
 
 635 
 

 INDICES TO 
 
 "JOHANNINE VO< 
 
 PABULARY " 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 PAH. 
 
 
 
 PAN. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 11 5 i- 
 
 : 718/ 
 
 12 y^ 
 
 
 657. 716 b, 
 
 13 18 
 
 884 d, 
 
 r- 
 
 676 a, 682/ 
 
 
 
 735 6-, 
 
 
 885 (ii) b 
 
 53 
 
 536 
 
 
 
 748 a, 
 
 l 9 
 
 545 6 
 
 54 
 
 710, 728/ 
 
 
 
 775 d 
 
 20 
 
 671 /', 721/, 
 
 55 
 
 885 (ii)<z 
 
 36 
 
 
 539 40, 715 g, 
 
 
 723 fi. 
 
 57 
 
 695 r, 771 
 
 
 
 748 a, 
 
 
 826-31 
 
 12 i 
 
 717 //, 770 
 
 
 
 775 ,/, 782- 
 
 21 
 
 727 /', 811 c 
 
 2 
 
 717 a, e, 771 a 
 
 
 
 3, 859 C, 
 
 22 
 
 607, 832 
 
 3 
 
 684 a, 717 0, 
 
 
 
 866 
 
 2 3 
 
 596 a, 744 (vi) 
 
 
 736//, 753, 
 
 37 
 
 
 540 
 
 
 foil., 769 
 
 
 768 a, 
 
 38 
 
 
 766, 852 
 
 2 4 
 
 885 (ii) b 
 
 
 771 £, 
 
 38- 
 
 40 
 
 673/' 
 
 25 
 
 744 (x), 760 
 
 
 885 (ii)a 
 
 39 
 
 
 540 
 
 26 
 
 724 c, 765 
 
 4 
 
 810 a 
 
 39" 
 
 4° 
 
 612-13 
 
 26- 
 
 30 724 e 
 
 5 
 
 710 c, 738, 
 
 40 
 
 
 683 e, 737 c, 
 
 27 
 
 692/, 885(H)/-, 
 
 
 814 a 
 
 
 
 813, 
 
 29 
 
 885 (ii)a 
 
 6 
 
 858, 885 (ii)rt 
 
 
 
 885 (u)c 
 
 30 
 
 544 a, 710 /', 
 
 7 
 
 734 6' 
 
 41 
 
 
 610, 712/ 
 
 
 718/ 
 
 8 
 
 688/' 
 
 42 
 
 
 464,726,765 a, 
 
 33 
 
 658. 676 a, 
 
 9 
 
 652/', 739 40, 
 
 
 
 861 a, 884 a 
 
 
 716 a, 843, 
 
 
 884 a 
 
 4 2 ~ 
 
 3 
 
 540-1 
 
 
 885 (ii) /r 
 
 1 1 
 
 537-8, 652 /', 
 
 43 
 
 
 744 (\\)a 
 
 34 
 
 843 
 
 
 884 a 
 
 44 
 
 
 752/ 
 
 36 
 
 658. 719 c, 
 
 12 
 
 636, 739 40 
 
 44" 
 
 5 
 
 598 
 
 
 728,/, 866 
 
 >3 
 
 633 a, 635 6, 
 
 44" 
 
 6 
 
 543 4 
 
 37 
 
 692 a, 715 //, 
 
 
 674, 684 c, 
 
 44- 
 
 8 
 
 825-31, 832 a 
 
 
 843, 885// 
 
 
 752 a, 755, 
 
 47 
 
 
 614 C, 637 a, 
 
 38 
 
 679, 692 a, 
 
 
 816 b, 
 
 
 
 692- 
 
 
 715 d, 843, 
 
 
 885 (ii)a, c 
 
 47" 
 
 -8 
 
 582-5 
 
 
 885// 
 
 >4 
 
 861/-, 885 (ii)/' 
 
 50 
 
 
 885 d 
 
 14 1 
 
 546, 727/' 
 
 15 
 
 456 a, 636, 
 
 13 1 
 
 
 680 c, 720 d, 
 
 r- 
 
 12 464 
 
 
 674/', 677, 
 
 
 
 744 (vi) 
 
 2 
 
 682//. 684 a 
 
 
 678 d, 
 
 
 
 foil., 860 
 
 2- 
 
 3 661, 688 c 
 
 
 754 a, 756, 
 
 1- 
 
 ■3 
 
 657-8 
 
 3 
 
 637 
 
 
 861/' 
 
 2 
 
 
 724 c, 854 a 
 
 4 
 
 658. 696/ 
 
 16 
 
 721 i, 860 
 
 3 
 
 
 637 a 
 
 5 
 
 728// 
 
 20 
 
 647. 713/ 
 
 4 
 
 
 712 g, 885(ii)/> 
 
 6 
 
 696,. 727// 
 
 20- 
 
 1 538, 702 
 
 5 
 
 
 674 a. 712,^, 
 
 7 
 
 605. 626 
 
 21 
 
 677 a 
 
 
 
 768 a, 
 
 8 
 
 852 
 
 23 
 
 639 b 
 
 
 
 885 (ii)/' 
 
 9 
 
 605, 626/' 
 
 ^4 
 
 681. 692// 
 
 6 
 
 
 636 
 
 IO 
 
 546. 707 a 
 
 25 
 
 450. 713/, 
 
 7 
 
 
 626 
 
 1 1 
 
 546 
 
 
 716,\728/, 
 
 8 
 
 
 860 
 
 12 
 
 546, 662 
 
 
 866/ 
 
 10 
 
 
 728 a 
 
 1 5 
 
 714// 
 
 26 
 
 717 d 
 
 10 
 
 -1 1 
 
 545 a, 857 <' 
 
 iu 
 
 708 a, 712//. 
 
 27 
 
 639/', 692 «\ 
 
 14 
 
 
 861, 885 a' 
 
 
 720/ 
 
 
 719/, 727A 
 
 '5 
 
 
 885 (ii)/' 
 
 17 
 
 627. 727/ 
 
 29 
 
 672 
 
 [6 
 
 
 672. 683 c, 
 
 17- 
 
 19 598 
 
 30 
 
 692 a 
 
 
 
 723 /,775 a, 
 
 rS 
 
 637 
 
 3' 
 
 719/, 859/' 
 
 
 
 784 foil. 
 
 i') 
 
 716/ 
 
 32 
 
 517, 710,^, 
 
 17 
 
 
 784 foil., 859,' 
 
 21 
 
 597 b, 716 //, 
 
 
 866 a 
 
 IS 
 
 
 680 b, 709 /', 
 
 
 885/ 
 
 33 
 
 710 </, 724/ 
 
 
 
 710//, 
 
 2 2 
 
 714/, 716// 
 
 34 
 
 538 9, 704, 
 
 
 
 722 k. 
 
 2 3 
 
 637/' 
 
 
 866 a 
 
 
 
 755 a, 
 
 :o 
 
 720/, 723/' 
 
 Thii Index extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438 885). 
 
 636 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 14 28 
 
 637, 658, 662, 
 
 16 21 
 
 721/7,811/865 
 
 18. 13 
 
 764/, 768, 885 
 
 
 683 c 
 
 2 2 
 
 598,719c, 885 (/ 
 
 
 (ii)/. 
 
 2 9 
 
 546 
 
 25 
 
 675 /, 694 d, 
 
 14 
 
 688 ,7, 885 // 
 
 31 
 
 627 
 
 
 712/ 
 
 15 
 
 767. 885(ii)c 
 
 15 1 
 
 684, 727/; 
 
 25-9 
 
 721/' 
 
 16 
 
 767 
 
 2 
 
 674 
 
 26 
 
 708,7 
 
 18 
 
 711 /", 735 / 
 
 2- 
 
 6 885 (ii)/ 
 
 27 
 
 548. 596 (?, 
 
 
 885(H) c 
 
 3 
 
 857 e 
 
 
 637,7,716/, 
 
 20 
 
 672 /, 694 /, 
 
 4- 
 
 5 674, 707 a 
 
 
 728/ 
 
 
 712/ 
 
 6 
 
 674, 682(7,858, 
 
 28 
 
 637(7, 662 3 
 
 2 ° 
 
 737 c 
 
 
 864 
 
 29 
 
 662 3 
 
 H 
 
 764 b 
 
 9" 
 
 10 707 a 
 
 3° 
 
 464, 548, 637,7 
 
 2 5 
 
 679, 735 (/ 
 
 12 
 
 843 
 
 3 1 
 
 464, 548 
 
 26 
 
 680, 709 ,/, 
 
 13 
 
 715,7' 
 
 3 2 
 
 639(7, b, 674/, 
 
 
 734/', 738/, 
 
 14 
 
 596, 775(7, b, 
 
 
 863 
 
 
 866 c 
 
 
 784-92 
 
 33 
 
 549, 771 c, 
 
 27 
 
 679 
 
 15 
 
 596. 717/, 
 
 
 811 e, f 
 
 28 
 
 745 ,7, 814 
 
 
 723 i, 775 
 
 17 1 
 
 639/ 
 
 
 815 /', 885 
 
 
 (7, /;, 784- 
 
 1—2 
 
 590 2. 608 
 
 
 (ii)/ 
 
 
 92 
 
 2 
 
 576-8 
 
 29 
 
 885(H) b 
 
 16 
 
 659-60, 676, 
 
 3 
 
 627 
 
 3 1 
 
 685, 715/ 
 
 r 9 
 
 716/", 728/ 
 
 4 
 
 774 c, 884 c 
 
 3 2 
 
 710 (/, 724/ 
 
 20 
 
 683 c 721 h, 
 
 5 
 
 712/, 719/" 
 
 35 
 
 713/, 718/ 
 
 
 723 7,775 a, 
 
 7 
 
 719/ 
 
 56 
 
 685 (7, 713 m, 
 
 
 /, 784-92, 
 
 8 
 
 464,550,637(7, 
 
 
 719/, k, 
 
 
 854 c 
 
 
 727/ 
 
 
 764 
 
 21 
 
 625. 626 c, 
 
 9 
 
 708(7 
 
 37 
 
 614 c, 727/- 
 
 
 692 a 
 
 12 
 
 591, 722 k, 
 
 38 
 
 727 r 
 
 22 
 
 719 /», 834 (/ 
 
 
 810(7 
 
 40 
 
 752(7 
 
 24 
 
 605, 719/' 
 
 13 
 
 719/ 
 
 19 2 
 
 676 (/, 734 a, 
 
 25 
 
 715 c, 751(7 
 
 15 
 
 708(7 
 
 
 805-6, 814/, 
 
 26 
 
 720/ 723 e, 
 
 17 
 
 727,/ 
 
 
 885 (ii)/ 
 
 
 111 p 
 
 18 
 
 723/ 
 
 3 
 
 737 c 
 
 27 
 
 708 c 
 
 19 
 
 692(7, 885/7 
 
 4 
 
 707/ 
 
 16 r 
 
 545, 694(7 
 
 20 
 
 708 a 
 
 5 
 
 674 /, 734 ,7. 
 
 2 
 
 679, 726. 885 
 
 20-1 
 
 464, 550 
 
 
 755, 805(7, 
 
 
 («)*; ' 
 
 22 
 
 712/ 
 
 
 885 (ii)/ 
 
 3 
 
 626 c 
 
 2 3 
 
 627^ 774 c, 
 
 6 
 
 721/, 752(7 
 
 4 
 
 708 c, 721// 
 
 
 884, 
 
 7 
 
 861 
 
 5 
 
 658, 728,/ 
 
 24 
 
 712/, 858 
 
 8 
 
 614/ 
 
 5~ 
 
 7 662 
 
 2 5 
 
 629(7, 691c 
 
 9 
 
 728 c, 814, 
 
 6 
 
 713 d, 771 
 
 18 1 
 
 885 (ii)/, c 
 
 ro 
 
 577, 593 
 
 7 
 
 720/ 723 e 
 
 3 
 
 815 c, 885 (ii) 
 
 n 
 
 570 c, 577, 
 
 8 
 
 582-5 
 
 
 b, c 
 
 
 707 c, 884/ 
 
 8- 
 
 ro 854/; 
 
 5 
 
 860 
 
 12 
 
 752 (7, 764, 
 
 9 
 
 464. 547 
 
 6 
 
 885 (ii) c 
 
 
 788(7 
 
 10 
 
 658 
 
 / 
 
 672 c, 860 
 
 12- 
 
 16 593 4 
 
 11 
 
 582-5 
 
 8 
 
 652,7, 885 t^ 
 
 13 
 
 614/, 713 c 
 
 13 
 
 727/, 861 
 
 10 
 
 680, 709 (/, 
 
 
 745, 750. 
 
 16 
 
 597 
 
 
 710 »-, 73477, 
 
 
 885 (ii) Z 
 
 16- 
 
 19 598 c, 716/ 
 
 
 738?'. 885 
 
 15 
 
 752(7 
 
 19 
 
 735 b 
 
 
 (ii)/ 
 
 17 
 
 713 g, 792 /, 
 
 20 
 
 857 
 
 1 1 
 
 508, 678, . 885 
 
 
 807. 810 
 
 20- 
 
 22 713,/, 771 
 
 
 («)* 
 
 18 
 
 796 
 
 21 
 
 676 b, 708 b, 
 
 1 : 
 
 738, 815 c 
 
 19 
 
 860, 885(ii)c 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 (printed 438—885). 
 
 $37 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 19 20 
 
 689 a, 713r, g, 
 
 20 14 
 
 725/ 
 
 21 
 
 9 
 
 607.711^,763, 
 
 
 721/, 885 
 
 1 5 
 
 728/, 885 {\\)b 
 
 
 
 769 
 
 
 (ii)r 
 
 16 
 
 694,", 713^, 
 
 
 10 
 
 719- 723/ 
 
 2 3 
 
 707 c, 885 (ii) 
 
 
 737,/ 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 683 a. 710 f, 
 
 
 a, <- 
 
 17 
 
 695^, 719 a, 
 
 
 
 712 a 
 
 24 
 
 679. 722 k, 
 
 
 728/, 749 
 
 
 12 
 
 602. 751. 780, 
 
 
 769-70 
 
 18 
 
 599 a, 601, 
 
 
 
 810, 
 
 25 
 
 885 (ii)/' 
 
 
 694,/, 885 
 
 
 1 2- 
 
 -13 636 
 
 26 
 
 596a, 610, 744 
 
 
 (ii)a 
 
 
 14 
 
 597 /. 686 c, 
 
 
 (vi) foil. 
 
 '9 
 
 636. 681 c, 
 
 
 
 695,'. 716/ 
 
 26- 
 
 -30 752/ 
 
 
 725/ 796- 
 
 
 
 738 a 
 
 27 
 
 721/ 
 
 
 7, 804 a, 
 
 
 15 
 
 714 a. 728/, 
 
 2<S 
 
 722/-, 750 6, 
 
 
 813 a, 854 e, 
 
 
 
 885 (ii) a 
 
 
 774, 
 
 
 858, 884 c 
 
 
 T 5- 
 
 17 437-41. 714a. 
 
 28- 
 
 30 865/' 
 
 20 
 
 780 
 
 
 
 728/ 
 
 29 
 
 813,. 864, 885 
 
 21 
 
 723 e-g, 854,- 
 
 
 r6 
 
 862. 885 (ii) /5 
 
 
 (ii)* 
 
 2 2 
 
 72l//885(ii)a 
 
 
 17 
 
 624 b, 695 e, 
 
 3° 
 
 451 8,462 a-c, 
 839 foil. , 
 
 2 3 
 
 682 d, 691 a, 
 721; 
 
 
 
 728 />, 885 
 
 (ii)/ 
 
 
 858 a 
 
 -4 
 
 695/. 710 
 
 
 18 
 
 693.;. 712..-, 
 
 3 1 
 
 683a, 885(ii) r 
 
 25 
 
 465, 552-8, 
 
 
 
 735/, 843, 
 
 31- 
 
 3 751 
 
 
 885 (ii)/, <r 
 
 
 
 885 (ii) a 
 
 32 
 
 678 b, 817 c, 
 
 885(H),- 
 
 26 
 
 636, 725/, 796 
 -7, 854 c, 
 
 
 l 9 
 
 710 ,/. 712 k, 
 724/, 843 
 
 33 
 
 775</, 885(ii)<- 
 
 
 858, 884 c 
 
 
 20 
 
 596,/. 607. 638, 
 
 34 
 
 756 
 
 27 
 
 681 b, 862 e 
 
 
 
 695//, 744 
 
 35 
 
 465, 551. 606, 
 727// 
 
 29 
 
 465, 554- 60, 
 599. 601, 
 
 
 
 (vi) foil., 
 760 
 
 36 
 
 722/-, 861 
 
 
 749/, 859 c 
 
 
 20 
 
 "oil. 638-9 
 
 37 
 
 687 e, 722 k, 
 
 30 
 
 768/ 
 
 
 2 2 
 
 735 a 
 
 
 856 a. 885 
 
 31 
 
 465. 553, 561 
 
 
 23 
 
 708;. 735 a 
 
 
 (ii)a 
 
 21 1 
 
 597 /. 686 c, 
 
 
 25 
 
 885(H)// 
 
 38 
 
 541. 681 c 
 
 
 716/ 726 e, 
 
 
 
 
 39 
 
 544. 718/, 754, 
 
 
 738 a, 811,/ 
 
 
 
 ACTS 
 
 
 885 (ii) a, b 
 
 5 
 
 710. 727 a 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 794 a 
 
 40 
 
 600, 716 a, 
 
 3 
 
 544,/. 652 a, 
 
 
 [4 
 
 749 a' 
 
 
 734 c, 751 r, 
 
 
 718;', 719^, 
 
 
 15 
 
 708/ 
 
 
 832 b, 866 
 
 
 723 b 
 
 
 16- 
 
 20 722// 
 
 
 (i)-(iv) 
 
 3-8 
 
 736 c 
 
 
 25 
 
 720 i 
 
 20 1 
 
 607. 710 b, 
 
 4 
 
 725 b, /', 754, 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 121a 
 
 
 718;. 815a 
 
 
 884 c 
 
 
 '4 
 
 725 
 
 2 
 
 596 a. 728 a 7 ,/ 
 
 4-9 
 
 763 
 
 
 •7 
 
 592 
 
 3- 
 
 1 1 798 804 
 
 » 
 
 676 /. 796 a, 
 
 
 3« 
 
 485, 
 
 4 
 
 727a, 885 (ii),- 
 
 
 885 (ii)/ 
 
 5 
 
 1 5 
 
 736,/ 
 
 5 
 
 600 1, 607, 
 
 6 
 
 691,/, 693/ 
 
 
 20 
 
 725 c 
 
 
 716a, 726/ 
 
 
 710 -712 a, 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 772a 
 
 7 
 
 760,866(ii)-(iv) 
 
 
 763a. 834, 
 
 1 
 
 43 
 
 645,/ 
 
 8 
 
 465. 552 60, 
 
 i 
 
 596 a, 602, 
 
 
 r 5 
 
 772 a 
 
 
 722 a foil. 
 
 
 712 v. 744 
 
 
 .-5 
 
 6 725 // 
 
 8- 
 
 10 673, 
 
 
 (vi) foil., 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 485, 
 
 9 
 
 491. 722 a / 
 
 
 780. 810/ 
 
 
 '9 
 
 594,/ 
 
 1 1 
 
 466, 560, 600, 
 
 7 8 
 
 560 
 
 
 •> — 
 - / 
 
 645,/ 
 
 
 726/. 775 ,/ 
 
 8 
 
 712 a, 734 ,/, 
 
 
 .'.-' 
 
 5 772 // 
 
 12 
 
 672. 858 
 
 
 736,. 862, 
 
 9 
 
 33 
 
 736,/ 
 
 »3 
 
 728,/ 
 
 
 885 lii), 
 
 
 42 
 
 476 a 
 
 This Imicx extends from 1438 to 1885 1 printed 438 -885). 
 
 638 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 
 ACTS 
 
 
 
 ROMANS 
 
 
 GALATIANS 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAN. 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 735/' 
 
 8 
 
 17 
 
 
 844 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 673,/ 
 
 
 25 
 
 645,/ 
 
 
 35. 
 
 37 
 
 744 (iv) 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 884,7 
 
 
 4.; 
 
 476 a 
 
 9 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 478 
 
 
 9 
 
 720, 
 
 
 4* 
 
 485, 
 
 
 '7 
 
 
 722 h 
 
 
 16 
 
 474, 722 / 
 
 11 
 
 '7 
 
 476 a 
 
 
 2 1 
 
 
 583,7 
 
 
 20 
 
 517, 744 (iv), 
 
 
 ^4 
 
 772,7 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 478 
 
 
 
 (x) 
 
 
 28 
 
 724/ 
 
 
 ^?, 
 
 
 474 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 474 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 723, 
 
 10 
 
 9- 
 
 1 1 
 
 541 
 
 
 8, 
 
 10, 
 
 
 21 
 
 745,/ 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 474, 722// 
 
 
 
 22 722/ 
 
 13 
 
 4' 
 
 507/ 
 
 
 '4 
 
 
 474 
 
 
 2 7 
 
 475,7 
 
 14 
 
 2 
 
 708/ 
 
 
 2 1 
 
 
 501,7 
 
 4 
 
 10 
 
 648/ 
 
 
 •3 
 
 735/ 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 
 
 722 h 
 
 
 r 9 
 
 598/ 
 
 
 17 
 
 853 a 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 478 
 
 
 20 
 
 735/ 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 476,?, 692/ 
 
 
 3 2 
 
 
 722/ 
 
 
 3° 
 
 722/? 
 
 16 
 
 r 9 
 
 710 g 
 
 12 
 
 21 
 
 
 771, 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 725,? 
 
 
 3 1 
 
 476 a, 507 a 
 
 13 
 
 1 
 
 
 569 b, c 
 
 
 12 
 
 709,/, 734/ 
 
 
 34 
 
 692/ 
 
 14 
 
 3" 
 
 22 
 
 714 g 
 
 
 13 
 
 717/" 
 
 17 
 
 3 
 
 692/ 
 
 
 4 
 24 
 
 
 725 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 725« 
 
 15 
 
 
 604/ 
 
 
 EPHiSIANS 
 
 
 27 
 
 617, 804/ 
 
 16 
 
 5 
 
 
 722/ 
 
 2 
 
 4- 
 
 5 744(iv),z 
 
 18 
 
 12, 
 
 16, 
 
 1 7 745 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 19 
 
 569,? 
 629 
 
 19 
 
 4 
 
 476,? 
 
 1 
 
 COE 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 744 (iv) 
 
 
 5 
 3 2 
 
 485, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 715^, 782 
 
 
 504/ 
 
 1 
 
 13. 
 
 r 5 
 
 485 c 
 
 
 25 
 
 744(iv) 
 
 
 33 
 
 735/ 
 
 
 2 2 
 
 
 479 
 
 6 
 
 I '2 
 
 569,7 
 
 20 
 
 28 
 
 720 i 
 
 2 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 727 
 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 3° 
 
 710 £ 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 
 714,;' 
 
 
 PHI] 
 
 22 
 
 •9 
 23 
 
 476,7 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 842 
 
 1 
 
 14 
 
 744 (iv)/ 
 
 
 752 a 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 
 714; 
 
 
 '9 
 
 763/ 
 
 23 
 
 13, 
 
 21 504/ 
 
 6 
 
 1 2 
 
 
 594,7 
 
 
 29 
 
 474 
 
 
 35 
 
 1 1 
 
 814 e 
 
 
 J 9 
 
 
 740 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 
 748,7, 749 ,- 
 
 24 
 
 645,7 
 
 7 
 
 31 
 
 
 570 c 
 
 3 
 
 12 
 
 735/ 
 
 25 
 
 6, 
 
 10, 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 
 834/ 
 
 4 
 
 13 
 
 744 (iv) a 
 
 
 
 17 745,7 
 
 9 
 
 1- 
 
 5 
 
 594,7 
 
 
 
 
 
 27 
 '9 
 
 724/ 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 570, 
 
 
 COL 
 
 26 
 
 501,7 
 
 10 
 
 2 
 
 
 475,7 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 475 
 
 27 
 
 12 
 
 504/ 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 692/ 
 
 
 13 
 
 568, 569,/, 570, 
 
 
 21 
 
 725 e 
 
 11 
 
 18 
 
 
 507/ 
 
 
 16 
 
 569,? 
 
 28 
 
 2 3 
 
 504/ 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 
 475,7 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 475 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 
 478 
 
 
 9 
 
 772,? 
 
 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 474 ,7. 507 b 
 
 
 1 0, 
 
 15 569,7 
 
 
 
 ROMANS 
 
 14 
 
 25 
 
 
 645 
 
 
 r6 
 
 648/ 
 
 1 
 
 30 
 
 501 a 
 
 15 
 
 3- 
 
 4 
 
 722 c 
 
 4 
 
 12 
 
 725,/ 
 
 2 
 
 
 -7 714 i r 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 560, 802 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 501 77 
 
 
 5 - 
 
 8 
 
 597/, 716/ 
 
 
 rHES 
 
 
 17 
 
 648 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 504/ 
 
 1 
 
 9 
 
 727/' 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 771, 
 
 
 2 4 
 
 
 569,7 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 662" 
 
 
 20- 
 
 8 478 
 
 16 
 
 13 
 
 
 725,7 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 828,7, 832,7 
 
 4 
 
 2— 
 
 6 478 
 
 
 22 
 
 
 630-1, 728 ,/ 
 
 
 14 
 
 474,7 
 
 
 3 
 
 474, 722 h 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 715 ?, 782-3 
 
 6 
 
 5, 
 3 
 
 24 474 
 475 a 
 
 2 
 
 CORINTHIANS 
 
 2 
 
 rHESSALONIANS 
 
 
 6 
 
 517 
 
 3 
 
 17 
 
 
 727,/ 
 
 2 
 
 11, 
 
 12 474,? 
 
 7 
 
 '9 
 
 772/ 
 
 11 
 
 3 2 
 
 
 723 c 
 
 
 16 
 
 744 (iv) a 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438— 885). 
 
 639 
 

 
 INDICES TC 
 
 • "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 
 i 
 
 TIMOTHY 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 JAMES 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 1 JOHN 
 
 PAR. 
 
 1 
 
 12 
 
 744 (iv) a 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 716/" 
 
 5 
 
 10-13 487a 
 
 
 16 
 
 474 c 
 
 
 5 
 
 7227/ 
 
 
 13 
 
 553 a 
 
 
 18 
 
 692/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 609 
 
 4 
 
 13 
 
 638, 735 a 
 
 
 
 1 PETER 
 
 
 I? 
 
 764 a 
 
 5 
 
 18 
 
 722/; 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 475 
 
 
 20 
 
 627, 856 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 677 a 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 600 b, 726 0, 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 TIMOTHY 
 
 
 21 
 
 800/ 
 475 
 
 
 
 3 JOHN 
 
 1 
 
 1 2 
 
 474, 
 
 
 2 4 
 
 592 
 
 
 14 
 
 609 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 692 j 
 844 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 677 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 6 
 
 722 h 
 
 
 
 JUDE 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 501a 
 
 4 
 5 
 
 19 
 
 3 
 
 692/ 
 594a 
 
 
 6 
 
 800 b 
 
 
 
 TITUS 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 2 PETER" 
 
 
 REVELATION 
 
 1 
 
 16 
 
 501a 
 
 1 
 
 13 
 
 832 c 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 724/ 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 569 a 
 
 
 20 
 
 722/ 
 
 
 4 
 
 639 
 
 
 3 
 
 501a 
 
 3 
 
 ! 
 
 832 c 
 
 
 5 
 
 696 c 
 
 
 8 
 
 474 c 
 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 794 
 
 
 '5 
 
 728,/ 
 
 
 
 1 JOHN 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 794 
 
 
 PHILEMON 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 I- 
 
 604, 804/ 
 5 616 20 
 
 
 13 
 17 
 
 696 c 
 
 711// 
 
 
 5 
 
 475 
 
 
 9 
 
 764 a, 848. 
 
 
 26 
 
 564, 594// 
 
 
 HEBREWS 
 
 
 
 861a 
 
 3 
 
 7~ 
 
 14 727/ 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 720/ 
 
 
 9 
 
 744 ( iv) 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 645 
 
 
 3> 
 
 5 628 
 
 
 '4 
 
 696 c 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 712 A 
 
 
 7 
 
 687 d 
 
 
 T 9 
 
 728,/ 
 
 
 12 
 
 794 
 
 
 8 
 
 727,^ 
 
 
 20 
 
 725// 
 
 
 15 
 
 811, 
 
 
 9- 
 
 10 539 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 794 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 476 b, 853 a 
 
 
 1 r 
 
 656 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 563. 594 b 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 
 845 
 
 
 12 
 
 553 a 
 
 
 10 
 
 727/ 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 485 a 
 
 
 18, 
 
 29 628 
 
 7 
 
 17 
 
 794 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 728 /., 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 609 
 
 9 
 
 3 j 
 
 10. 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 504 b 
 
 
 8, 
 
 12 728// 
 
 
 
 19 563 
 
 8 
 
 2 
 
 727/i 
 
 
 17 
 
 603 a 
 
 
 20 
 
 646 
 
 9 
 
 24 
 
 727/i 
 
 
 18 
 
 728//, 744 (v) 
 
 11 
 
 3 
 
 696 c 
 
 10 
 
 7> 
 
 9 637 a. 856 
 
 
 '9 
 
 628 
 
 
 6 
 
 563. 594/ 
 
 
 r- 
 
 485 a 
 
 
 23 
 
 487/. 553 a 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 563 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 
 478 c 
 
 
 24 
 
 628 
 
 13 
 
 ^ 
 
 1 : 564a 
 
 
 6 
 
 476/' 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 628 
 
 
 7 
 
 594/ 
 
 
 18- 
 
 [9 722 c 
 
 
 3 
 
 722/- 
 
 
 8, 
 
 12 646 
 
 
 21 
 
 645 
 
 
 6 
 
 628, 727/ 
 
 14 
 
 9i 
 
 1 1 646 
 
 
 34 
 
 858 a 
 
 
 7 
 
 628 
 
 
 lS 
 
 564. 594/ 
 
 12 
 
 2 
 
 475/ 
 
 
 9 
 
 498. 723 § 
 
 16 
 
 9 
 
 564/. 594/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 723- 
 
 17 
 
 6 
 
 696 c 
 
 
 
 JAMES 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 604 
 
 
 1:, 
 
 !.; 564 
 
 1 
 
 25 
 
 600 /. 726 b, 
 
 
 14 
 
 604. 723 ?, 
 
 is 
 
 • 
 
 564 
 
 
 
 800 
 
 
 
 774 a 
 
 l'.i 
 
 20 
 
 723, 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 722// 
 
 
 16 
 
 629 
 
 20 
 
 4 
 
 646 
 
 
 ' i 
 
 478 
 
 
 '7 
 
 585 a. 859/ 
 
 
 6 
 
 564 
 
 
 '9 
 
 476 
 
 
 [8 
 
 651. 681c 
 
 22 
 
 >4 
 
 564c. 594 b 
 
 
 
 476. 596 a, 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 637 a. 727/ 
 
 
 1 5 
 
 728 / 
 
 
 
 722 h. 790/ 
 
 
 10 
 
 491/ 
 
 
 '7- 
 
 20 631 
 
 /'///> Index extends from 1438 /,< 1885 {printed 438— 885). 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 II. SUBJECT-MATTER (ENGLISH) 
 
 [For Synoptic and Johannine words not in this Index, see the English 
 alphabetical lists in 1672 — 96 and 1707—28] 
 
 Aaron, " the holy one of God " 835 a 
 
 Abide 707; "abiding in" 659-60; 
 " abiding," higher than " believing " 
 547 
 
 Above, from, 707 
 
 Abraham, God's "friend" 596a, 789 a, 
 790 ; his faith 472-8 
 
 Adders, deaf 614 d 
 
 Allusiveness, in Jn 438-9, 446 ; speci- 
 mens of 450-8, 762-3, 797, 804, 
 831 
 
 Alone, " the linen cloths alone" 804 
 
 Ambiguities, verbal 444-5, 529, and see 
 Index to "Johannine Grammar" 
 
 Annas 764 
 
 Aphesis, the sabbatical " release " 690 
 
 Apostles or Missionaries in the first 
 century 594 a 
 
 "Appeared to" or "was seen by" 
 (it00??) 597/; 
 
 Apprehend (Ko.TaXa.fj.pdi'w) 735 e 
 
 Authority 562-94; "receiving author- 
 ity," explained by Origen 484 
 
 Baptism, baptizing 485, 487, 493 
 Baptist, see "John " 
 Begin (vb.), only once in Jn 674 a 
 Beginning (n.) 708 a" 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 
 
 A. VI. 64 
 
 Beholding {Qewpiw) 597 foil., 723; 
 sometimes unintelligent 598 
 
 Belief or faith, not used by Jn as noun 
 467 ; Mk's doctrine of 467 ; meaning 
 of, influenced by Christianity 473 ; 
 "thy faith hath saved thee," unique 
 agreement as to, in the Triple Tradi- 
 tion 477; insignificance of "faith" 
 in the teaching of Epictetus 479 ; 
 a lower and a higher 505 ; inferior to 
 "knowledge" 559 
 
 "Believe" or "trust," a key-word in 
 the Fourth Gospel 463—561 
 
 Benefactor, a name assumed by several 
 Eastern kings 571 
 
 Blood and water, the fountain of 606 
 
 Bowing the head 451 foil. 
 
 Bread 699 ; " the true bread " 513 
 
 Break (bread) 675 
 
 Brother (metaph.), not used in Jn till 
 after the Resurrection 701; "the 
 brethren" 708; "my brethren" 
 748-9 
 
 Burial of the Lord, the, verbal differ- 
 ences as to 866 (i) — (iv) 
 
 Child 676 ; " authority to become chil- 
 dren of God" 579; "receiving little 
 
 to 1885 {printed 438—885). 
 
 I 41 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 children'" 698; "children of light " 
 
 782 
 Coming, vbs denoting 630-9 ; the 
 
 coming of the Lord 630 foil. ; "come 
 
 and see," a Talmudic formula 609 ; 
 
 " Hethatcometh," a technical Jewish 
 
 term 633 ; " thy king cometh " 634 ; 
 
 s. also 624 a 
 Compassion 677 
 Cross, the, taking up, bearing etc. 
 
 792 />, 842; in connexion with 
 
 "following" Christ 843 
 Cry aloud 752 a foil. 
 
 Darkness 710 ; degrees of 544 
 Dative w. iriarevw 470-90 
 Deaf, the, not mentioned in Jn 614 
 Debts, remission of, in the sabbatical 
 
 year 462, 690 ; Mt. has " debts " for 
 
 " sins " in the Lord's Prayer 462 
 Destruction, parall. to "Judas Iscariot" 
 
 810a; "the son of destruction" to 
 
 be "destroyed" 591 
 Devils, authority to cast out 580 a 
 Diminutives, Jn's use of 736 e, 738 
 "Disciple that Jesus loved, the" 
 
 744 (x) ; at Christ's tomb 600 
 Double Tradition, denned 447 foil. 
 
 Edition, a second, hypothesis of in Lk. 
 
 871a 
 Elenchos, the convicting Logos or 
 
 Spirit 609 a 
 Enemies, "a man's enemies shall be 
 
 they of his own household" 792a 
 Enlightened, "those who were once 
 
 enlightened " = " baptized " 485 a 
 " Eternal," applied by Jn to nothing 
 
 but "life" 705 
 Eucrgctes and Kakergetes 571 
 " Eyes, lifting up the," symbolical 608 
 
 Faith, see "Belief" 
 
 Family of Heaven, the 698 
 
 Father, divine 711 
 
 Fear [i.e. worship) the Lord 643 a, 651 
 
 Fellowship 619, 700 
 
 Fire of coals 711 
 
 Five Thousand, Feeding of the 512 
 
 Flesh, metaph. 699 ; " all flesh " 592 
 
 Following Christ 840-3 
 
 Forgive, forgiveness 682 ; authority to 
 forgive 575 
 
 Free (adj.) 712; "I am free and a 
 friend of God" 788a 
 
 Freedom 727a; Epictetus on "free- 
 dom " and " slavery " 717 g 
 
 Friend, "my friends" 775 a, 784; 
 distinction between "friends" and 
 "servants" 789-91; "a friend of 
 Caesar" 788a; "I am free and a 
 friend of God " 788 a 
 
 Galilaeans, the, described differently by 
 
 Lk. and Jn 606 a 
 Galilee, the sea of 811 a" 
 Glory, glorifying 712 ; in Jn, of a 
 
 spiritual nature 489-90 
 God, "knowing God," "not knowing 
 
 God" 622 
 Going, vbs denoting 652-64; "go and 
 
 bear fruit " 659-60 
 Golgotha 807 
 "Government, the," Jewish traditions 
 
 on 570 
 Greater, of persons 683 
 Greek, classical, fails to represent 
 
 Semitic traditions about trust in God 
 
 470 ; low-class 732, 736, 737 
 "Crow in the understanding of God" 
 
 627 
 
 "Hating one's own life" 450, 713/, 
 761, 792 a 
 
 Head, "bow the head," meaning of 
 451 foil., 839 
 
 Hearing, the Johannine ami the Synop- 
 tic view of 612 
 
 Heaven, the opening of 530/', 866 (iv) 
 
 Hebrew, "believing" or "trusting," 
 meaning of, in Hebrew 469-71 
 
 Thil Index extends from 1438 to 1885 ( printed 438 — 885). 
 
 642 
 
SUBJECT-MATTER (ENGLISH) 
 
 Hell, "destroying in hell," parallel to 
 " casting into hell " 566 
 
 Hillel, abrogated the Remission of 
 Debts 462, 690 
 
 " Holy One of God, the," 835 
 
 Hosanna 807 
 
 Household, "they of his own house- 
 hold," Heb. " men of his house," Syr. 
 "sons of his house," = " friends" 
 787 
 
 I AM [HE] 522 
 "Israelite, an" 727/ 
 
 "Jews, the," the term how used in Jn 
 647, 713 
 
 John, St, the Baptist 482 
 
 John, St, the Evangelist, see "Johan- 
 nine Grammar" Contents, passim, 
 and, in Index, " Allusiveness," "Am- 
 biguity," "Emphasis," "Metaphor," 
 "Mysticism," "Narrowing down," 
 "Quotation" 
 
 "Joseph, son of" 776-8 
 
 Jubilee, the, = the Sabbatical Year 690/' 
 
 Judas Iscariot, parall. to "destruction" 
 810 a 
 
 Judging, judgment 714 ; not in Triple 
 Tradition 714a'; "judgment," not 
 used by Mk 585; "day of j." not 
 mentioned in Jn 585a; "authority to 
 do judgment" 581-5 
 
 "Judgment seat, a" or "the" 745 
 
 Kingdom, antithesis between k. and 
 "authority" 568; "the k. of God, of 
 heaven" 685a 
 
 Knowing, vbs denoting 621-9 
 
 Logos, the, described by Philo as 
 "standing" 725 g 
 
 Look, "stoop (?) and look in" 798 
 
 Loosing the shoe 833 d 
 
 "Lord, the," meaning "Jesus" 779 foil. 
 
 Love, different words for 436, 596, 716, 
 728 w— p; the n. not used by Mk 697 
 
 Luke, a compiler of traditions in various 
 styles 758; hypothesis of a second 
 edition in his gospel 871a; his view 
 of "authority" 565-71 ; avoids virayw 
 653 ; Jn differs from 606 a, 778; where 
 Lk. omits, Jn intervenes 792 
 
 Manifest (vb) 716 
 
 Maran atha 630-1 
 
 Mark, his doctrine of belief or faith 467 
 
 Marvel (see "Wonder") rebuked by 
 
 Jesus 673 a 
 Mary Magdalene at Christ's tomb 601 
 Meant (£\eye) 491 a 
 "Meek," an epithet om. by Jn in 
 
 quoting Zechariah 456 
 Metaphors, Johannine 699, 867 
 Midst, "standing in the midst," used 
 
 of Jesus 793-7 
 Might, mighty 686; "mighty work" 
 
 686 e 
 "Minister" and "slave," apparently 
 
 used by Mk as parallel terms 717^ 
 "Multitude, the great" 739-40 
 
 Name, the, believing in 483 
 
 "Narrowing down" 481 
 
 Nathanael, his profession of belief 488; 
 
 the calling of 671 b 
 "Nazareth where he was brought up" 
 
 778 
 Nicodemus, the dialogue with 493-6; 
 
 "a ruler of the Jews" 765a 
 
 "Law, your" 715 
 
 Life, "hating one's own life" 450, 713/, Ni S ht (metaph.) 718 
 
 792 a ; "authority to lay down one's " Nos q ui cum eo fuimus" 802 a 
 
 life" 594 : "Now," different meanings of 719 
 
 Light, children (or sons) of 782; the 
 
 Light of the world 748 I "Own, his" 720 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438 — 885). 
 
 643 41—2 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 Parable, see "Proverb" 
 
 Paraclete, the 720 
 
 Paul, St, his view of "belief" 475, 478 
 
 Perfect belief, knowledge etc. 629 
 
 Peter, St, at Christ's tomb 600 
 
 Phantasm, phantom, or spirit 813 a 
 
 Praetorium, not in Lk. but in Acts 
 
 814 c 
 Praying (irpofffvxofxai) not mentioned 
 
 by Jesus in Jn 649 
 Prepositions in the Four Gospels 
 
 881-5 
 "Privately," not used by Jn of Christ's 
 
 teaching 672 3 
 "Proverb" and "parable" 721 
 
 "Qui cum eo fuimus" 802a 
 Quotation, Johannine, of Zechariah, 
 
 inaccurate 456, 757 ; from Scripture, 
 
 how introduced 722// 
 
 Rebelling 502 
 
 Receiving (persons) 689, 721 ; "receiving 
 little ones" 829 
 
 Recognising 629 a 
 
 "Reigning with Christ" 844 
 
 Rejection, Mk, Lk., and Jn on 823 foil. 
 
 Remission of sins 690 
 
 Resurrection, Christ's, revealed dif- 
 ferently to different persons 600 
 
 "Retaining sins" 721 
 
 Revelation, "God revealed Himself by 
 degrees" 600a 
 
 Righteous, only once in Jn 668 ; applied 
 to God 691 e 
 
 "Rising again," an ambiguous term 
 529 
 
 Sabbatical Year, the 690 3 foil. 
 
 Salim 721 
 
 Samaritan Woman, the, dialogue with 
 
 647-51 
 Scripture, "believing the s. " 491-2; 
 
 "another s." 722; "the s.," "this s." 
 
 722; "the scriptures" 722 
 "Sea of Galilee, the" 811 
 
 Seeing, vbs denoting 597 — 611, 723 ; 
 
 Philo on Gen. i. 31, "God saw 
 
 (eI5ef) his works" 611a 
 Sending, vbs denoting 723; "He that 
 
 sent me" 723 
 Serpent in the Wilderness, the 495, 517 
 Servant 723; bondservant 785; dis- 
 tinction between "servants" and 
 
 "friends" of God 704, 789-91 
 "Signs," i.e. miracles 521 
 Simon, father of Judas Iscariot 724 <; 
 
 Simon, in Heb. cor.fusable w. "those 
 
 with us" 802a 
 Sing, Christ singing 794 
 Single Tradition, defined 447 
 Sins, remission of 690; Mt. substitutes 
 
 "debts" for "sins" in the Lord's 
 
 Prayer 462 
 "Slave" and "Minister," used by Mk 
 
 as parallel terms 717^ 
 Sleep, " He giveth unto his beloved in 
 
 sleep" 515 
 "Son of man" 525a, 539a, 704; the 
 
 Eldest Son "looking at the Father's 
 . acts" 607; Sons of Light 782 
 "Spirit, a," = phantasm, or phantom 
 
 813 a; a spirit or messenger, in Epic- 
 
 tetus 727 a 
 Spirit, the, "the Spirit of truth" 720/, 
 
 727/; Spirit or wind, trvevixa 655 
 Standing, applied to Jesus 725, 793-7: 
 
 to God, Wisdom etc. 725 £■ 
 Stretching out the hands 693 
 Stumbling 545-6 
 Synonyms, see note on next page 
 
 Talmud, the, on authority 569 e, 570a 
 
 Testimony, see "Witness" 
 
 "The Lord (Jesus)," in narrative 779 
 
 Tradition, see Double, Single, and 
 Triple Tradition 
 
 Transliteration 728 A 
 
 Triple Tradition, defined 447; does not 
 agree in a single saying of Christ 
 using the verb "believe" 477 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438—885). 
 
 644 
 
SUBJECT-MATTER (ENGLISH) 
 
 Trouble 727; "freedom from trouble" 
 
 in Epictetus 706, 727 r 
 True, truly, truth 727; "knowing truth" 
 
 703 
 Trusting or believing 469-78 
 Truth, see "True" 
 "Twelve, the," how mentioned by Tn 
 
 671* 
 
 Understanding (God or man) 624-9; 
 implies sympathy 626 
 
 "Verily" and "Verily verily" 696 « 
 Vine, metaphor of the 660 
 
 Water 699 
 
 Wind or Spirit, wveOfxa 655 
 
 With, "those with us," confusable in 
 Heb. w. "Simon" 802 a 
 
 Witness 696 ; believing witnesses 522 ; 
 witness = testimony 703 
 
 Wonder, in a bad sense 671 a, 673 a — e; 
 "I saw and wondered," a phrase 
 used by Greek tourists 673 e 
 
 Worshipping 640-51 ; different from 
 "prostration" 643; "we worship 
 that which we know " 647 
 
 This Index extends from 1438 to 1885 [printed 438—885). 
 
 Addendum on "Synonyms" 
 
 By "synonyms" are meant (1595) "words so far alike that at first the reader 
 may take the thought to be the same, though it is always really different." A 
 more exact term — if it were English — would be " homoionyms.' n Strictly speaking, 
 some might say that there are no "synonyms" in John, i.e. no words that convey 
 precisely the same shade of meaning. 
 
 645 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 III. WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 [ The main object of this Index is to guide the reader to some paragraph in 
 "■Johannine Vocabtdary" where a characteristic Johannine word is mentioned or 
 discussed. It does not contain e.g. dpros, crdpi^, or iiSup, because these words are not 
 characteristically Johannine. But "bread" "flesh," and "water" in the English 
 Index, will guide the reader to passages illustrating the Johannine characteristic use 
 of these common -words. 
 
 For conjunctions, prepositions, pronouns etc. , the reader is referred to Index III. 
 of '■Johannine Grammar. "] 
 
 'A/3padjU 851 
 
 dyados 682 
 
 dyaWidu 851 
 
 dyavaKTtij} 684 
 
 dyairdw and (pikew 436, 
 
 596, 716, 728 m— a, 
 
 744 (i) — (xi) 
 dydwy) 716, 851 
 dyaw7]T6s 674 
 d77eXta 620 
 a77A\a> 885 (ii) 
 dyyeXos 672 
 dyidfa 835 a, 851 
 01710s, 6 a. rod deou 835 
 dyvifw 885 (ii) 
 dywvt^ofiai 764 
 doe\rp6s, 01 d5e\(poi 708, 
 
 doeXc>6s aov 851 
 d'Srjs 851 
 dowta. 764 
 ddiriw 823-32 
 alyiaKb's 750 
 Aivuv 707 
 al'pa;, d. 6(f>da\fj.ovs 608, 
 
 d. cravpbv 792 b 
 aiwi> 672 a, as rde a., 
 
 e/s tops d. 712 a 7 , 728/- 
 aiwcios 710, 715 
 dKaOaproi 695 
 dicdfoVos 734, 805 a 
 
 d/coi5a;, w. accus. and w. 
 
 gen. 614 a — c 
 ■' Kvpbw 824a 
 d\r)6(ia 727 
 d\-qdr)% 727, 810, d. and 
 
 dXrjdivos 727 // — l 
 dXtjdifos 111, 764, d. and 
 
 d\y\Qi]% 727 A — » 
 d\r)6ujs 727 
 dXtewo (Jn xxi. 3) om. 
 
 in 885 (ii) 
 d\\d 708, dXX' as and 
 
 dXXos 756 
 d\\ofj.ai 885 (ii) 
 dXXos, and d\X' efs 756 
 dXXorpios 851 
 a\6r/ 885 (ii) 
 d/j-aprdvco 852 
 dfxaprla, &(pecris dfj.apri.Qiv 
 
 690 
 dfj.apTui\6s 693 
 djUTjj' 696 
 d/iti/is 885 (ii) 
 d/j.Tre\u)i> 696 
 dvayytWio 616, 620 
 di'cryii'wo'/iw 689 
 dvanci/uai 689 rf 
 dpa/cXlpw 689 
 dj'a7ri'7rra> 689^ 
 d»»do"Ta(rts 529 c 
 
 dvaTpeirw 885 (ii) 
 di'axwpew 810 
 &vep.os 696 
 dvtpxop.a.1 885 (ii) 
 dvdpaKid 711 
 dvOpajwoKTOfos 885 (ii) 
 dviTj/ja 752 <5 
 dvLaTrj/jLi tr. 721, intr. 
 
 672 
 "A^as 764 
 deofyw 852, 866 (iv) 
 dvrtX^w 764 
 dfrXfu; 710 
 dyco, -t)ei> 707 
 d£tos 852 
 
 d7ra77^\Xa; 616, 675 
 aTrapveofxaL 679 
 direidiu 501, 885 (ii) 
 a7rexcj 679 
 diriGTiu, -la, -os 681 
 dirofiaivo} 763-4 
 dirodidufii 687 
 dwodvri<TKU) 710 
 dTTOKaXi'iTTTa; 738 <7, 852 
 d7ro\07rrw 709 </, 734 
 airdtcpiais 765 
 d7roX('w 679 
 diropeix) 832 
 aTTocrAXa) 723 d 
 d7r6<TTo\os 672 
 
 7>4w Index extends from 1438 /V 1885 {printed 438 — 885). 
 
 646 
 
WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 diroa vvdyioyos 726 
 a.TTTo/J.a.1 695 
 a7ra.'\eta 810 
 dpa 695 
 dpa<pos 885 (ii) 
 dpyvpiov 686 
 dpeards 885 (ii) 
 dpidfids 765 
 dptcrrdw 765 
 apK^io 852 
 dpvlov 885 (ii) 
 apirdfa 750 
 fip-rt 719, 750 
 dpx?7 708, 810 
 dpxiTpiK\Lvos 885 (ii) 
 dpxo/J-ai 674 
 
 fipx w " 765 ' 852 
 
 dpai/ia 832 
 
 dadeveia 679 c/, 724, 853 
 
 dadevtu 724 
 
 dadevrjs 724, 750 
 
 arijUaj'w 832 
 
 drapa^ia 727 t - 
 
 ai'i^rij'w 684 
 
 aurop-aros 515 a 
 
 &<pecris 682, ct. dfiapTiQv 
 
 690 
 d(plrjfxi 682; a. (pwvqv, 
 
 752 6' 
 d(popdu} els 475 
 
 Ba0t'/s 765 
 
 jtfcuoi' 885 (ii) 
 
 /3dXXw, ^\t]fj.ev7] 834 <z 
 
 fiVLTTTi j'ul 485 (" 
 
 pdiTTicrfxa 673 
 fiaTTTiarris 673 
 (3dTTTU} 765 
 /SacriXeia 685 
 paaiXinds 885 (ii) 
 jSacrrd^u} aravpov 792 /> 
 Brj6avia...Tr€pav tov 'Iop- 
 
 Sdvou 708 
 B??#fa0d, v.r. B7?#crai<5d 
 
 etc. 708 
 Br)6\eifi 853 
 )3^a 745, 750 
 /3tJ3pLbffKw 885 (ii) 
 /3ios 694 
 
 p\a<j<p7i(jLe'w, -ia 674 
 /3X<?ttw 600, 607, 723 
 /3odw 752 t? 
 (3ov\evofJ.ai 766 
 jSoOj 766 
 Ppaxt-vv 766 
 /Spaxi' 766 
 ppecpos 676 
 ppovTT) 734 
 
 fipwffts 746, 750 
 
 Vappadd 712 
 
 ya£o<pvXdKioi> 832 
 
 ya^oo, -os etc. 686, 853 
 
 7dp 712 
 
 76 853 
 
 yievva 683 
 
 Y^rco)/ 766 
 
 yefdfru 832 
 
 7€fed 682 
 
 yeuerrj 885 (ii) 
 
 7ei'»'dw 708 
 
 ye'pui' 885 (ii) 
 
 yeupyos 684 
 
 yrjpdaKW 885 (ii) 
 
 ylvop.au 734, 7. and 771/ 
 
 734 ( 
 yivuo-KW 621-9, 715, 738 a 
 yXwacroKofiov 885 (ii) 
 yvuipifa 766 
 7vwcrTos 767 
 70771^ 689 3, 718, 853 
 yoyyva/j.6s 718 
 ro\7o0d 810 
 ypdpLfxa. 767 
 ypa/ntxcLTeus 692 
 ypa<pr), sing, and pi. 692, 
 
 722 
 ypd<pw, to yeypap.p.ivov 
 
 touto 722 c 
 ypTjyopecj 696 
 yu/xvos 810 
 7W1} (wife) 696 
 
 Aaip.ovli'0/j.ai 679 
 
 da.L/j.6vtov 679 
 
 5aKp0u) 885 (ii) 
 
 Aai>«'5 679 
 
 oe|i6s 691 
 
 <5(?op.cu 853 
 
 Seure 810 
 
 o<?xop.at 689, 721/, 825-31 
 
 6<*u> 866 (iii) 
 
 5td 692 tf, 5:d rtva 652/', 
 
 884 «£ 
 5td/3o\os 665 a, 854 
 54070771/^ 689 /> 
 010701 794 <z 
 5t.adi5w/AL 767 
 diafribvvvfii 712 
 ota/foi'e'w 717 
 StaKoyos 717, 810 
 oiaK6(7iot 734 
 0iaXo7cfopicu, -icrfids 689 
 diap-epifa 679 
 OLCLO-iropd 713 /-, om. in 
 
 885 (ii) a 
 
 dtarpijio} 885 (ii) 
 
 didaKTos 885 (ii) 
 
 <5i5dcr/caXe (voc.) 694 
 
 AlSvfios 710 
 
 oieyeipw 832 
 
 SiVaios 691, 727/ 
 
 rnKaioavvT) 854 
 
 5iKcu6co 854 
 
 diipdw 750 
 
 oi.uiKU3 854 
 
 56Xos 811 
 
 56£a 712 
 
 5o£dj v a> 712 
 
 5oi'\et/w 854 
 
 SoOXoj 717/, 723, 790 foil. 
 
 dvva/uLis 669, 686 
 
 5i'eaTos 686 
 
 fdioeKCL, 01 8. 695 
 
 Swped 885 (ii) 
 
 Bicpedv 746, 751 
 
 StDpoi- 682 
 
 'Eai<ToO, -diy 720/ 
 
 'E/Spai'trrt 713 
 
 eyyl^ui 687 
 
 e - 77t''s 718 
 
 6701 and ei'yiu 713 
 
 ft/vos 687, 718 
 
 eflos 767 
 
 et5oi> 610-11, t'S«j» 609, 
 
 £5c6v 599 
 elSos 767 
 «pu 707, 713, i?? and 
 
 eyevero 734 c 
 elprjur] 854 
 ets for ei> 884, w. fiairTi- 
 
 freadai. 475a, w. 7r«r7eiiw 
 
 470 foil, 
 ets ? aXX' efs read as dXXo? 
 
 756 
 eladyw 767 
 elaepxop-a-L, parall. to 
 
 Trpocrepx- 801a, h 
 fKarovTapxys 676 
 ev/3dXXw (ocup.6fia) 679 
 ckSvoj and evdvw 806 
 e\-e£ 527 rt 
 €KKevT€U 885 (ii) 
 eKXtyopLCU 709, 833 
 «Ae/cr6s 676 
 eKp.do-0-w 762, 768 
 enveuw 885 (ii) 
 eKTeiuw x"pa(s) 693 
 eKX* 1 * 3 751 $ 
 eXatwv (al. -ci?) 687 
 i\a.TTOio 885 (ii) 
 eXdrrwv 885 (ii) 
 eXai'^co 833 
 
 7"Aw 7;/(/cU extends from 1438 /<? 1885 [printed 438—885). 
 
 647 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 e'X^YX w 855 
 
 e'Xetw 677 
 
 e\€7j/j.o<Tvvri 855 
 
 ?\605 677, 727/;., 855 
 
 eXevdepos 712, 751 
 
 iXevdepdw 712 
 
 eXiyp.a 885 (ii) 
 
 eX/ctfw 710 
 
 "EXX^fs, -iarl 713 
 
 eXtrifw 855 
 
 fyuai'roO, -6^ 718, 855 
 
 epPpi/xdopai 713, 811 
 
 e'/xoy 718 
 
 epwalfw 686 
 
 ffjLTrip.TrXrjfxi 768 
 
 ifxTrdpiou 885 (ii) 
 
 'ip.irpoadev 681 a 
 
 e/HTTTvu) 693 
 
 ilMtpavifw 597 />, 716, 751 
 
 ep.<pvadw 885 (ii) 
 
 ei' 881-2, W. 7TtCTT€(''W 
 
 470, 480 
 e»5vw 689, e*. and ckovw 
 
 806 
 eveiXtw 866 (i) foil. 
 ?j>eira 692, 884 
 eV0a5e 768 
 eViaiiriy 768 
 ivKaivLo, 885 (ii) 
 evracpidfw 734 ff, 751 
 evTa<piaafj.6s 732, 734 
 evTevdev 768 
 ivrvXlaaw 855, 866 (i) 
 
 foil. 
 evwiriov 768 
 e^a7w 833 
 i^pXopat 637 a 
 Qeariv 594rt, 685 
 e&rdfw 751 
 i^yioixai 769 
 ei^op.oXoyi'op.ai. 678 
 efrvffia 562-94 
 e£oi'<ndfa> 570 /> 
 e^virvlfw (Jn xi. ii) om. 
 
 in 885 (ii) 
 eoprq 711 
 enaipw 855 
 eiraniw 737 <7 
 eVaparos 885 (ii) 
 tiravpLov 811 
 ZireiTa 769 
 tVe^St'T^s (Jn xxi. 7) om. 
 
 in 885 (ii) 
 (nepwrdw 672 
 tVi 884, 7rt<rT«i'w e. 470 
 
 77 
 tVtyetoy 885 (ii) 
 iiriyivwo-Kw 685 
 
 €Trt6i'/iia 833 
 
 ewiKeifxai 769 
 
 eTriXeyo/xat 885 (ii) 
 
 iiri<TTp<t(pw 695 
 
 eiricrvvdyw 682 
 
 €TTiridrjp.i, v.r. irepiedijKav 
 805 
 
 ewtxpi-u 885 (ii) 
 
 eVoi/pdcios 885 (ii) 
 
 iina, eTTTaKLS 692 
 
 ipavvdw 885 (ii) 
 
 epydfopai 513, 728 
 
 ?P70J< 728 
 
 £p??,uo5 679, 728 
 
 epp-qvevw 713, 728 / 2 
 
 fpXopat. 630-9, tpxopai 
 and yjXdov 624, 6 epx^- 
 juevos 633, eXr/Xvda 
 637 <7, eXrjXvdev wpa, 
 tpxerai wpa 639 a — // 
 
 epwrdw 708 
 
 eV0iu 680 
 
 ecrxaros 685, e. i)p.epa 715 
 
 erepos 687, 856 
 
 eroipdfw, eroi/jLos 688 
 
 evayyeXifopai, evayyeXiov 
 670, 682 
 
 ei)5oA.^a>, -t'a 696 
 
 evdiws 693 
 
 ei)Ww 885 (ii) 
 
 etf0i)y (adv.) 693 
 
 evXoyiw, evXoyrjTOi 674 
 
 evvoiw 714 1' 
 
 'titppalu 710 
 
 «X0f'y 885 (ii) 
 
 <rxM s 680, 792 a, 856 
 
 ?Xw 796 a 
 
 £wy conj. 735, prep. 884 
 
 Z?)Xoy 885 (ii) 
 {rfTTjais 885 (ii) 
 j"w7? 715 
 fwvvvpu 712 
 i'woirouw 716 
 
 "H 647; 
 
 ijyepwu 682 
 ifdeXov etc. s. W\w 
 ij™ 637 a, 856 
 'HXday 680 
 rjXiKia 856 
 17X05 885 (ii) 
 ^7rep 647 i 
 
 <JdXa<7<ra 811 
 Odvaros 710 
 Oavarbw 679 
 dapaiw 811 
 
 da.vp.dfw 671 a, 673 a — * 
 Bavp-acTTOs 811 
 dedop.at. 604, 723, 856 
 OeX-qpa 728 
 6eXw, ■fj'itXov, -7?<ra, -a 
 
 735 5, f 
 0e6y, 6 497 a 
 deoaefiris 885 (ii) 
 depairevw 683 
 0epf£w 856 
 6eppai.vop.ai 735 
 Oewpew 598 foil. , 723 
 07?/c7? 885 (ii) 
 6>Xii/ay 811 
 Opep.p.a 885 (ii) 
 6pr]vew 857 
 dvydrTjp 678 
 dvpwp&s 735 
 
 'I&Kwfios 684 c/ 
 
 idopat 683 
 
 i'5e 674, 812 
 
 i'Setv 609-11, s. etSoy 
 
 i'Sioy 720, /car' t'Stac 672, 
 
 oi t'Stoi and Ta i'Sia 720 </; 
 
 (rty) raw t'Stwi/ 630 
 t'SoiJ 674 
 tepei'S 688 
 IepocoXiijueiTat 735 
 iKav6i 683 
 i/idy 833 
 ip.aTiap.6s 769 
 Era 726 
 'Ioi'oaTos 713 
 'loi'Say, oi'x 6'\aKapiwTiqs 
 
 714 
 'IcrpaTjX 684 
 Icrpa^XeiT^y 713 
 LffTtifxi 725, uradrivai and 
 
 ffTTJvai 125 b — (?, eoTuiy 
 
 of God 725 f, &TT77 ei'y 
 
 fxiaov or ep ptaw, of 
 
 Jesus 793 foil. 
 iVxi'poy, iffxvs, lo-xvw 686. 
 
 693 
 'Iwd^7;s (Peter's father) 
 
 714 
 'Iu<t?)0 (Mary's husband) 
 
 857 
 
 Kd-yu) 857 
 Kadaipw 885 (ii) 
 KaOapifw 676 
 Ka0apiap.6s 833 
 Ka6ap6s 857 
 Kadtfopai 857 
 *a0ei'>d"w 693 
 Katd<£ay 857 
 
 7>4m /W<u" extends from 1438 /<> 1885 {printed 438 — 8851. 
 
 648 
 
WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 Kaipbs 695 
 /ccu'w 858 
 kcucws ^xwc 679 
 KaXa/uos 689 
 KaX^co 675 
 Kaed 709 
 
 Kara 884, /car' tS/ov 688 
 KaTafioXr] 858 
 Ka.Tayvv/J.1 751 
 KaraKafxa: 834 
 KaTaKXlvw 689 
 KaraKpivw 677 
 KaraKi'/oiei'w 570 
 KaraXo/U/Sacw 735 
 KaraXi'O) 679 
 Karavoew 800 a 
 Acarf^occriafw 570 
 Karriyopia 885 (iij 
 KaroLK^cc 858 
 K^Spwe (Taje) 885 (ii) 
 Ketfiai 858 
 /ceipta 885 (ii) 
 KevTvpioiv 676 
 Kepbaivw 682 
 Kep,ua 686, 885 (ii) 
 Kepfj.a.T«rT7js 885 (ii) 
 KecpaXr), s. kX'lplo 
 ktjttos 769 
 KrjTrovpos 885 (ii) 
 Krjpuacru} 688 
 Krj</>as 709 
 KXddos 674 
 /cXdw 675 
 KXelio 858 
 KhiiTT-qs 858 
 /cXTj/xa 674, 885 (ii) 
 KXr/povop-iw, -La, -os 684 
 kXlplc 858, kXIvoj Kt<paXrfv 
 
 451-8, 462, 839 
 KXw7ras 885 (ii) 
 Koi.fj.aoiJ.aL 693, 858 
 Koifj.r]o-is 885 (ii) 
 koip6s 677 /' 
 kolvolo 677 
 KOLvuivla 700 rt 
 kokkos 692 // 
 KoXdj'w 723 <;• 
 KoXacris 723 i 
 koXXv(3lo-tt)s 812 
 koXttos 769 
 Ko\v/j.f3r]dpa 720 
 KOfxfoTepof ^x eiv 885 (ii) 
 KOTudw 859 
 k6<t/xos 728 
 KpdjSarTos 673. 736 
 Kpa^tc 752 rt — y 
 Kparlu) 691, K. dfjaprias 721 
 Kpavydi'u 752 a — _/" 
 
 KpWivos 708 
 
 «pkw 677 </, 714, 859 
 
 Kplais 859 
 
 Kpl'lTTTCO 859 
 
 KT-qnaTa 694 
 
 icwcX6« 770 
 
 kvtttu), forms of 799 c 
 
 Kvpievw 570 
 
 Kvpios (6), of Jesus 770 
 
 «w06s 679 
 
 Aa7xd>w 770 
 
 Adfapos 770 
 
 Xd^p^i 752 
 
 XaXe'w 724 
 
 XaXtd 752 
 
 Xafj-fidvu 689 f, 721, 735/ 
 
 X. aravpbv 792 /» 
 Xa/xwds 746, 752 
 Xa6s 688, parall. to 6'xXos 
 
 739 
 Xarpeia 885 (ii) 
 Xe7w hist. pres. 804 «, 
 
 ^Xeye 491 a 
 X4vtloi> 885 (ii) 
 Xtwpa, -6s 685 
 Aeim'r?7S 770 
 Xi0afw 726 
 Xidtvos 885 (ii) 
 Xido/3oXeu> 859 
 Xidoo-TpuTos 885 (ii) 
 Xirpa 885 (ii) 
 XoyLfofx.ai 770 
 Xdyos, s. J oh. Gr. Index 
 
 X6-yx ? 7 752 
 Xotdop^u) 885 (ii) 
 Xotfw 728 
 XiW 859 
 Xvireo/j-ai 111 c, 812 
 
 Xl^T? 771 
 
 Xt^x^os, -fa 685 
 Xi'W 679 /' 
 
 MatVo/uoi 885 (ii) 
 
 fj.aKapi.os 859 d 
 
 MdXxos 885 (ii) 
 
 fiavdavio 812 
 
 fxdvva 717 
 
 Mdptfa 717, 771 
 
 Mapid(ju) (the mother of 
 Jesus) 686 
 
 Map«£(/u) (sister of Laza- 
 rus) 771 
 
 fjaprvpeu 703, 726, 859 
 
 fiaprvpia 695 />, 726, 834 
 
 /xapTvpiof 695, 726 
 
 ixaprvs 696, 726 
 
 fj.dcrTti; (disease) 692 
 
 fj-axo/Jai 885 (ii) 
 
 M<?7as 683 
 
 fie8epfjL7)vei'<w 728 /.,, 812 
 
 /xediju 752 
 
 fj.elfav, of persons 683 
 
 ^w 707 
 
 peplfa 679 
 
 ixipi/xva 676 
 
 p.<?pos 860 
 
 M^cos, s. 'iffTJifu, 793 foil. 
 
 fjecrdoj 885 (ii) 
 
 Meo-a^as 717 
 
 fxecrrbs 753 
 
 fxeTafialvoj 860 
 
 /xeravoew, -oia 691 
 
 fxera^v 860 
 
 fierpTfT-qs (Jn ii. 6) om. in 
 
 885 (ii) 
 fjyjdeis 885 
 fxrjTroTe 885 
 fx-qvino 771 
 fuaivw 885 (ii) 
 M«poi' (adv.) 716, 812 
 fiLKpos 686 
 fj.Lfj.vrio-Kop.aL 721 /, 860 
 
 flUTib) 713 
 
 fXLadbs 691 
 
 fjicrdwTos 736 
 
 fivrffLovevw 721 
 
 /xoi'77 707 
 
 fxovoyevrjs 771 
 
 fxbvos, ra odbvia p.bva 804 
 
 NajwpaZos 860 
 
 ISaOavaifX 718 
 
 vdpdos 736 
 
 j/et'/w 885 (ii) 
 
 vecpiXy) 676 
 
 v??7rios 676, 860 
 
 vifcrTevLo, vrfareia, vyilttls 
 
 681 
 ft/cda; 771 
 Nik65t7p:os 718 
 vLirrrfp 885 (ii) 
 vt7rTw 728, 813 
 jWw 813 
 vo/x?) (Jn x. 9) om. in 
 
 885 (ii) 
 lottos 715, 860 
 v6(ros 679, 724 a 
 vvfx<pri 860 
 pOp 719 
 yi}£ 718 
 vvltltw 753 
 
 SiiXo*' 885 (i) 
 
 '05»?7ew 861 
 
 77/ w 7;/^x extends from 1438 /c 1885 {printed 438—885) 
 
 649 
 
INDICES TO "TOHANNINE VOCABULARY" 
 
 bbonropia 885 (ii) 
 
 o56s 696 
 
 6'fw 885 (ii) 
 
 odoviov 716, 772, 804 
 
 olba 621-9, 715 
 
 OLKia 684 
 
 olKodeawdTTjs 684 
 
 oiKo8o/j.ew 675 
 
 oIkos 684 
 
 oI/jlcu 885 (ii) 
 
 oktui 772 
 
 bp.vvoi 694 
 
 6/xoios 861 
 
 bu.oi.bu 686 
 
 bp.oXoye'o} 678 rt, 861 
 
 6p.oD 727 
 
 bvdpiov 885 (ii) 
 
 bvop.a 553 a, iritrreiyw e/s 
 
 rd 6. 483 
 oVos 861 
 oVrcos 834 
 6tt\ov 885 (ii) 
 07rws 695 
 opacris 601 
 opaw 601, 605-6, 723, 
 
 oKpOr, 597/; 
 bpyl'^op.ai 861 
 op/cos 687 
 bpcpavbs (Jn xiv. 18) om. 
 
 in 885 (ii) 
 ocr/x^ 885 (ii) 
 boreov 861 
 ocrns 885 
 ore 775 e 
 
 oti 726, Trio-reOu) 6 476 
 oi'at 696 
 ov p.bvov 753 
 oiV 883, 885 
 ovttoj 719 
 oi-5 680, 866 c 
 oi'xi 861 
 bcpeiXto 861 
 b(pda\fxovs ai'puj 608 
 6'xXos and Xaos 739, 6 6. 
 
 7ro\i''s 739-40 
 b\pa.pi.ov 712 
 <$(Ma 813 
 b\pis 885 (ii) 
 
 Jlatoapiof 736 t ', 885 (ii) 
 iraiblov 676 
 7rcus 862 
 naXaibs 687 
 7rapa 885 
 7rapa/3aiVw 824 ,; 
 7rapa/SoX7? 669, 687, 721 <? 
 7rapa7w 687, 813 
 Trap abacus 695 
 
 irapaKoKew 674 
 napaKKrjTos 720 
 ■n-apaKVTTu 600, 726, 772, 
 
 798—804 
 7rapa\a J a/3dj'u) 689 c, 735/, 
 
 781,z 
 Trapap.vdiop.ai 885 (ii) 
 TrapaTldrjp.i 692 
 Trapaxpyp-a 693, 862 
 wdpeipu 862 
 
 rrapepxopai 631, 687, 735 < 
 wapoip-ia 669. 721 
 irapprjaia 744 (xi) a, (e?) 
 
 jr. 712, 719 
 7ra<TX(j 694 
 irarrip 711 
 rreivdu) 684 
 7T6tpafw, -o.o~p.bs 695 
 Trep.Truj 723, 6 iripxpas (pie) 
 
 723 *. 
 wevdepbs 885 (ii) 
 TrevT7]Kovra 834 
 ■ntpav tov lopodvov 714, 
 
 813 
 7rept 885, oi 7r. Ilerpoi' 
 
 802 a 
 wepidiTTW 711_/ 
 7Tfpi/3dX\'j 676, 806 a 
 Trepioew 885 (ii) 
 TrepuaTripu 885 (ii) 
 wepnraTeio 656 
 ■repiacrbs 753 
 Trepirep-vw 772 
 TrepiTi6rjp.L 809. 813, 7rept- 
 
 id-qKav v.r. for e-redr/Kav 
 
 805 
 wept.Top.ri 709 
 Trerpa 691 
 7T777?; 736 
 7r7?X6s 709 
 7r?)xi>s 862 
 7udfco 723 
 irnrpauKW 808. 814 
 ■wicTTevw pp. xi — xii, 
 
 463—561, 681, perf. 
 
 472. 519, 629 
 
 TTLCfTlKOS 736 
 
 ttLo-tis 478 c, 681, 7r. ^eoC 
 
 467 
 7ri(rT6s 681, 736,/, 862 
 TrXeiioi' 504 A 
 tt\(?kw 809, 814 
 7rXei'pd 753 
 wXrjdos 834 
 Tr\r)pr)S 772 
 Tr\r)ptopa 814 
 wXriaiov 687 
 7r\o«xptov 736 
 
 7rXoiVtos 691 
 
 7rXo0ros 691 
 
 irvevpa 655, 720 /', eVe- 
 
 ftpip.r)(raTO to) tt. 811 A 
 7ryea> 862 
 7r60e»' 728 
 7roifw 513, 772 
 TrotpLalvu 862 
 Trolp-vr] 862 
 7roX\d/as 814 
 7roXiys, 6 6'x^os 7T. 739-40 
 7roXtJ7iyaos 753 
 Tropevop.ai. 652-64 
 TTOpveia 814 
 Tropcpvpeos 885 (ii) 
 7rocr(s 885 (ii) 
 7rocros 683 
 irbrepov (Jn vii. I 7) om. in 
 
 885 (ii)" 
 iroT-qpiov 678 
 7ro0 728 
 
 TrpaiTupLov 809, 814 
 Trpdo-ati} 772 
 tt peer (lure poi 680 
 
 7Tp6, 7T. pLLKpOV 799 A, TT. 
 
 irpoawTrov 681 rt, tf. 
 
 roO (inf.) 863 
 Trpodyoj 682 
 TrpofiaTiKTi 885 (ii) 
 irpofiaTLov 885 (ii) 
 Trpbfiarov 723 
 Trpoepxop.at 682 
 TTponopevop-ai 682 
 TrpoaaiTeo) 885 (ii) 
 7rpo(raiT7?s 737 
 Trpoo~epxop.ai 649, 677, 
 
 801 «— A 
 Trpocrevxv 688 
 Trpoaevxop-aL 649, 688 
 
 TTpOaKOTTTU} 863 
 
 TTpoaKvvew 640-51 
 irpoo~K\>vr)Tr)s 885 (ii) 
 irpocrcpdyiov 796,;. 885 (ii) 
 TTpbawwov, wpb tt. 681 <? 
 Trpbrepov, (to) atlv. 708 
 rrpoTpex^ 773 
 irpb<paais 834 
 
 7TpUi 815 
 
 irpwia 754 
 TTpWTOS 682 
 WTtpva 885 (ii) 
 irrvo-pa 885 (ii) 
 TTT-i'oj 693,/. 737 
 7rTcox6s 688 
 Trvvddi>op.at 863 
 ?rPp 682 
 7tuj\os 677 
 
 TTOipbol 737 
 
 7>4m ///,/c.r extends from 1438 to 1885 (printed 438— 885). 
 
 65O 
 
WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 'Pa/3/SeZ 694 c, 815 
 'Vappovvel 694 c, 737 
 pdwifffxa 737 
 pVw 885 (ii) 
 Pw/ucuoi, -aiffrt 721 
 
 2a55oi>Kcuos 692 
 2aXefyi 721 
 ^.a/j-apeir^s 863 
 Sa/xa/oetTts 885 (ii) 
 Zafxapla 773 
 Sarai-as 692 
 oeLff/xus 680 
 <jrnj.aLvw 724 
 
 <T7)p.iloV 669 
 
 SiXwd^ 773 
 
 Zlfxwv (father of Judas 
 
 Iscariot) 724 
 Sl^V 754 
 
 axai'SaXifw, -op 545, 694 
 o-kAos 885 (ii) 
 o~K-qvoirr)yla 885 (ii) 
 <tkt]v6(j} 885 (ii) 
 ffKXrjpds 754 
 (TKOpiri^cti 863 
 o-KOTia, -os 710, 863, 864 
 fffjivpva 746, 754 
 2o\o / u<in' 864 
 ffovddpiov 773 
 <rotf>ia, -6s 696, 864 
 o-Treipa 809, 815 
 ffirelpio 693 
 airipfxa 692 
 CT7r\a7xi'tj"o / ctat 677 
 0-7T0770S 815 
 crirbpos 692 
 ordSios 864 
 
 trravpds, -6w 678, 792 £ 
 OTtcpavos 815 
 o-T?70os 773 
 <rnj<w 725, 737 
 o~rori 885 (ii) 
 o~t6[ao. 864 
 OTpecpw 864 
 o-ti 726 
 (Tiry-yei^s 773 
 ovWeyu 864 
 av/iUptpcs) 754 
 <tiikx7oj 682 /" 
 (rwc^oryiy' 694 
 crwaAtjOjCicu 794 a 
 crwavaKei/jiai 689 
 ovvtMjtpxop.a.1 885 (ii) 
 tnVeim, ffweris 695, 865 
 ffvvix^) 834 rf 
 <rwr)dei.a (Jn xviii. 39) 
 
 om. in 885 (ii) ; see 
 
 2464 £ 
 cvvirjfXL 695 
 ffwixadrirrji 885 (ii! 
 
 avvaravpooj 678, 817 t - 
 GVVTldep.au. 774 
 <n''pw 885 (ii) 
 Suxap 726 
 (Tcppayifa 754 
 ffX'.^ 866 (iv) 
 trxicr^a 815 
 ffXoivlov 885 (ii) 
 o-a-fu 692 
 (7u)/xa 674 
 o-WT7)p 774 
 awTrji'La 774 
 
 Ta7rett'6s, -6w 865 
 
 rapacro-w 727 
 
 Tax^o^ 885 (ii) 
 
 rax^ws 774 
 
 re 865 
 
 retailor 676 <7, 885 (ii) 
 
 t£kvov 676 
 
 reXeibio 774 
 
 reX<?w 865 
 
 tA.os 680 
 
 Te\d)V7]s 689 
 
 re'pas 816 
 
 rerapTaios 885 (ii) 
 
 rerpap-r/voi 885 (ii) 
 
 T7?p<?w 714, 816 
 
 Tt/3epids 726 
 
 TidriixL 659 «, r. \pvxf)v 715 
 
 tiktu 865 
 
 Tt/a^ 746, 755 
 
 rirXos 885 (ii) 
 
 T6r<r 695 
 
 Tpiaxboioi 738 
 
 Tptrov, e/c rplrov 695, (to) 
 
 TpLTOV 834 
 
 Tplros 695 
 Tpocpi) 865 
 rpw7u; 680 5, 710, 755 
 
 7-i'<7ros 885 (ii) 
 Tv<p\6(x> 885 (ii) 
 
 'T^tjs 728, 816 
 
 i>5p/a 885 (ii) 
 
 £/5wp 728, 834 
 
 fleets 728 
 
 vfi^repos 774 
 
 i>7rd7a> 652-64, 713, 816 
 
 UTT&VT7)0~IS 755 
 
 inrap^is B(ov 476 /' 
 i/7rdpxo/'ra, rd 694, 865 
 i>7rep 692 a, 885 
 
 VWT)p(T7)S 719 
 
 iiTTPOs 865 
 inr6 885 
 
 virboei.yp.a 885 (ii) 
 inroKplvofj-ai, -Kpiais, -Kpi- 
 
 ttjs 684 
 inro/jLL/j.vrj<TKui 775 
 
 ficrcrco7ros 885 (ii) 
 vorepov 866 
 inpavrbs 885 (ii) 
 vipiffTos 683 
 ui/'ow 711 C, 866 
 
 •fciryeti' 680 /' 
 
 (palvw, e<pdc?/749r, 885 (ii) 
 
 (pavepbs 686 
 
 <pav€p6u> 597 3, 716, 738 
 
 (pavepws 738 
 
 0ai»6s 885 (ii) 
 
 <paOAos 885 (ii) 
 
 (pevyu 682 
 
 (pi\tw and d7a7rdw 436, 
 
 595-6, 716 </—/", 728 
 
 »z — (/ 
 0tXZa 716/ 
 <t>t\i7T7ros 720 
 <p/Xos 775, 866 
 (poptofiai 643 a, 681 
 06/3os 681 
 (pdlvLt, 885 (ii) 
 <pope'w 755 
 (ppay4\\t.ov 885 (ii) 
 <pp«?ap 775 
 (ppbvLfMos 866 
 (pvXaKrj 688, 696 
 (puviw 752 i' 
 <p<2s 715, 866, (p. kou/jlov 
 
 748 
 (pwTlfa 485, 775 
 
 Xap.al 885 (ii) 
 Xapis 775 
 Xeip-appos 885 (ii) 
 Xfi/J-wv 816 
 XiXt'apx°5 738 
 XoXdw 885 (ii) 
 Xoprdjlw 692 
 Xw\6s 685 
 Xwpew 816 
 Xwplov 816 
 
 SPeOSos 885 (ii) 
 \j/cvcrT7]s 885 (ii) 
 \f/7l\a.<pau 617, 804 
 \f/fj<pos 711 // 
 l/'t'Xos 885 (ii) 
 \pufxlov 724 
 
 "12 687 
 c55e 683 
 d>s (when) 775 
 djcaj'j'd 816 
 dxrei 693 
 uicnrep 866 
 co'crre 693 
 
 (hrdpiov 736 c% 738, 866 c 
 uirlov 866 
 
 77/w 7«(/^ extends from 1438 to 1885 {printed 438—885). 
 
 Z^ 
 
 **™^K. 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 I. NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 [The references are to paragraphs, indicated by black numbers, which, 
 in this Index, run from 1886 to 2799. The thousand figure is not 
 printed. A?i asterisk distinguishes numbers up to [2]000.] 
 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 782 
 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 559/ 
 
 14 
 
 7 
 
 
 536/ 
 
 
 6 
 
 670/' 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 394/ 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 428 a, 746 a 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 292 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 270 a 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 009-10 
 
 3 
 
 11 
 
 899*, 
 
 981*, 
 
 
 28 
 
 239 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 
 962* 
 
 
 
 998*, 401a 
 
 10 
 
 1 1 
 
 437 a 
 
 
 2 5" 
 
 -6 
 
 341-6 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 962* 
 
 
 
 J4 
 
 437 a 
 
 
 26 
 
 
 220 
 
 
 13 
 
 292 
 
 
 
 l 9 
 
 532 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 914a*, 220-2, 
 
 
 18 
 
 342/ 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 322, 499 
 
 
 
 
 699 
 
 
 n 
 
 709 a 
 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 532 a 
 
 15 
 
 2 
 
 
 532 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 679 c 
 
 
 
 2 7 
 
 709/ 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 499/; 
 
 
 11 
 
 3 
 
 940* 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 959*, 646 
 
 
 12 
 
 689 </ 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 216/ 
 
 
 J 4 
 
 
 513 c, 534 < 
 
 
 14 
 
 539 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 477 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 646 
 
 
 1 g 
 
 948*, 
 
 275/ 
 
 
 18 
 
 253 a 
 
 
 29 
 
 
 724 a 
 
 
 22 
 
 708- 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 689/ 
 
 16 
 
 9- 
 
 10 
 
 708/ 
 
 
 23 
 
 513 c, 
 
 534 c 
 
 
 2 ?~7 
 
 165 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 782 
 
 
 25-6 
 
 520 
 
 
 
 27 
 
 586 d, e 
 
 
 •9 
 
 
 517 19 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 377 a 
 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 173 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 
 566 < 
 
 
 26 
 
 144 
 
 
 
 2 5 
 
 261/ 
 
 
 2 4 
 
 
 437 a, 496 r,515 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 767 
 
 
 
 29 
 
 517 a 7 
 
 
 28 
 
 
 576 
 
 
 7 
 
 536 
 
 
 
 3 2 
 
 553, 
 
 17 
 
 1 
 
 
 962* 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 743 
 
 
 
 46 
 
 395 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 364 a 
 
 
 16 
 
 702 d 
 
 
 
 ?o 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 18 
 
 8- 
 
 9 
 
 592 
 
 
 21 
 
 263, 680/ 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 342/ 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 517-9 
 
 
 22 
 
 335 a, 
 
 409 
 
 
 13-H 
 
 093/ 
 
 19 
 
 3 
 
 
 379 
 
 
 24-6 
 
 580 a 
 
 
 
 ■4 
 
 144 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 677 
 
 
 2 7 
 
 915'' 
 
 
 
 '9 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 
 26 
 
 
 649 a 
 
 8 
 
 6 
 
 684/ 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 039 
 
 20 
 
 1 
 
 
 708. 
 
 
 8 
 
 559 
 
 
 
 56 
 
 364 a 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 272 a 
 
 
 27 
 
 162;/ 
 
 
 14 
 
 3 
 
 460 a, 517 0" 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 265/ 
 
 71ns Index extendi from 1886 lo 2799. Before numbers -wit// * supply 
 <•.,;•. [1]999* ,• before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 652 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 MATTHEW 
 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 20 
 
 28 
 
 593 
 
 27 
 
 13 
 
 737 b 
 
 4 
 
 26 
 
 
 917 a * 
 
 21 
 
 1 
 
 310 a 
 
 
 15 
 
 464 *-t" 
 
 
 36 
 
 
 272, 570,/ 
 
 
 7 
 
 537(H), 781, 
 
 
 '9 
 
 294a, 537 (ii)*, 
 
 
 41 
 
 
 162 a, 694 * 
 
 
 1 [ 
 
 292 
 
 
 
 732 
 
 5 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 962* 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 558 e 
 
 
 27 
 
 570 a' 
 
 
 22 
 
 
 558,/ 
 
 
 22 
 
 536 
 
 
 3° 
 
 558 a 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 270 a 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 971*, 342 c 
 
 
 33 
 
 738 
 
 
 28 
 
 
 270 a 
 
 
 25 
 
 906*, 953* 
 
 
 48 
 
 623 
 
 
 30 
 
 
 270 a, 563* 
 
 
 42 
 
 356, 396/', 621 
 
 
 55 
 
 318 
 
 
 35 
 
 
 482* 
 
 22 
 
 12 
 
 253 a 
 
 
 57 
 
 291, 769 
 
 
 36 
 
 
 237 a, 439* 
 
 
 18 
 
 563/' 
 
 
 62 
 
 087-8 
 
 
 37 
 
 
 586,/ 
 
 
 46 
 
 586 d, e 
 
 
 63 
 
 732 
 
 
 41 
 
 
 679* 
 
 23 
 
 S 
 
 784 e 
 
 28 
 
 1 
 
 310 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 
 363 a, 364 a 
 
 
 25 
 
 329 a 
 
 
 6 
 
 1716' 
 
 
 10- 
 
 11 
 
 437 a 
 
 
 30-2 
 
 950 a * 
 
 
 7 
 
 186 a 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 460 a, 517,/ 
 
 
 3 2 
 
 439 (v) * 
 
 
 10 
 
 307/' 
 
 
 22- 
 
 4 
 
 536/ 
 
 24 
 
 3 
 
 707 
 
 
 18 
 
 742/' 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 020 
 
 
 5 
 
 220 a, 585 a-b 
 
 
 
 
 
 36- 
 37 
 
 7 
 
 428 a 
 
 
 8 
 
 197 a 
 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 
 512, 690 a 
 
 
 13 
 
 322, 499 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 670* 
 
 
 38 
 
 
 745 a 
 
 
 14 
 
 709 a 
 
 
 7 
 
 899*, 043, 
 
 
 45 
 
 
 089 a 
 
 
 18 
 
 711* 
 
 
 
 558 a 7 
 
 
 46 
 
 
 962-3* 
 
 
 23 
 
 439 
 
 
 8 
 
 981*, 998*, 
 
 
 48- 
 
 9 
 
 341 6, 472 
 
 
 25 
 
 186 a, 585 a-/' 
 
 
 
 401a 
 
 
 49 
 
 
 220 
 
 
 26 
 
 439 
 
 
 9 
 
 292, 706 a 
 
 
 5° 
 
 
 914a*, 220-1, 
 
 
 3° 
 
 317/ 
 
 
 16 
 
 342/' 
 
 
 
 
 699 
 
 
 35 
 
 255, 580 a 
 
 
 21 
 
 709 a 
 
 
 52 
 
 
 449 a 
 
 26 
 
 5 
 
 918* 
 
 
 27 
 
 694/' 
 
 7 
 
 13 
 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 
 7 
 
 607 
 
 
 32 
 
 425/' 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 959* 
 
 
 '4 
 
 928 a* 
 
 
 39 
 
 709 a 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 261/' 
 
 
 18 
 
 364 a 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 711a 
 
 8 
 
 17 
 
 
 449 a 
 
 
 20 
 
 483* 
 
 
 4 
 
 294 a 
 
 
 19- 
 
 :o 
 
 708/' 
 
 
 21 
 
 945* 
 
 
 5 
 
 559/' 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 917 (iii)-(vi)* 
 
 
 22 
 
 702 a" 
 
 
 7 
 
 155 a 
 
 
 34 
 
 
 437a,496r,515 
 
 
 23 
 
 945* 
 
 
 13 
 
 394/' 
 
 
 38 
 
 
 580 a 
 
 
 25 
 
 702 a" 
 
 
 19 
 
 235 a 
 
 9 
 
 1 
 
 
 576 
 
 
 28 
 
 721a 
 
 
 27 
 
 959* 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 962* 
 
 
 29 
 
 532/' 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 710 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 155 a 
 
 
 30 
 
 307 c 
 
 
 6 
 
 173 
 
 
 '9 
 
 
 363 a, 364 a 
 
 
 39 
 
 679 b 
 
 
 9 
 
 294 a 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 696* 
 
 
 4° 
 
 482,/ 
 
 
 13 
 
 962* 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 782 
 
 
 47 
 
 928 a* 
 
 
 25 
 
 261* 
 
 
 25 
 
 
 679 c 
 
 
 50 
 
 575 a 
 
 
 26 
 
 593 
 
 
 28 
 
 
 155 a 
 
 
 51 
 
 558 a 
 
 
 27 
 
 517 a" 
 
 
 37 
 
 
 398, 593 
 
 
 56 
 
 111, 478 a 
 
 
 29 
 
 593 
 
 
 43" 
 
 "7 
 
 513 a, 592 
 
 
 61 
 
 331 
 
 
 3i 
 
 395 
 
 
 45 
 
 
 534," 
 
 
 63 
 
 734 a 7 
 
 
 35 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 
 47 
 
 
 534 c 
 
 
 64 
 
 915 (vi) a*, 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 342/ 
 
 10 
 
 2 
 
 
 379 a 
 
 
 
 220a, 245a 
 
 
 12 
 
 093/' 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 711a 
 
 
 65 
 
 270/', 563 c 
 
 
 14 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 677 
 
 
 72 
 
 960/'* 
 
 
 17 
 
 039, 593 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 649 a 
 
 
 74 
 
 914*, 960 b* 
 
 
 21 
 
 948*, 275 *, 
 
 
 23- 
 
 -4 
 
 592 
 
 27 
 
 2 
 
 969* 
 
 
 
 372a, 593a', 
 
 
 26 
 
 
 366, 
 
 
 12 
 
 537 a 
 
 
 
 702 a 7 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 593, 649 a 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before members \ 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 <ith * supply 1, 
 
 653 
 
INDICES TO "TOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 
 
 MARK 
 
 
 
 LUKE 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 10 
 
 33 
 
 265 3 
 
 11 
 
 63 
 
 270/', 563 c 
 
 6 
 
 39 
 
 513 c, 702 d 
 
 
 45 
 
 167, 593 
 
 
 7i 
 
 960 3* 
 
 
 42 
 
 767 
 
 11 
 
 i 
 
 310 a 
 
 
 r- 
 
 914* 
 
 
 43 
 
 649(i)<r 
 
 
 7 
 
 537(H), 781 c 
 
 15 
 
 1 
 
 969* 
 
 
 46 
 
 680 3 
 
 
 8 
 
 047 
 
 
 4 
 
 736, 737 3 
 
 
 47 
 
 580 a 
 
 
 15 
 
 558 e 
 
 
 6 
 
 464 b-c 
 
 
 49 
 
 915* 
 
 
 23 
 
 521a 
 
 
 x 4 
 
 068 a 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 709 a 
 
 
 24 
 
 536 
 
 
 16 
 
 570 a' 
 
 
 2 
 
 584 3 
 
 
 25 
 
 532 a 
 
 
 r 9 
 
 558 a 
 
 
 6 
 
 559 
 
 
 27 
 
 342^ 
 
 
 22 
 
 738 
 
 
 19 
 
 940* 
 
 
 28 
 
 971* 
 
 
 23 
 
 380 3 
 
 
 33 
 
 253 a 
 
 
 3° 
 
 906', 953* 
 
 
 36 
 
 623 
 
 
 44 
 
 563 a 
 
 
 32 
 
 466 (i) a 
 
 
 40 
 
 318 
 
 
 47 
 
 178 a 
 
 12 
 
 II 
 
 356, 396/', 621 
 
 
 42 
 
 048, 087-8 
 
 
 48 
 
 781 c 
 
 
 12 
 
 366 c 
 
 
 43 
 
 291 
 
 8 
 
 1 
 
 374 a 
 
 
 15 
 
 563/; 
 
 1G 
 
 2 
 
 310 
 
 
 10 
 
 093 3 
 
 
 2 5 
 
 593 
 
 
 6 
 
 171 e 
 
 
 II 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 
 28 
 
 665 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.3 
 
 039 
 
 
 37 
 
 468/' 
 
 
 
 LUKE 
 
 
 16 
 
 948*, 275 3, 
 
 
 4 1 
 
 333 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 372 a 
 
 13 
 
 3 
 
 707 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 904* 
 
 
 19 
 
 294 a. 395 
 
 
 6 
 
 585 a-b 
 
 
 37 
 
 356 a 
 
 
 21 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 
 8 
 
 197 a 
 
 
 45 
 
 356 a 
 
 
 2 5 
 
 162 a 
 
 
 10 
 
 709 a 
 
 2 
 
 30 
 
 473 
 
 
 32 
 
 962* 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 532 
 
 
 4i 
 
 l\hd 
 
 
 46 
 
 563 3 
 
 
 '3 
 
 322, 499 
 
 3 
 
 16 
 
 899*, 981*, 
 
 
 50 
 
 237 a, 439 3 
 
 
 16 
 
 7113 
 
 
 
 998*, 043, 
 
 
 51 
 
 586 d 
 
 
 20 
 
 078 a, 441 b-c 
 
 
 
 401a, 558 d 
 
 
 54 
 
 679 3 
 
 
 2 1 
 
 439 
 
 
 18 
 
 335 a, 414/ 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 437 a 
 
 
 -3 
 
 585 a-3 
 
 
 19- 
 
 21 460 a, 480 a 
 
 
 5 
 
 437 a 
 
 
 3 1 
 
 255, 580 a-/' 
 
 
 20 
 
 517 </ 
 
 
 13 
 
 428 a 
 
 
 35 
 
 678 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 072 
 
 
 17 
 
 329 (i) a 
 
 14 
 
 2 
 
 918 * 
 
 
 14- 
 
 15 374 a 
 
 
 23 
 
 437a, 496^,515 
 
 
 3 
 
 563 a, 607 
 
 
 16 
 
 292 
 
 
 26 
 
 580 a 
 
 
 7 
 
 533 
 
 
 30 
 
 542-3 
 
 
 27 
 
 576 
 
 
 10 
 
 928 a* 
 
 
 3 1 
 
 709 a 
 
 
 28 
 
 962* 
 
 
 J 7 
 
 483 3 
 
 
 36 
 
 694 3 
 
 
 37 
 
 331 e 
 
 
 18 
 
 945* 
 
 
 4° 
 
 425 3 
 
 
 41 
 
 364 a 
 
 
 '9 
 
 702 a" 
 
 
 44 
 
 709 a 
 
 10 
 
 21 
 
 689/ 
 
 
 20 
 
 945* 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 342 /', 354 
 
 
 21- 
 
 2 165 
 
 
 ^4 
 
 721a 
 
 
 2 
 
 354 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 
 532 a 
 
 
 -5 
 
 532 3 
 
 
 3 
 
 342/ 
 
 
 7 
 
 7113 
 
 
 26 
 
 307 c 
 
 
 '4 
 
 593 3 
 
 
 9 
 
 536 
 
 
 3' 
 
 513 a-b 
 
 
 '9 
 
 294 a 
 
 
 13 
 
 743 
 
 
 36 
 
 679/' 
 
 
 20 
 
 559 3 
 
 
 21 
 
 533 
 
 
 37 
 
 482 7 
 
 
 27 
 
 394 3 
 
 
 22 
 
 517 d 
 
 
 43 
 
 911*, 928 a* 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 983 a* 
 
 
 36 
 
 532 c 
 
 
 46 
 
 575 a 
 
 
 8 
 
 710 
 
 
 39 
 
 329 a 
 
 
 47 
 
 558 a 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 173 
 
 
 41 
 
 760 
 
 
 49 
 
 111, 363 a, 
 
 
 12 
 
 962* 
 
 
 42 
 
 033 a 
 
 
 
 364 a 
 
 
 20 
 
 679 c 
 
 12 
 
 3 
 
 709 3 
 
 
 58 
 
 331, 451 
 
 
 23 
 
 689 d 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 532 
 
 
 r,. 
 
 537 a 
 
 
 25 
 
 679 C 
 
 
 24 
 
 144 
 
 
 62 
 
 220 a, 245 a 
 
 
 33 
 
 513,/ 
 
 
 32 
 
 679. 
 
 This Index extendi from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers 
 e.g. |i]999*,- before others. 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 654 
 
 nth * supply 1, 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 
 LUKE 
 
 
 
 LUKE 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAK. 
 
 12 
 
 58- 
 
 9 520 
 
 
 23 5 
 
 
 737 a 
 
 1 15- 
 
 34 
 
 601 2 
 
 13 
 
 3 
 
 521-2 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 537 a 
 
 16 
 
 
 146 a, 414/7 
 
 
 5 
 
 521 
 
 
 33 
 
 
 738 
 
 16- 
 
 18 
 
 pref. p. vii 
 
 
 26 
 
 335 a 
 
 
 34 
 
 
 318/' 
 
 17 
 
 
 301, 411c 
 
 
 28 
 
 532 b 
 
 
 36 
 
 
 623 
 
 18 
 
 
 938*, 964', 
 
 14 
 
 12, 
 
 1 3 532 a 
 
 
 38 
 
 
 339, 347 
 
 
 
 275 a, 308- 
 
 
 33 
 
 261/' 
 
 
 48 
 
 
 317/, 318 
 
 
 
 9, 382,615. 
 
 15 
 
 3° 
 
 781 < 
 
 
 49 
 
 
 318 a 
 
 
 
 706 foil. 
 
 16 
 
 6 
 
 781, 
 
 
 51 
 
 
 291 
 
 '9 
 
 
 481 
 
 
 16 
 
 477 
 
 
 53 
 
 
 257/' 
 
 19- 
 
 -2 1 
 
 766 (i) /' 
 
 
 18 
 
 677 
 
 
 53" 
 
 4 
 
 087-8 
 
 20 
 
 
 189, 401, 598 
 
 17 
 
 20 
 
 736 c 
 
 
 24 1 
 
 
 310 
 
 20-1 
 
 600 
 
 
 31 
 
 711(5 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 664/ 
 
 21 
 
 
 940*, 965*, 
 
 
 33 
 
 739 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 472,5 
 
 
 
 248 c, 498 a 
 
 18 
 
 5 
 
 322 
 
 
 36 
 
 
 307 
 
 22 
 
 
 113 
 
 
 3 1 
 
 265^ 
 
 
 36- 
 
 42 
 
 483 a 
 
 2 3 
 
 
 401 
 
 19 
 
 2 
 
 374,7 
 
 
 39 
 
 
 220 1, 269,/, 
 
 24 
 
 
 214, 481 
 
 
 28- 
 
 9 310 <7 
 
 
 
 
 699-700 
 
 26 
 
 
 998*, 399 
 
 
 3 1 
 
 513,/ 
 
 
 41 
 
 
 703 a, c 
 
 26- 
 
 "7 
 
 401 
 
 
 35 
 
 537 (ii) 
 
 , 781c 
 
 43 
 
 
 335 
 
 26- 
 
 ■33 
 
 552 
 
 
 4* 
 
 539 
 
 
 47 
 
 
 709 a 
 
 27 
 
 
 094 a, 104,7, 
 
 20 
 
 r 
 
 342 e 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 558 a 7 , 687 
 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 971 * 
 906*, 
 
 953* 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 28 
 
 
 968,*, 172, 
 648 
 
 
 10 
 
 690 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 937*, 994a*, 
 
 29 
 
 
 938*, 509, 624 
 
 
 18 
 
 397 ,?, 
 
 622 a 
 
 
 
 308,363-8. 
 
 3° 
 
 
 896*-900*, 
 
 
 23 
 
 563/' 
 
 
 
 
 395 
 
 
 
 927*, 330, 
 
 21 
 
 1 
 
 333,? 
 
 
 1- 
 
 -2 
 
 386 
 
 
 
 360, 369 
 
 
 8 
 
 220,7 
 
 
 1- 
 
 -8 
 
 594-7 
 
 
 
 71, 401. 
 
 
 12 
 
 197 a 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 301. 440, 478 
 
 
 
 478/', 571, 
 
 
 18- 
 
 19 322 
 
 
 3" 
 
 4 
 
 996 * 
 
 
 
 666, 718 
 
 
 33 
 
 255, 580,7 
 
 5 
 
 
 141 
 
 
 
 foil. 
 
 22 
 
 3 
 
 928 a* 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 937*, 277, 358 
 
 31 
 
 
 064, 387 
 
 
 •4 
 
 483/' 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 302 4, 525-8 
 
 3 r " 
 
 -3 
 
 401 
 
 
 '9 
 
 721a 
 
 
 7" 
 
 -8 
 
 063 
 
 3 2 
 
 
 952-5*, 458, 
 
 
 20 
 
 721,7 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 105-7,112,382 
 
 
 
 473 
 
 
 2/ 
 
 593 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 277, 508 
 
 3 2 " 
 
 4 
 
 572 
 
 
 33 
 
 643 
 
 
 9- 
 
 -11 
 
 508, 
 
 33 
 
 
 947*, 981*, 
 
 
 39 
 
 307 c, 
 
 799 (ii) 
 
 10 
 
 
 301 
 
 
 
 336, 382, 
 
 
 42 
 
 679 £ 
 
 
 1 1- 
 
 12 
 
 570 
 
 
 
 509 
 
 
 45 
 
 482,/ 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 268-9, 448,7. 
 
 34 
 
 
 386a,401, 473 
 
 
 47 
 
 928,7* 
 
 
 
 
 799 c 
 
 3r< 
 
 
 624 
 
 
 48 
 
 072 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 268-9, 371 a. 
 
 36 
 
 
 649 
 
 
 5° 
 
 983 a* 
 
 ,985 a*, 
 
 
 
 654, 722 c 
 
 38 
 
 
 279 a, 649 
 
 
 
 558 a 
 
 14 
 
 
 946* 
 
 41 
 
 
 901/'*, 985* 
 
 
 53 
 
 111, 364a 
 
 14- 
 
 17 
 
 284-7 
 
 42 
 
 
 456,7, 649 
 
 
 54 
 
 575 a 
 
 
 14- 
 
 18 
 
 180 
 
 43 
 
 
 471, 624 
 
 
 58 
 
 960/'* 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 896*-900*, 
 
 43" 
 
 •5 
 
 970*, 636 
 
 
 60 
 
 914*, 
 
 960,5* 
 
 
 
 925-7*, 
 
 44 
 
 
 289 
 
 
 61 
 
 649,7 
 
 
 
 
 330, 371, 
 
 45 
 
 
 931 2*, 418 a, 
 
 
 67 
 
 220 a 
 
 
 
 
 478/', 479, 
 
 
 
 643 
 
 
 69 
 
 915 (vi 
 
 )a* 
 
 
 
 507, 571, 
 
 45- 
 
 6 
 
 289 
 
 
 70 
 
 220 a, 
 
 245 a 
 
 
 
 665-6, 722, 
 
 46 
 
 
 932*. 245, 
 
 23 
 
 1 
 
 969* 
 
 
 
 
 799 a 
 
 
 
 248 c 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999* ,• before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 655 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 1 47- 
 
 -51 
 
 765 
 
 3 10 
 
 966*. 248 
 
 1 7 
 
 482 c 
 
 48 
 
 
 995 a*, 278, 
 
 11 
 
 428 
 
 8 
 
 310, 480, 746 a 
 
 
 
 372, 491 e, 
 
 12 
 
 256. 554 
 
 9 
 
 pref. pp. viii— 
 
 
 
 552 
 
 13 
 
 931-2', 141. 
 
 
 ix. 066. 273 
 
 49 
 
 
 966*, 669 
 
 
 211, 265 a, 
 
 9-10 536 (i la 
 
 50 
 
 
 189, 236, 241, 
 
 
 275, 503 
 
 10 
 
 980 a*, 400, 
 
 
 
 248 c, 372, 
 
 i.S 
 
 636 < 
 
 
 553 a, 743 
 
 
 
 552 
 
 15-21 
 
 pref. pp. vii- 
 
 II 
 
 258 
 
 51 
 
 
 958*, 265 a, 
 
 
 viii, 066 
 
 12 
 
 374 a 
 
 
 
 275, 336, 
 
 16 
 
 917a*, 986*, 
 
 13 
 
 553 c 
 
 
 
 626a 
 
 
 203, 262, 
 
 13-14 574 
 
 2 1 
 
 
 985*, 624 
 
 
 697 
 
 '4 
 
 039. 255, 314- 
 
 1- 
 
 -2 
 
 461 
 
 17 
 
 301, 606 
 
 
 16, 405 
 
 3 
 
 
 031 
 
 18 
 
 986*, 181, 
 
 16 
 
 437 8 
 
 4 
 
 
 229-30, 642, 
 
 
 187, 253. 
 
 17 
 
 552 
 
 
 
 647 
 
 
 475 a, 
 
 18 
 
 894*, 915(H)* 
 
 5 
 
 
 414, 437, 516 b 
 
 
 477 />, 484. 
 
 '9 
 
 439 (ii) a 
 
 5" 
 
 ■/ 
 
 632 
 
 
 695 
 
 20 
 
 245 
 
 6 
 
 
 070, 281-3 
 
 '9 
 
 092, 181 
 
 21-3 
 
 019,061, 485 a 
 
 7" 
 
 -8 
 
 437-8 
 
 19-2C 
 
 568 c 
 
 23 
 
 167, 398 
 
 9 
 
 
 939*, 016-8, 
 
 20 
 
 574, 584 a, 606 
 
 23-4 
 
 603 
 
 
 
 069 a, 281- 
 
 21 
 
 185 a, 574, 
 
 24 
 
 994a* 
 
 
 
 3, 459, 
 
 
 584 a 
 
 25 
 
 939*, 382 
 
 
 
 506 a, 607 
 
 22 
 
 670/ 
 
 25-6 
 
 205, 221 b 
 
 10 
 
 
 424 
 
 22-3 
 
 277 a 
 
 26 
 
 940* 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 386 (i) 
 
 23 
 
 424 
 
 26-8 
 
 633 
 
 1 2 
 
 
 374, 394, 395 
 
 23-4 
 
 480 
 
 27 
 
 231/; foil., 338 
 
 13 
 
 
 553/' 
 
 23-5 
 
 633 
 
 28 
 
 310 
 
 14- 
 
 ■16 
 
 553 a 
 
 25 
 
 349-50 
 
 29 
 
 702/', a" 
 
 1 ; 
 
 
 929*, 558 e 
 
 27 
 
 496 
 
 30 
 
 465 
 
 16 
 
 
 437 
 
 28 
 
 189 t , 330, 401 
 
 31 
 
 668 
 
 16- 
 
 18 
 
 633, 639 
 
 28-31 
 
 602 
 
 34 
 
 994 ,095, 298 
 
 18 
 
 
 179. 183 a, 400 
 
 29 
 
 939*, 571 
 
 35 
 
 185, 230 (iil- 
 
 ■9 
 
 
 439 (iii)-(v) 
 
 30-6 
 
 pref. p. viii 
 
 
 (iii), 246a, 
 
 19- 
 
 :o 
 
 331 
 
 31 
 
 904*, 555 a 
 
 
 437, 616, 
 
 20 
 
 
 021-4, 146, 
 
 3 2 
 
 451 
 
 
 762 a 
 
 
 
 248 c 
 
 32-3 
 
 501. 568/-, 628 
 
 36 
 
 287 /, 313 
 
 21 
 
 
 382, 467-9 
 
 33 
 
 270, 
 
 36-7 
 
 392 
 
 22 
 
 
 406, 469 
 
 34 
 
 324, 654, 714 
 
 37 
 
 980 a*, 795 
 
 23 
 
 
 069 a, 569, 
 
 35 
 
 334 c 
 
 38 
 
 477 
 
 
 
 654, 670 
 
 36 
 
 576 d, 598 
 
 39 
 
 041, 273 
 
 2 3- 
 
 4 
 
 466, 644 
 
 4 1 
 
 198. 459 
 
 40 
 
 465, 655 
 
 24 
 
 
 995 a*, 254 
 
 1-2 
 
 628 
 
 42 
 
 929 a*. 989 \ 
 
 24- 
 
 5 
 
 959*, 374, 
 
 1 3 
 
 635 (i) 
 
 
 450 
 
 
 
 491 e, d 
 
 2 
 
 374 a 
 
 43 
 
 994 /' * 
 
 25 
 
 
 094 a, 104 a, 
 
 3 
 
 440/, 649 (i), 
 
 43-4 
 
 067 
 
 
 
 607 
 
 
 670 b 
 
 45 
 
 167, 273. 460, 
 
 3 1 
 
 
 071 a, 290 a 
 
 4 
 
 272a, 635 (i) 
 
 
 692 
 
 ■2 
 
 
 933* 
 
 4-5 
 
 482, 
 
 +6 
 
 071a, 198, 
 
 3 
 
 
 576 d 
 
 5 
 
 970*, 198,310. 
 
 
 649 lit 
 
 3- 
 
 5 
 
 573. 603 
 
 
 368 a, 405 
 
 46-53 
 
 584/' 
 
 3- 
 
 7 
 
 903-8*, 612 
 
 6 
 
 916*, 198, 
 
 47 
 
 567/' 
 
 5 
 
 
 316rt 
 
 
 272, 751 
 
 4* 
 
 232. 366/, 
 
 8 
 
 
 614 
 
 6-9 
 
 631 
 
 
 456 a 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with 
 e.g. [1|999*; before others, 2. e.g. [2]000. 
 
 656 
 
 supply 1, 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 John 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 4 50 
 
 406, 459 
 
 5 38- 
 
 -9 «9 (i), (ii) 
 
 6 30 
 
 
 400, 525-8, 
 
 52 
 
 465 c 
 
 39 
 
 383,7 
 
 
 
 553(7 
 
 5«~3 
 
 013,025-6,206 
 
 39- 
 
 40 141 
 
 3i 
 
 
 552 
 
 53 
 
 374 a 
 
 4' 
 
 605 
 
 32 
 
 
 455,7 
 
 5 1 
 
 951 a*, 394 
 
 42 
 
 032-40 
 
 33 
 
 
 974*, 503 
 
 2 
 
 216, 670 
 
 43 
 
 145, 554, 677 
 
 34 
 
 
 553, 
 
 3 
 
 930* 
 
 44 
 
 895*, 923*, 
 
 34" 
 
 -6 
 
 056 
 
 4 
 
 334 d, 348 
 
 
 145, 399/;, 
 
 35 
 
 
 255, 507, 625 
 
 5 
 
 071a 
 
 
 496, 664 
 
 36 
 
 
 161, 189 
 
 6 
 
 248 c, 279 a 
 
 45 
 
 973 * 235 a, 
 
 37 
 
 
 507 
 
 6-7 
 
 206,? 
 
 
 442-3, 474 
 
 38 
 
 
 952,7*, 552,7, 
 
 7 
 
 093/; 
 
 46 
 
 339 
 
 
 
 605 
 
 9 
 
 914* 
 
 47 
 
 989*, 256 
 
 39 
 
 
 921-2*, 213, 
 
 1 1 
 
 380 b, 438 a 
 
 6 1 
 
 045 
 
 
 
 262 
 
 1 1-1 2 
 
 206 
 
 1- 
 
 -15 963* 
 
 39" 
 
 -54 
 
 609,7, 715/; 
 
 i3 
 
 031, 460, 
 
 2 
 
 417 
 
 40 
 
 
 093, 096 
 
 
 466 (i 1,541 
 
 3 
 
 707, 751 
 
 4' 
 
 
 504 
 
 '4 
 
 456 a, 478 b 
 
 3" 
 
 -5 616, 633 
 
 41- 
 
 -2 
 
 552,7 
 
 15 
 
 466 (i) 
 
 4 
 
 931*, 654 d 
 
 42 
 
 
 932*. 970*, 
 
 15-18 
 
 389 
 
 5 
 
 279,7, 366/', 
 
 
 
 427,7, 
 
 16 
 
 537, 715 c 
 
 
 428, 512, 
 
 
 
 552,7 
 
 16-18 
 
 464 
 
 
 642, 745-6 
 
 43 
 
 
 349 
 
 '7 
 
 915 (vi)*, 
 
 6 
 
 374, 467-8 
 
 44 
 
 
 715/; 
 
 
 226/;, 537 
 
 7 
 
 643 
 
 44" 
 
 ■5 
 
 548,7 
 
 18 
 
 468/;, 733(7 
 
 9 
 
 056, 412/; 
 
 45" 
 
 •6 
 
 218-19, 357-9 
 
 '9 
 
 148, 382, 516, 
 
 10 
 
 009-11, 070, 
 
 46 
 
 
 386. 552 
 
 
 537, 605, 
 
 
 437, 632/; 
 
 48- 
 
 50 
 
 504-5 
 
 
 617a, 739(7 
 
 n 
 
 198 
 
 48- 
 
 ■51 
 
 574, 608 
 
 20 
 
 114, 375 
 
 13 
 
 985*, 267, 
 
 49 
 
 
 950,7*, 552, 
 
 21 
 
 148, 741,/ 
 
 
 329 (i), 419 
 
 
 
 553 e 
 
 21-3 
 
 066/; 
 
 [4 
 
 940*, 553 d 
 
 49" 
 
 5 1 
 
 956-7* 
 
 23 
 
 128 
 
 *5 
 
 198, 375, 
 
 50 
 
 
 530 
 
 24 
 
 477 b, 799 (iii) 
 
 
 649 (i), 
 
 51 
 
 
 074, 076, 
 
 25 
 
 485 ,7, 499, 
 
 
 724 foil. 
 
 
 
 504-5 
 
 
 603, 799 (i) 
 
 16 
 
 336 
 
 51- 
 
 5 
 
 567 
 
 26 
 
 039, 148, 741 ,7 
 
 17 
 
 031 
 
 53 
 
 
 039 
 
 26-7 
 
 066/ 
 
 18 
 
 929 <? * 
 
 54 
 
 
 715/; 
 
 28 
 
 485 a, 603 
 
 l 9 
 
 909* 
 
 54- 
 
 7 
 
 613 
 
 29 
 
 499, 584 a 
 
 19- 
 
 21 340-6 
 
 56 
 
 
 124,7 
 
 3° 
 
 514 (i)e, 605 
 
 20 
 
 205,220-2,699 
 
 $6- 
 
 7 
 
 297-300 
 
 3r 
 
 514 (i) 
 
 21 
 
 909*, 914*, 
 
 57 
 
 
 957*, 124, 
 
 31-2 
 
 972* 
 
 
 472, 478/;, 
 
 
 
 151 
 
 32 
 
 384, 675, 730, 
 
 
 498, 716-7 
 
 57- 
 
 8 
 
 504-5 
 
 
 791-5 
 
 22 
 
 417, 466 (i) 
 
 58 
 
 
 949 50*, 
 
 34 
 
 605 
 
 22- 
 
 4 417,7 
 
 
 
 952-7*, 
 
 35 
 
 275 b, 471, 
 
 24 
 
 466 (i), 482 c, 
 
 
 
 122/;, 553 e 
 
 
 655, 689 £ 
 
 
 752 
 
 60 
 
 
 041 
 
 36 
 
 230,z, 384, 
 
 25 
 
 478, 758 
 
 61 
 
 
 248 c, 279,7 
 
 
 453, 604, 
 
 27 
 
 931*, 312-13, 
 
 62 
 
 
 172,7, 192, 
 
 
 686 7 
 
 
 438 
 
 
 
 210-12, 
 
 37 
 
 450,7 
 
 28 
 
 493. 512 
 
 
 
 265,7, 515, 
 
 37-8 
 
 038 40, 259 
 
 29 
 
 968 b *, 096, 
 
 
 
 739/; 
 
 38 
 
 178, 382, 764- 
 6, 799 (iii) 
 
 
 382, 405 a, 
 526-8 
 
 63 
 
 
 975-7*, 257/', 
 545 c, 606 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 supply 1, 
 
 A. VI. 
 
 657 
 
 A 2 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 6 63- 
 
 ■4 
 
 056/' 
 
 7 34 
 
 
 487 a 
 
 8 29 
 
 449, 614 
 
 64 
 
 
 251 a, 254, 510 
 
 34- 
 
 6 
 
 171a 1 , 190 a, 
 
 30-1 
 
 470 
 
 64- 
 
 5 
 
 470, 636 
 
 
 
 578. 605 
 
 3 1 
 
 366/', 506,514 
 
 65 
 
 
 548 a 
 
 35 
 
 
 046,179,248/', 
 
 35 
 
 263 e-g 
 
 67 
 
 
 235 
 
 
 
 607, 645 
 
 36 
 
 192 
 
 68- 
 
 9 
 
 226 c 
 
 37 
 
 
 168, 479, 618 
 
 37-8 
 
 193-4 
 
 69 
 
 
 442 3, 475 
 
 37- 
 
 •8 
 
 039. 129 
 
 38 
 
 027, 355, 357- 
 
 70 
 
 
 441 a-d 
 
 38 
 
 
 921-2*, 
 
 
 9. 439(v)<r 
 
 7' 
 
 
 928% 931*, 
 945*, 
 
 
 
 315-16, 
 421, 626 a 
 
 39 
 
 078-9, 213 a, 
 698 
 
 
 
 467-8 
 
 39 
 
 
 407, 468, 499 
 
 40 
 
 934-5*, 412a, 
 
 7 1 
 
 
 498 
 
 40 
 
 
 213 
 
 
 451 
 
 
 
 931*, 951* 
 
 41- 
 
 -2 
 
 068, 289, 552 
 
 4' 
 
 932*, 194, 
 
 2 
 
 
 114, 147, 569, 
 
 42 
 
 
 932 a* 
 
 42 
 
 326, 382, 457 
 
 
 
 690, 727 
 
 44 
 
 
 138, 472, 498, 
 
 43 
 
 251 
 
 4 
 
 
 917 (i), (vi)*, 
 
 
 
 575 
 
 44 
 
 932 * , 194 /'-r, 
 
 
 
 202, 375 a, 
 
 45 
 
 
 991a*, 385 
 
 
 326,378-9, 
 
 
 
 727 
 
 48 
 
 
 057 
 
 
 498, 535, 
 
 s 
 
 
 395(7, 466 
 
 49 
 
 
 924*, 253,266, 
 
 
 728 
 
 6- 
 
 ■8 
 
 989*, 605 
 
 
 
 417 
 
 45 
 
 177 a 
 
 8- 
 
 10 
 
 264-5, 629 
 
 5i 
 
 
 960* 
 
 47 
 
 389, 553/' 
 
 9 
 
 
 458 
 
 52 
 
 
 185a, 439 (i) a, 
 
 50 
 
 973 a*, 600 
 
 [O 
 
 
 202, 375 
 
 
 
 492 
 
 50-1 
 
 978 " 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 385, 732 
 
 8 6, 
 
 9 
 
 348 
 
 51 
 
 989* 
 
 13 
 
 
 917 (i), (vi)* 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 915 (vi) a* 
 
 51-2 
 
 514-15, 552/', 
 
 14 
 
 
 264-5 
 
 1 2 
 
 
 608, 625 
 
 
 576, 657/' 
 
 15 
 
 
 253 
 
 13- 
 
 14 
 
 554 
 
 5 2 
 
 017 
 
 16 
 
 
 989*, 629 
 
 '4 
 
 
 457, 490, 
 
 53 
 
 923*, 413 
 
 16- 
 
 -17 
 
 250 
 
 
 
 514 (i), 
 
 54 
 
 927 a*, 979* 
 
 17 
 
 
 498, 515 a, 
 
 
 
 549, 736 c, 
 
 55 
 
 160, 613 
 
 
 
 586 a 
 
 
 
 739 a, 759 
 
 56 
 
 935*, 097, 
 
 1 8 
 
 
 386 
 
 15- 
 
 16 
 
 628 
 
 
 688-9 
 
 '9 
 
 
 248/', 455 a 
 
 16 
 
 
 074 6, 159, 
 
 57 
 
 146, 248<- 
 
 21- 
 
 -2 
 
 388 
 
 
 
 207, 515 a, 
 
 58 
 
 221/, 625 
 
 22 
 
 
 949-50*, 
 
 
 
 600, 614 
 
 59 
 
 072, 538-43, 
 
 
 
 218-19 
 
 16- 
 
 17 
 
 428 
 
 
 646 
 
 22- 
 
 3 
 
 961*, 552, 
 
 17 
 
 
 988*, 558,-. 588 
 
 9 2 
 
 098 
 
 
 
 715 « 
 
 
 
 foil., 626 
 
 3 
 
 063, 106-7, 
 
 23 
 
 
 244, 248 c 
 
 18 
 
 
 794 
 
 
 112 
 
 24 
 
 
 438 
 
 '9 
 
 
 148, 566 /', 
 
 4 
 
 089, 428 a-,- 
 
 26 
 
 
 917 (vi)*, 057, 
 
 
 
 739 a 7 
 
 5 
 
 531 c, 608 
 
 
 
 139 a 
 
 20 
 
 
 138,333-4,481 
 
 6 
 
 569 <\ 784/ 
 
 ±: 
 
 
 531, 535, 736, 
 
 2 1 
 
 
 487 a, 545, 
 
 7 
 
 305. 437, 
 
 2 7- 
 
 ■8 
 
 142 
 
 
 
 552, 578 
 
 
 456 a, 
 
 2S 
 
 
 200 a, 479. 
 
 21- 
 
 2 
 
 190 a, 605 
 
 
 583,, 706 
 
 
 
 600, 618, 
 
 22 
 
 
 185 a, 702 a 7 
 
 S 
 
 466 (i) 
 
 
 
 736 c 
 
 23 
 
 
 399. 553 c 
 
 9 
 
 189,205,221'', 
 
 *9 
 
 
 151, 613 a 
 
 24 
 
 
 189,192,221/'. 
 
 
 265 (i) 
 
 .'-0 
 
 
 138, 472. 481, 
 
 
 
 552 
 
 1 1 
 
 305. 381. 
 
 
 
 575 
 
 ?4- 
 
 5 
 
 223 8 
 
 
 58Sr, 
 
 .'.' 
 
 
 074 5, 405 a 
 
 25 
 
 
 154-6, 413 
 
 
 706 a 
 
 3 2 
 
 
 991 a * 
 
 2(, 
 
 
 062. 451 
 
 12 
 
 732 
 
 33 
 
 4 
 
 489 
 
 ?: 
 
 
 468 
 
 13 
 
 931*. 018, 
 
 33 
 
 5 
 
 082 
 
 28 
 
 
 221/', 605 a 
 
 
 351/' 
 
 This ///</,• v , vtends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with : supply 1, 
 e.g. 1 1 ]999 * .• before others, 2, e.g. [2|ooo. 
 
 658 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAK. 
 
 
 I'AK. 
 
 9 r 4 
 
 
 071(7 
 
 10 26-7 
 
 987* 
 
 11 32 
 
 465, 565-6, 
 
 16 
 
 
 386/; 
 
 27 
 
 491c 
 
 
 558 d-e 
 
 '7 
 
 
 018, 183, 274 
 
 28-9 
 
 139, 586 d-e, 
 
 i3 
 
 198, 614 ( 
 
 18 
 
 
 931", 018 
 
 
 767 
 
 34 
 
 441 
 
 '9 
 
 
 248 c 
 
 29 
 
 053 /, 496 b, 
 
 37 
 
 496 
 
 :i 
 
 
 723 
 
 
 744 
 
 38 
 
 198 
 
 21- 
 
 3 
 
 577 
 
 32 
 
 441, 486, 606 
 
 39 
 
 437 
 
 22 
 
 
 480 
 
 34 
 
 190 e 
 
 4° 
 
 189, 545 
 
 24 
 
 
 425(7, 427(7 
 
 35 
 
 143, 799 (iii) 
 
 41 
 
 052, 452, 552 c. 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 274, 351, 381 
 
 35-6 
 
 921*, 244,248 c 
 
 
 617 
 
 27 
 
 
 498 
 
 36 
 
 190/ 
 
 42 
 
 058,294,525 8 
 
 27- 
 
 8 
 
 558 c' 
 
 37 
 
 256 
 
 44 
 
 437 
 
 28 
 
 
 554 
 
 38 
 
 893*, 511 
 
 45 
 
 941-4* 
 
 29 
 
 
 400, 427(7, 
 
 40 
 
 968 c*, 172, 
 
 45" 
 
 6 380 
 
 
 
 737 e 
 
 
 458, 649 (i) 
 
 47 
 
 991 ,7 *, 493-4, 
 
 29- 
 
 30 
 
 068, 142(7 
 
 40-2 
 
 647 
 
 
 512, 766 (i) 
 
 3° 
 
 
 218 c, 393, 
 
 4 1 
 
 075 (7, 169 
 
 48 
 
 559 (7, 645 
 
 
 
 683 
 
 11 1 
 
 071 (7, 290 
 
 5° 
 
 104, 645 
 
 33 
 
 
 079/;, 698 
 
 •-) 
 
 276 
 
 50- 
 
 1 645 
 
 34" 
 
 '5 
 
 248 c 
 
 4-6 
 
 633 
 
 52 
 
 664/ 
 
 35 
 
 
 242, 456 a, 
 
 6 
 
 198, 458 
 
 54 
 
 917 (vi)*, 199, 
 
 
 
 459 
 
 7 
 
 394 
 
 
 352(7, 724 
 
 36 
 
 
 113, 157, 381, 
 
 7-8 
 
 649 (ii) 
 
 55 
 
 646, 686 7 
 
 
 
 525-8 
 
 8 
 
 146, 248 c 
 
 55- 
 
 7 687 
 
 37 
 
 
 980,?*, 163, 
 
 9 
 
 514 
 
 56 
 
 184, 349, 
 
 
 
 456(7 
 
 1 1 
 
 394, 642 
 
 
 766 (\)a 
 
 40 
 
 
 215, 351 
 
 I 1-12 
 
 586 c 
 
 57 
 
 991(7*, 173, 
 
 4 1 
 
 
 190/; 
 
 12-14 
 
 632 c, 634 
 
 
 480, 635 
 
 10 1 
 
 
 265 b-C 
 
 '3 
 
 382, 464(7, 
 
 12 1 
 
 172, 199, 288, 
 
 2 
 
 
 669 
 
 
 467-8, 481 
 
 
 624, 635, 
 
 2- 
 
 9 
 
 608 
 
 14 
 
 917 (i), (ii)* 
 
 
 648 
 
 3^ 
 
 12 
 
 267 
 
 r +- 1 5 
 
 099-102 
 
 3 
 
 168, 329, 607 
 
 3" 
 
 27 
 
 420 
 
 15 
 
 525 foil. 
 
 4 
 
 928*, 945*, 
 
 4 
 
 
 330(7 
 
 16 
 
 928 * 
 
 
 586,7 
 
 4" 
 
 5 
 
 558 c 
 
 17 
 
 198 
 
 5 
 
 945* 
 
 5 
 
 
 255 
 
 17-19 
 
 480 
 
 7 
 
 103, 352 /, 
 
 6 
 
 
 251, 382 
 
 18 
 
 670 
 
 
 456(7 
 
 8 
 
 
 361-2, 798 d 
 
 18-19 
 
 941-4* 
 
 9 
 
 941a* 
 
 10 
 
 
 606 
 
 '9 
 
 990 1*, 360 
 
 9" 
 
 12 992* 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 484, 608, 625 
 
 20-1 
 
 565 6 
 
 10 
 
 147 
 
 12 
 
 
 704 
 
 22 
 
 915 (i)-(v)*, 
 
 10 
 
 u 464 
 
 12- 
 
 13 
 
 179 
 
 
 536 (i) a, c, 
 
 1 1 
 
 041, 294(7 
 
 14 
 
 
 608 
 
 
 660/ 
 
 12 
 
 278, 417 
 
 14- 
 
 15 
 
 125-6, 491c 
 
 25 
 
 456(7, 625 
 
 13 
 
 966*. 047, 669 
 
 [5 
 
 
 484, 552 
 
 26 
 
 242, 248c, 262, 
 
 14 
 
 461, 537 (ii), 
 
 15- 
 
 18 
 
 612 
 
 
 545 a 
 
 
 756 
 
 16 
 
 
 151 
 
 27 
 
 940% 475, 
 
 15 
 
 537 (ii) 
 
 17 
 
 
 391, 552 
 
 
 553 d 
 
 16 
 
 339, 360, 396- 
 
 18 
 
 
 606 
 
 29 
 
 902/*, 465, 
 
 
 7, 469, 
 
 12 
 
 
 670 
 
 
 565-6 
 
 
 621-2. 757 
 
 23 
 
 
 969(7* 
 
 29-3 1 
 
 902/*, 554/ 
 
 18 
 
 152-3, 386 b 
 
 24 
 
 
 917 (vi)* 
 
 30 
 
 480 
 
 19 
 
 439 (ii), 494, 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 186(7, 604 
 
 3' 
 
 902/*, 941- 
 
 
 645, 
 
 25- 
 
 6 
 
 605 
 
 
 4", 686-7 
 
 
 753 a-e 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999*,- before others, 2, e.g. [2J000. 
 
 659 
 
 42 — 2 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 12 20 
 
 046/.*, 686-7 
 
 13 10 
 
 263,265(i),659 
 
 , 14 7 
 
 915(vi|*,243,/, 
 
 21 
 
 289 
 
 n 
 
 190 ,7, 263, 
 
 
 477/', 491, 
 
 22 
 
 418, 482 c 
 
 
 265 (i), 510 
 
 
 566/', 739,/, 
 
 23 
 
 537 ,/, 604 a 
 
 12 
 
 243,248,, 270, 
 
 
 760 foil. 
 
 24 
 
 948*, 375, 725 
 
 
 477,564,649 
 
 8 
 
 437// 
 
 25 
 
 313 b, 485 
 
 
 (iii), 762 
 
 9 
 
 248 c, 609 
 
 26 
 
 487, 515, 552 < 
 
 13 
 
 051,/, 195, 680 
 
 IO-II 
 
 579 
 
 27 
 
 057,231/', 325, 
 
 14 
 
 931*, 195,441, 
 
 1 1 
 
 080, 238, 727 
 
 
 389 a, 437, 
 
 
 477, 564 
 
 12 
 
 151 
 
 
 512 b-c, 
 
 15 
 
 127,/ 
 
 12-14 
 
 536 (i) 
 
 
 614 ,- 
 
 16 
 
 550/' 
 
 l 3 
 
 414, 516 
 
 27-8 
 
 052, 053 f, 659 
 
 17 
 
 514 (i) 
 
 r 3- r 4 
 
 604, 625 
 
 28 
 
 958*, 162, 441, 
 
 18 
 
 105-12, 263, 
 
 15 
 
 987*, 515/', 
 
 
 768 foil. 
 
 
 441 
 
 
 609 
 
 3° 
 
 110 b, 478 b, 
 
 l 9 
 
 915 (vi)*, 
 
 16 
 
 931-2*, 630, 
 
 
 611 c 
 
 
 995tf*,221/>, 
 
 
 793-5 
 
 32 
 
 642, 739 a 
 
 
 526-8, 585 
 
 ,6-17 
 
 352-3 
 
 33 
 
 467-8 
 
 20 
 
 507, 609, 739,/ 
 
 17 
 
 243 a, 491 <-, 
 
 34 
 
 642, 645 
 
 21 
 
 945*, 614 c 
 
 
 496, 762 
 
 35 
 
 923*, 201, 
 
 2 3 
 
 277, 308 
 
 18 
 
 600 
 
 
 342,4, 438 
 
 24 
 
 249, 252, 
 
 u ) 
 
 149, 177, 
 
 35-6 
 
 201, 696, 
 
 
 465 c-d 
 
 
 230 (i). 
 
 36 
 
 238, 342//, 538, 
 
 25 
 
 917* 
 
 
 241 a, 
 
 
 646 
 
 26 
 
 537 d 
 
 
 762 a 
 
 37 
 
 031, 466 
 
 27 
 
 918*, 437, 
 
 21 
 
 980*, 987*, 
 
 37-4° 
 
 390 
 
 
 439(v),486, 
 
 
 373 
 
 39 
 
 466, 496 
 
 
 554 e 
 
 22 
 
 928/'*, 265 (i), 
 
 40 
 
 093 6, 114, 
 
 28-9 
 
 464 
 
 
 478//, 694, 
 
 
 449 a-b 
 
 29 
 
 926 b* 
 
 
 766 a 
 
 43 
 
 092, 369 
 
 30-2 
 
 914* 
 
 2 3 
 
 515 /', 609 
 
 44 
 
 072, 479 
 
 3i 
 
 446, 522// 
 
 23-4 
 
 569,/, 580 
 
 44"5° 
 
 618 
 
 33 
 
 082, 127,/, 190, 
 
 24 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 45 
 
 609 
 
 
 489 b, 545, 
 
 25 
 
 625 
 
 46 
 
 933*, 262,457, 
 
 
 578, 605 
 
 26 
 
 931 2*, 411,- 
 
 
 608 
 
 33-7 
 
 915 (vi)* 
 
 27 
 
 957,/*, 993*, 
 
 46-7 
 
 159 
 
 34 
 
 894/*, 094, 
 
 
 122 /', 609 b 
 
 47 
 
 395 , 606 
 
 
 116, 127 a, 
 
 27-9 
 
 525 8 
 
 48 
 
 978*, 799 (iii) 
 
 
 130, 412, 
 
 2S 
 
 550,/, 739 c 
 
 48-9 
 
 179 
 
 
 441, 609 
 
 29 
 
 186,/, 585 
 
 49 
 
 293 b, 375, 
 
 34-5 
 
 036/', 612 
 
 29-30 
 
 915 (v)* 
 
 
 586a,606a, 
 
 35 
 
 332, 393,515// 
 
 30-I 
 
 106-8 
 
 
 742 a 
 
 36 
 
 082, 578, 605, 
 
 3' 
 
 428, 742 ,/ 
 
 49-50 
 
 195 
 
 
 642 
 
 15 1-5 
 
 608, 625 
 
 L3 1 
 
 319 23 
 
 36-7 
 
 497, 555 
 
 2 
 
 920-2*. 421 
 
 '"4 
 
 279 
 
 37 
 
 565 a, 643 
 
 2 ~5 
 
 921* 
 
 3 
 
 327, 334, 
 
 37-8 
 
 248, 
 
 3 
 
 353, 799 (iii) 
 
 4 
 
 270 
 
 38 
 
 537,/ 
 
 4 
 
 208, 437 c 
 
 6 
 
 200. 236,/, 
 
 11 1 
 
 889% 236 40, 
 
 4-6 
 
 521 
 
 
 248,, 483, 
 
 
 555 
 
 5 
 
 386 
 
 
 486, 564, 
 
 i-3 
 
 080 6, 186 
 
 r> 
 
 919*. 266, 426. 
 
 
 784, 
 
 3 
 
 159, 486 7, 
 
 
 445, 755 
 
 7 
 
 394 a 
 
 
 649 (ii) 
 
 7 
 
 514, 516 </, 
 
 8 
 
 564 
 
 4-6 
 
 614, 
 
 
 536 (i). 
 
 8-9 
 
 208 9, 564 
 
 6 
 
 301,/, 625 
 
 
 660/', 739 
 
 This Indi 1 extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [ 1 1999* ; before others, 2, e.g. [2|000. 
 
 660 
 

 
 
 NEW 
 
 TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 I'AR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 15 8 
 
 
 114, 393, 446 
 
 16 20 
 
 
 058 
 
 17 11- 
 
 ■1 2 
 
 408-11, 568 
 
 9 
 
 
 127, 437 
 
 21 
 
 
 948a*, 535 
 
 I 2 
 
 
 584, 742, 744 c 
 
 9" 
 
 1 1 
 
 988*, 581 
 
 21- 
 
 -2 
 
 149, 196-7 
 
 ■4 
 
 
 552 
 
 9" 
 
 -12 
 
 987* 
 
 22 
 
 
 915(vi)<r*, 
 
 15 
 
 
 325 
 
 10 
 
 
 131, 514, 568 
 
 
 
 077, 169 
 
 16 
 
 
 552 
 
 12 
 
 
 096,131,529(7. 
 609 
 
 23 
 
 
 516, 630 f, 
 739 a 
 
 ■7 
 18 
 
 
 661 
 
 127, 132, 444, 
 
 13 
 
 
 095 
 
 2 3" 
 
 -4 
 
 536 (i), 604 
 
 
 
 554 a 
 
 '5 
 
 
 901*, 441, 447, 
 
 24 
 
 
 915(vi)Z>* 
 
 19 
 
 
 369, 376 a 
 
 
 
 451, 477, 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 917 (i), (ii), 
 
 19- 
 
 -24 
 
 529 a 
 
 
 
 550 
 
 
 
 (vi)*,485a 
 
 20 
 
 
 074 5, 304, 
 
 i6 
 
 
 120-1,313,414, 
 
 26 
 
 
 536 (i). 630 
 
 
 
 500,799 (iii) 
 
 
 
 441 a, d, 
 
 27 
 
 
 931a*, 246, 
 
 20- 
 
 -4 
 
 118-9 
 
 
 
 516,536(i), 
 
 
 
 326-8, 
 
 21 
 
 
 208 b, 308, 
 
 
 
 604 
 
 
 
 442-3, 
 
 
 
 376 a, 
 
 16- 
 
 20 
 
 426 
 
 
 
 475-6 
 
 
 
 526-8,554, 
 
 17 
 
 
 529 a 
 
 28 
 
 
 326-8, 457, 
 
 
 
 614, 740 
 
 18 
 
 
 896*,901*,243. 
 
 
 
 649 (ii) 
 
 21- 
 
 - 2 
 
 127/', 132 a 
 
 
 
 666, 762 
 
 29 
 
 
 917(i),(ii),(vi)*, 
 
 21- 
 
 "5 
 
 052-3 
 
 l 9 
 
 
 387, 441 a, d 
 
 
 
 643 
 
 2 2 
 
 
 455 
 
 20 
 
 
 405-6 
 
 30 
 
 
 104a, 246,327, 
 
 23 
 
 
 306, 554, 614 
 
 20- 
 
 1 
 
 059 
 
 
 
 332 
 
 24 
 
 
 151, 422, 455, 
 
 21 
 
 
 582 
 
 30- 
 
 1 
 
 248 < 
 
 
 
 487. 495, 
 
 2 2 
 
 
 213 a, 698 
 
 3 1 " 
 
 -2 
 
 475 
 
 
 
 740 e, 744 a 
 
 2 4 
 
 
 161, 213a, 442 
 -3,475,698 
 
 32 
 
 
 246, 485 a, 487, 
 604 a, 614, 
 
 25 
 26 
 
 
 164-5 
 
 014, 164 b, 
 
 2 4- 
 
 5 
 
 105-12 
 
 
 
 629, 799 (i) 
 
 
 
 529 a 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 799 (iii) 
 
 35 
 
 
 058, 477 
 
 18 1 
 
 
 374 a, 671^1 
 
 26 
 
 
 931-2* 
 
 17 1 
 
 
 958 *, 456 a, 
 
 1- 
 
 2 
 
 799 (ii) 
 
 27 
 
 
 074 
 
 
 
 604 a, 617, 
 
 1- 
 
 3 
 
 634 
 
 16 1- 
 
 7 
 
 060 
 
 
 
 647 
 
 3 
 
 
 994/'* 
 
 2 
 
 
 093/', 485 a, 
 
 1- 
 
 .-> 
 
 455 
 
 4 
 
 
 200, 605 <,635, 
 
 
 
 499, 799 (i) 
 
 1- 
 
 •I 1 
 
 052 
 
 
 
 649 a' 
 
 2_ 
 
 1 1 
 
 999* 
 
 2 
 
 
 921*,936*,114, 
 
 S 
 
 
 189, 205, 221 /' 
 
 3 
 
 
 448, 582 
 
 
 
 117, 266, 
 
 5~ 
 
 6 
 
 634 
 
 4 
 
 
 254 a 
 
 
 
 422, 552, 
 
 5~ 
 
 8 
 
 625 
 
 5 
 
 
 139 a 
 
 
 
 690, 740-4 
 
 6 
 
 
 205, 221 b 
 
 7 
 
 
 104 
 
 ■>_ 
 
 24 
 
 742 /> 
 
 7 
 
 
 605 c, 649 a 7 
 
 8 
 
 
 367, 614 
 
 3 
 
 
 936*, 095, 114, 
 
 8 
 
 
 189, 191, 205, 
 
 8- 
 
 11 
 
 182 
 
 
 
 168, 491 c, 
 
 
 
 221 b 
 
 9" 
 
 10 
 
 074-5 
 
 
 
 664 a 
 
 9 
 
 
 190, 742 /', 
 
 9- 
 
 11 
 
 077, 169 
 
 4 
 
 
 340, 687/; 
 
 
 
 744 < 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 477^ 
 
 4- 
 
 ■5 
 
 915 (vl* 
 
 10 
 
 
 985*, 558 a, 
 
 12 
 
 
 497 
 
 5 
 
 
 995 a *, 027, 
 
 
 
 563, 637 
 
 l i~ 
 
 16 
 
 614 
 
 
 
 355, 405, 
 
 11 
 
 
 232.377,456 a, 
 
 '4- 
 
 15 
 
 488, 583, 629 
 
 
 
 768 foil. 
 
 
 
 742/' 
 
 15 
 
 
 189 
 
 6 
 
 
 455,568,798 a 
 
 14 
 
 
 104 
 
 16 
 
 
 190 a', 642 
 
 7~ 
 
 8 
 
 448, 455 a 
 
 16 
 
 
 931-2*, 986*, 
 
 16- 
 
 J9 
 
 583, 613 
 
 8 
 
 
 246, 328, 376a 
 
 
 
 368 
 
 17 
 
 
 190 d, 213, 
 
 9 
 
 
 405 a, 455, 630 
 
 16- 
 
 17 
 
 985/'* 
 
 
 
 423, 468/^ 
 
 9" 
 
 -i 2 
 
 744 c 
 
 r 7 
 
 
 381 
 
 '9 
 
 
 248 1, 349, 
 
 10 
 
 
 332, 477 
 
 18 
 
 
 351a 
 
 
 
 466 (i), 472, 
 
 11 
 
 
 376 a, 529 a, 
 
 20 
 
 
 917 (vi)*, 
 
 
 
 498 
 
 
 
 661, 740 
 
 
 
 251/', 440a 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 supply 1, 
 
 66l 
 

 INDICES 1 
 
 X) "J< 
 
 3? 
 
 LANNINE G 
 
 RAMIV 
 
 I A 
 
 R" 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 18 2 1 
 
 381, 450 a 
 
 19 28 
 
 
 115, 394, 626,7 
 
 20 28 
 
 
 679 foil. 
 
 22 
 
 245, 248 c 
 
 28- 
 
 3° 
 
 279,7, 632 
 
 29 
 
 
 236,241.248,. 
 
 24 
 
 462 
 
 29 
 
 
 425 
 
 
 
 475, 499 
 
 25 
 
 425 
 
 29- 
 
 3° 
 
 623 
 
 30 
 
 
 335, 414/ 
 
 T-l 
 
 914* 
 
 3o 
 
 
 456,7, 644 (i) 
 
 30- 
 
 1 
 
 431-5 
 
 28 
 
 048, 646 
 
 3 1 
 
 
 048,087-8,115, 
 
 3i 
 
 
 526 foil. 
 
 29 
 
 969* 
 
 
 
 267, 419 
 
 •21 1 
 
 
 917,7*, 340-6, 
 
 3° 
 
 277, 566/;, 646 
 
 3 1 " 
 
 4 
 
 564/' 
 
 
 
 620 
 
 3 1 
 
 969,$* 
 
 3 2 
 
 
 607 
 
 2 
 
 
 418 
 
 33 
 
 234, 248 c, 
 
 33 
 
 
 336 
 
 3 
 
 
 486 
 
 
 649 (i), 
 
 34 
 
 
 914*, 586(7 
 
 4 
 
 
 137,307,7,336, 
 
 
 766 (\)b 
 
 35 
 
 
 151 ,7, 383-4, 
 
 
 
 341,7 
 
 33 foil. 649 (ii) 
 
 
 
 526-8, 607, 
 
 5 
 
 
 235/;-,/, 701-3 
 
 34 
 
 090-1, 245 a, 
 
 
 
 611, 731 
 
 6 
 
 
 684, 703, 
 
 
 248 c, 250/' 
 
 37 
 
 
 317-18, 675-7 
 
 7 
 
 
 632,7 
 
 35 
 
 702 </ 
 
 38 
 
 
 291, 394 
 
 8 
 
 
 020, 288 
 
 36 
 
 988% 566 b 
 
 39 
 
 
 461 
 
 9 
 
 
 703 
 
 37 
 
 185 />, 233-4, 
 
 4' 
 
 
 257/' 
 
 10 
 
 
 213. 405, 441, 
 
 
 245(7, 248 r 
 
 20 1 
 
 
 310-11 
 
 
 
 703 
 
 
 457 
 
 1- 
 
 -2 
 
 425, 482 c 
 
 10- 
 
 12 
 
 437 
 
 38 
 
 553 (/, 737 
 
 1- 
 
 •l8 
 
 482 c 
 
 c 1 
 
 
 281, 283,' 
 
 39 
 
 094 a, 248 r. 
 
 2 
 
 
 367, 441 
 
 12 
 
 
 924*, 273, 466 
 
 
 464 b-c 
 
 3 
 
 
 418 
 
 12- 
 
 13 
 
 483 
 
 39- 
 
 40 209 
 
 3" 
 
 4 
 
 465 
 
 13 
 
 
 335 a 
 
 40 
 
 969 a*, 070 
 
 3" 
 
 -II 
 
 664/' 
 
 H 
 
 
 619-20 
 
 19 3 
 
 465/' 
 
 4 
 
 
 918* 
 
 15- 
 
 17 
 
 248 c, 456 ,7. 
 
 4 
 
 553 d 
 
 6- 
 
 ■7 
 
 377 
 
 
 
 584, 
 
 5 
 
 960*, 200, 645 
 
 7 
 
 
 305 
 
 18 
 
 
 211 c, 796-7 
 
 6 
 
 553 d 
 
 10- 
 
 -I I 
 
 638 
 
 19 
 
 
 468, 552, 564,7 
 
 7 
 
 403, 733 
 
 1 r 
 
 
 073, 368 
 
 19- 
 
 21 
 
 209 
 
 8 
 
 586, 733(7 
 
 12 
 
 
 171-2, 216 /', 
 
 20 
 
 
 509 
 
 9 
 
 403-4, 537 c, 
 
 
 
 368 
 
 21 
 
 
 209, 386, 
 
 
 733 foil. 
 
 13 
 
 
 050, 185 (/ 
 
 22 
 
 
 229 30, 552. 
 
 10 
 
 231 a, 606, 645 
 
 14 
 
 
 137 
 
 
 
 564,7 
 
 r 1 
 
 904*, 213 «, 
 
 15 
 
 
 377, 649 
 
 22- 
 
 3 
 
 089, 495, 498, 
 
 
 698 
 
 16 
 
 
 586/' 
 
 
 
 515,7 
 
 12 
 
 969 a* 
 
 17 
 
 
 265 (7, 307 /', 
 
 23 
 
 
 074-5, 185/, 
 
 13 
 
 537 (i)-(ii), 
 
 
 
 489 
 
 
 
 486, 530,/. 
 
 
 586, 707 
 
 18 
 
 
 925-6*, 190,, 
 
 
 
 600, 642 
 
 H 
 
 048, 088 
 
 
 
 482 ,-, 586 /' 
 
 24 
 
 
 166, 386, 427- 
 
 if 
 
 245, 248 ( ,645, 
 
 •9 
 
 
 031, 200, 307 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 
 737 ( 
 
 
 
 9, 482 
 
 25 
 
 
 335 ,7, 414 16. 
 
 r<5- 
 
 17 570,/ 
 
 20 
 
 
 384 ,7 
 
 
 
 430-5, 
 
 '7 
 
 738 
 
 21 
 
 
 127. 132, 453 
 
 
 
 660/', 739 
 
 17- 
 
 :S 171 
 
 22 
 
 
 411, 
 
 
 
 
 '9 
 
 347 
 
 23 
 
 
 473/', 517-20, 
 
 
 AC 
 
 2 1 
 
 966,: , 439, 
 
 
 
 558, , 739,7 
 
 1 3 
 
 
 331,, 620, 715 
 
 
 645, 732 
 
 24 
 
 
 928*, 073 
 
 7 
 
 
 759,/ 
 
 22 
 
 473 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 255,/, 607 
 
 8, 
 
 9 
 
 781,7 
 
 2 3 
 
 904,7 \ 071, 
 
 25- 
 
 "7 
 
 567,7 
 
 12 
 
 
 673 
 
 
 270, 632,/ 
 
 26 
 
 
 307 9, 331,/, 
 
 18- 
 
 :o 
 
 781,7 
 
 24 
 
 270, 335 a 
 
 
 
 482 
 
 2 22 
 
 
 709,7 
 
 75 
 
 928*. 217, 355, 
 
 27 
 
 
 384,7 
 
 3 12 
 
 
 537 
 
 
 418, 586/' 
 
 2 7- 
 
 -8 
 
 049-51 
 
 '3 
 
 
 385,7 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers -with 
 e.g. |1]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2J000. 
 
 662 
 
 supply 1, 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 
 
 ACTS 
 
 
 
 ROMANS 
 
 2 
 
 CORINTHIANS 
 
 
 
 
 PAK. 
 
 
 
 
 PAK. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 3 
 
 '7 
 
 
 915 (i)* 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 
 559 a 
 
 7 
 
 9 
 
 915 (ii) a* 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 
 559 a 
 
 15 
 
 IS 
 
 
 691/ 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 243 a 
 
 5 
 
 28 
 
 
 732 
 
 16 
 
 20 
 
 
 741 
 
 
 23 
 
 721/; 
 
 6 
 
 1 1- 
 
 J 3 
 
 451 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 664 a 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 523 a 
 
 7 
 
 '9 
 
 
 949 a* 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 
 723 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 
 739 a 
 
 1 
 
 CORINTHIANS 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 
 784,/ 
 
 10 
 
 14 
 
 
 913 a * 759 £ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 676 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 913* 
 
 1 
 
 7~ 
 
 8 
 
 322 
 
 
 16 
 
 784 a 7 
 
 
 36- 
 
 8 
 
 292 a 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 
 566 a 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 414 c 
 
 
 4 1 
 
 
 335 a 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 959* 
 
 
 10 
 
 534 a 
 
 11 
 
 8 
 
 
 913 a*, 759 e 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 
 534 
 
 
 17-18 
 
 440 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 913* 
 
 4 
 
 9 
 
 
 530 a 7 
 
 13 
 
 9 
 
 534 a 
 
 
 22 
 
 
 709/» 
 
 
 l 9 
 
 
 569/' 
 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 I 
 
 
 917 a*, 203/; 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 332 a 
 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 
 270/', 563 c 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 
 784/' 
 
 
 GALATIAN 
 
 17 
 
 I 
 
 
 Vtlc 
 
 
 9- 
 
 11 
 
 691/) 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 709 a 
 
 6 
 
 '4 
 
 
 162 < 
 
 1 
 
 6-7 
 
 675-7 
 
 
 29 
 
 
 759 d 
 
 8 
 
 12 
 
 
 563/ 
 
 
 12-15 
 
 559,/ 
 
 19 
 
 14 
 
 
 409 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 
 702/ 
 
 
 18 
 
 364/ 
 
 
 25- 
 
 6 
 
 439 (ii) 
 
 
 1 I 
 
 
 783 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 364/ 
 
 20 
 
 22- 
 
 3 2 
 
 915 (i) 6'* 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 691/ 
 
 
 13 
 
 694, 
 
 21 
 
 20 
 
 
 439 (ii) 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 690 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 243 a 
 
 23 
 
 3° 
 
 
 691 c 
 
 
 22 
 
 
 440 
 
 4 
 
 9 
 
 904* 
 
 24 
 
 12 
 
 
 759 d 
 
 11 
 
 2 2 
 
 
 702/ 
 
 
 15 
 
 698 
 
 25 
 
 7 
 
 
 335 a 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 759/ 
 
 
 20 
 
 472 a, 717/; 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 439 (ii) 
 
 
 30 
 
 
 746 a 
 
 
 24-6 
 
 413 
 
 26 
 
 5 
 
 
 904* 
 
 12 
 
 3 
 
 
 680 
 
 
 25-6 
 
 906*, 907 C* 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 784/; 
 
 
 8- 
 
 10 
 
 676 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 697/ 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 242 
 
 13 
 
 1 
 
 
 522 a 
 
 6 
 
 9-12 
 
 114 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 698 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 478/ 
 
 
 10 
 
 696 
 
 28 
 
 7 
 
 
 665 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 915(vi)<r*, 
 511a 
 
 
 1 [ 
 
 691 a-e, 78 
 90 
 
 
 
 ROMANS 
 
 14 
 
 x 3 
 26 
 
 
 313 a 
 
 534/ 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 r 1 
 
 
 784/' 
 
 15 
 
 6- 
 
 ■8 
 
 619 
 
 
 EPHE 
 
 
 20, 
 
 21 
 
 558/; 
 
 
 l 9 
 
 
 474 a 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 [4 
 
 
 534 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 901* 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 014 
 
 3 
 
 ■9 
 
 
 606 a 
 
 
 22 
 
 
 530/ 
 
 
 13 
 
 909* 
 
 
 24, 
 
 25 
 
 558/ 
 
 
 -4 
 
 
 531 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 744/ 
 
 
 ^7 
 
 
 265 (i)a 
 
 
 47 
 
 
 906*, 953 a* 
 
 
 26 
 
 439 (iii) 
 
 4 
 
 x 3 
 
 18 
 
 
 759 d 
 
 689 
 
 16 
 
 10 
 
 
 364/ 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 114 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 
 698 
 
 O 
 
 COP [AN 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 18 
 
 
 709 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 PHILI 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 
 723 
 
 1 
 
 9 
 
 
 530,/, 723 
 
 
 
 
 
 29 
 
 
 897/)*, 901* 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 474 a 
 
 1 
 
 7 
 
 721/ 
 
 9 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 759 d 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 559 a 7 
 
 
 25-6 
 
 559,/ 
 
 
 -7 
 
 
 158, 721/) 
 
 
 2 3- 
 
 ■4 
 
 219/ 
 
 2 
 
 1-2 
 
 036/ 
 
 10 
 
 1 
 
 
 559 ,/ 
 
 3 
 
 12 
 
 
 917 (ii) a, (v) * 
 
 
 2 
 
 783 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 262 a 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 449 a 
 
 
 9 
 
 409 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 702/ 
 
 4 
 
 13 
 
 
 443 
 
 
 22 
 
 243 a 
 
 11 
 
 7~ 
 
 -8 
 
 449 a-b 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 
 523 a 
 
 3 
 
 20 
 
 559 a 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 
 522 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 364 
 
 4 
 
 r 2 
 
 162/; 
 
 
 36 
 
 
 294 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 584 a 
 
 
 14 
 
 783 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, e, 
 
 numbers with * supply 1, 
 g. [2]000. 
 
 66- 
 
INDICES TO "TOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 COLOSSIANS 
 
 
 HEBREWS 
 
 
 I 
 
 PETER 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 I'AR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 1 15 
 
 897 6* 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 558/' 
 
 5 10 
 
 
 377 a 
 
 16 
 
 294, 440, 
 747 a 
 
 
 6 
 9 
 
 694 
 576/' 
 
 12 
 
 
 691/;, 710 a 
 
 18 
 24 
 
 897/'* 
 915 (ii) a* 
 
 
 10 
 1 2 
 
 294 
 307/' 
 
 (< 
 
 2 
 
 PETER" 
 
 2 5 
 
 783 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 566 a 
 
 3 I- 
 
 -2 
 
 783 a 
 
 15 
 
 917 (i) * 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 784/' 
 
 9 
 
 
 586 a' 
 
 4 18 
 
 783 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 675 
 
 
 
 
 1 THESSALONIANS 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 016 a 
 
 439 (ii) a 
 
 
 I 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 751 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 427, 450 
 
 1 7- 
 
 8 991 * 
 
 
 18 
 
 558 6 
 
 1 
 
 fol 
 
 . 399 c, 610 
 
 2 16 
 
 322 
 
 
 2 5 
 
 322 < 
 
 3 
 
 
 074. 450 
 
 19 
 
 558/^ 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 566 a 
 
 4 
 
 
 399 c, 691 b 
 
 3 7 
 
 515 (i) 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 763 
 
 5 
 
 
 181, 450 
 
 10 
 
 559 a 
 
 
 12 
 
 255 
 
 2 1 
 
 
 159,399,, 630/s 
 
 13 
 
 559 a 
 
 
 J 3 
 
 477 
 
 2 
 
 
 075, 159 
 
 4 9 
 
 379 a 
 
 10 
 
 17 
 
 255 
 
 3 
 
 
 392, 515 
 
 5 1 
 
 379 a 
 
 
 37 
 
 230 (i) 
 
 4- 
 
 "5 
 
 569, 580 a 
 
 2- 
 
 3 531 
 
 11 
 
 17 
 
 751 
 
 5 
 
 
 033-40, 516 
 
 3 
 
 534 £ 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 539, 543 a 
 
 6 
 
 
 132 b, 382 
 
 4 
 
 697/; 
 
 
 28 
 
 751 
 
 7 
 
 
 254 a, 412 
 
 2 3 
 
 322, 559 a 
 
 12 
 
 2 3 
 
 901* 
 
 7" 
 
 •8 
 
 894/;* 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 203/', 731 
 
 8 
 
 
 412 
 
 2 THES 
 
 
 r 9 
 
 918*, 554 a 
 
 12 
 
 
 610 
 
 2 F 
 
 721/; 
 
 
 2 3 
 
 918*, 243 a, 
 
 554,/ 
 
 12- 
 
 1 g 
 
 14 
 
 691 b 
 
 034 a 
 
 5~ 
 
 6 915 (ii)* 
 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 262/' 
 
 10 
 3 5 
 
 033 a 
 033/; 
 
 
 
 JAMES 
 
 18 
 
 
 915 (iii)*, 
 450 a 
 
 ■7 
 
 691 £ 
 
 1 
 
 1 1 
 17- 
 
 445 
 18 904 a*, 907 a* 
 
 '9 
 
 
 106, 110, 
 263 c-d 
 
 1 
 
 TIMOTHY 
 
 
 18 
 
 558/' 
 
 21 
 
 
 262 b, 691/; 
 
 3 14 
 
 554 d 
 
 
 2 4 
 
 753, 
 
 2 3 
 
 
 262/' 
 
 4 10 
 
 474 a 
 
 2 
 
 J4 
 
 522 a, 523 a 
 
 24 
 
 
 254 a 
 
 13 
 
 5 25 
 
 089 
 
 
 •7 
 
 522 a 
 
 24- 
 
 7 
 
 922* 
 
 539 
 
 
 '9 
 
 242 a 
 
 26 
 
 
 691/' 
 
 
 
 
 2 4 
 
 439 (ii) 
 
 27 
 
 
 104 a, 201, 
 
 2 
 
 TIMOTHY 
 
 3 
 
 '7 
 
 904 a* 
 904 a* 
 
 
 
 558 /', 
 569 a 
 
 2 12 
 
 322/' 
 
 4 
 
 "2 — 
 
 3 536,;' 
 
 27- 
 
 8 
 
 915 (iii)* 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 034 a 
 
 28 
 
 
 427, 437,", 
 
 
 TITUS 
 
 5 
 
 1 1 
 
 322/; 
 
 
 
 528/' 
 
 3 5 
 
 558/' 
 
 
 i 
 
 PETER 
 
 29 
 3 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 243 a, 515 (i) 
 391, 454 a 
 915 (iv)*, 
 
 PI I: 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 046 
 
 
 
 427a. 434/' 
 
 18- 
 
 19 691/' 
 219 a 
 
 
 3 
 
 907 a* 
 
 3 
 
 
 132/;, 382 
 
 '9 
 
 
 6- 
 
 j 689 c, I 
 
 K 
 
 
 382 
 
 
 
 20- 
 
 1 304 a 
 
 6 
 
 
 262 A, 491 
 
 HEBREWS 
 
 
 23 
 
 25 
 
 907 a*, 313 a 
 
 709 a 
 
 7 
 9 
 
 
 132/', 382 
 262/' 
 
 1 1 
 
 949 \ 553, 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 558/' 
 
 10 
 
 
 262/- 
 
 '4 
 
 265 (i) 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 036/ 
 
 12 
 
 
 957 ' 
 
 '/'/lis IndeA extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with 
 e.g. [1]999*.- before others^ 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 664 
 
 supply 1, 
 
NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES 
 
 1 
 
 JOHN 
 
 
 1 JOHN 
 
 
 REVELATION 
 
 
 I'AK. 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 
 
 PAR. 
 
 3 '4 
 
 178 a, 427 a, 
 
 5 [3 
 
 399 c, 691 / 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 897/*, 901* 
 
 
 434/ 
 
 '4 
 
 181, 536 (i) 
 
 
 7 
 
 317 c- 
 
 15 
 
 039, 262/) 
 
 'r 
 
 121a, 159. 
 
 
 1 7 
 
 900* 
 
 16 
 
 035 fell.. 382 
 
 
 427 a, 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 497 
 
 1 7 
 
 035 foil., 516 a 
 
 
 434 b, 
 
 
 7 
 
 920* 
 
 20 
 
 409 a, 414 
 
 
 515 (i), 
 
 
 9 
 
 781 
 
 21 
 
 522 a, 523 a 
 
 
 536 (i) 
 
 
 [ 7 
 
 409 
 
 2 1-2 
 
 536 (i)/> 
 
 16 
 
 121a, 536 (i), 
 
 
 19 
 
 7810" 
 
 22 
 
 335, 516, 660/' 
 
 
 630/; 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 624 
 
 2 3 
 
 454 a, 528 
 
 18 
 
 262/, 502 a 
 
 
 3 
 
 013 
 
 23 foil 
 
 . 035 foil. 
 
 '9 
 
 427 a, 434/ 
 
 
 10 
 
 175 a 
 
 24 
 
 454 a 
 
 20 
 
 936*, 114, 
 
 
 12 
 
 920* 
 
 4 2 
 
 243,/ 
 
 
 427 a, 
 
 
 16-17 
 
 175 
 
 2-8 
 
 491 d 
 
 
 434 /, 
 
 
 21 
 
 920*, 421 
 
 3 
 
 915 (iv)*, 
 
 
 454 a, 
 
 4 
 
 I I 
 
 681 
 
 
 262 /,450 a 
 
 
 491 c 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 332 a 
 
 9 
 
 297, 304 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 781/, d 
 
 9-10 
 
 218, 440 
 
 
 2 JOHN 
 
 12 
 
 7 
 
 350/ 
 
 10 
 
 476 a 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 18 
 
 781/ 
 
 13 
 
 454 a 
 
 5 
 
 915 (iv) * 
 
 15 
 
 4 
 4 _ 5 
 
 664 a 
 
 14 
 
 473 
 
 6 
 
 450 a 
 
 18 
 
 781/ 
 
 16 
 
 036 /, 475 
 
 9 
 
 262/ 
 
 
 7 
 
 175 a 
 
 16-19 
 
 036 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 531 
 
 17 
 
 382, 528/ 
 
 
 3 JOHN 
 
 19 
 
 7 
 
 689/ 
 
 5 2 
 
 037, 535 
 
 9" 
 10 
 
 10 569 
 
 
 T I 
 
 362 a 
 
 3 
 
 037 
 
 258 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 409 
 
 6-8 
 
 610 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 409 
 
 8 
 
 306. 383 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 6 
 
 377 a 
 
 10 
 
 187 
 
 
 JUDE 
 
 22 
 
 3-4 
 
 409 
 
 1 r 
 
 454 a 
 
 25 
 
 664 a 
 
 
 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers zvith * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999* ; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 665 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR 
 
 II. SUBJECT-MATTER (ENGLISH; 
 
 Abba 679 
 
 Abide, abiding 915 (iii) *, 352, 437, 458, 
 
 514, 521 ; Origen on 649c; imperat. 
 
 437; "a. in the house" 263c-/"; 
 
 "a. (?) unto eternal life'' 312 foil.; 
 
 "a. alone" 375 
 Aboth, the, quotations in, how intro- 
 duced 470 a 
 Above, "from a.," in Jewish literature 
 
 906* ; " born from a." 903* foil. 
 Abraham, his love of man, Philo on 
 
 935* ; his " laughing," Philo on 097, 
 
 689 c ; Origen on 689 
 Abruptness of style 932*, 996* foil., 
 
 136-40, 766 (i) b 
 Accent (Greek) 960 a*, 190 a, 429-35, 
 
 671-4, 762 u-b 
 Accusative, absolute or suspensive 012 ; 
 
 adverbial 009-11; cognate 014, 036a; 
 
 (?) of respect 267, 419 ; of time 013, 
 
 678 ; accus. and infin. 375 a, 495; for 
 
 accus. w. special verbs, see the several 
 
 verbs in Index III 
 Active (voice) and middle 563 c, 689/ 
 Adjectives, predicatively used 894* ; 
 
 special 895*-901*, 664-7, s. Index 
 
 III, also Article 982-9*, Ellipsis 216, 
 
 Emphasis 982* foil., 993* 
 Adverbs, how emphasized 902*, 554/', 
 
 668; their position 636 c; intensive, 
 
 rare in Jn 902 * ; special 903-18*, s. 
 
 Index III 
 Adversative particles, s. Conjunction 
 
 and ( Connexion 
 Advocate, s. " Paraclete" 
 Afterthought, in Jn 461 ; how intro- 
 
 duced 633-4; expr. by pluperf. 480 ; 
 s. Self-correction and Impressionism 
 
 " All that thou hast given me (or, 
 him)," = "the future Church " 921*, 
 262, 422, 444, 454, comp. 740-4 
 
 Allusiveness, in Jn 901 /<*, 966 a*, 992*, 
 009 foil., 211b, 265 b, 269, 275/', 372a, 
 517-20, 537 (ii), 584/', 689, 764-5; 
 s. also "John, intervention of," and 
 Mysticism 
 
 "•Alone," applied to God 895*, 664, 
 comp. 168 ; " by himself alone " 375, 
 724-6; adv. 664 b 
 
 Ambiguity, causes of 886*, 893* 
 
 (i) in the meaning and reference 
 of words : " first," " before," or 
 "chief" 901*, 665-7 ; "from above" 
 903* foil.; "and now" 915 (i)* 
 foil.; "thus" 916*; "boldly" or 
 "plainly" 917 (i)* foil.; "(more) 
 quickly " 918* ; " the Jews " 941* ; 
 ' ' the fathers " 949-50 * ; "the heaven " 
 952-8* ; "the man" 959-61*; "the 
 prophet" 965*; "taste" or "taste 
 that" 016; "that" or "because" 
 083, 181-6, 219 ; "they went out [as 
 our soldiers, or, as deserters ] " 110 a-b, 
 263c; "and" or "and yet" 141 foil. ; 
 "and" or "also" 149 foil.; "[in) 
 the beginning" or "at all" 154; 
 "and if "or "even if 159 ; "and," 
 "both," or "also" 166; "that " 
 used for inverted commas 189 foil. ; 
 "lifted up" for "crucified" 211c; 
 " why ? " or " what ? " 231 b ; " from 
 the beginning" 254; "blood" pi. 
 
 'flits Judex extends from 1886 />> 2799. Before numbers 
 e.g. [1|999 4 ; before others, 2, e.g. [2J000. 
 
 666 
 
 it It * supply 1, 
 
SUBJECT-MATTER (ENGLISH) 
 
 268; "we all" 287; "out of" and 
 "from" describing extraction and 
 domicile 289 foil. ; "because of" or 
 ' ' for the sake of " 294 foil. ; " through 
 him" or "through it" 302 foil., 
 comp. 378-9; "to" or "into" 310; 
 "looking to" (in hope or fear) 317 ; 
 "to the end" or "to the utmost" 
 319 foil.; "keep out of" or "take 
 out of" 325; "in front of" or 
 " superior to " 330 ; "on the sea " or 
 "near the sea " 342 ; "along with" 
 or " against " 349 ; " questioning" or 
 " quarrel " 350 ; "in " or " among " 
 353 a ; " before me " 361 foil. ; " he 
 knoweth " or " He (i.e. the Lord) 
 knoweth" 383-4, 731; "that," 
 "because" or "whatever'" 413; 
 "if" or "soever" 414; "at feast 
 time" = "at that feast" or "at any 
 feast" 464 c; "apprehend' - i.e. 
 "understand" or "take captive" 
 596; "again" i.e. "a second time" 
 or "back" 635 (i), 649 (i)-(ii); 
 "another" or " Another (i.e. God)" 
 793 foil. (comp. 384, 730) 
 
 (ii) in forms or inflexions : indie, 
 or imperat. 889*, 915 (iii)b*, 079, 
 193, 194 c, 236 foil., 240 a, 439 (ii), 
 491, 760; particip. =" because" or 
 "though" 924 a*, 273; particip. 
 pies. w. r)v 277 ; " he that received " 
 or "he, who received " 501-2 ; present, 
 ordinary or prophetic 484 foil. ; "hid 
 himself" or "was hidden'* 538-43; 
 dat. of time 021 ; genit. subjective or 
 objective 032 foil., voc. or nom. 049 
 foil. ; ist pers. pi. inflexion, " we," 
 meaning of 427 foil. 
 
 (iii) in connexion or arrangement : 
 921 *; apposition 928*, 933*, 937* 
 foil. ; asyndeton 996 * foil. ; con- 
 nexion of "for" (conj.) 067 foil.; 
 "but" adversative or consecutive 
 071 foil.; "because" 099 foil.; 
 "accomplished in order that" or 
 " saith in order that" 115 ; "in order 
 that. ..in order that" 116 foil. ; "even 
 as" suspensive or explanatory 122-32; 
 "because " suspensive or explanatory 
 175 foil. ; " because " or "I say this 
 because" 178 foil. ; "I should have 
 told you that " or " I should have 
 told it to you, because " 186 ; "not 
 ...all" i.e. "not any" or "not every" 
 260 foil.; connexion of participle 277; 
 to life" or "leaping, to 
 
 life "' 314 (comp. 312-13) ; " filled 
 
 [full] of fragments" or "baskets of 
 fragments" 329 (i); "for this cause 
 [above mentioned, or, now to be 
 mentioned]" 387 foil.; "everyone 
 that cometh " or " the light... coming 
 508 ; " and they did " or " and [that] 
 they did" 757; words of Christ and 
 words of the evangelist (or others) 
 not clearly distinguished 917a*, 936*, 
 957 *, 066, s. Speech 
 
 (iv) in omission of words (s. also 
 Asyndeton): "the [one] that is des- 
 cending 974*, 503; "that [? spirit] 
 which giveth life" 975* foil. ; "but 
 [? it was ordained] in order that " 
 105 foil.; "[I say this] because" 
 180 foil.; "This man what [shall he 
 do? less prob. shall become of him?]'" 
 209; "If therefore... [what then will 
 ye do ?] " 192 and 210 foil. ; ' ' [some] 
 from" i.e. "some of" or "[sent] 
 from" 214-15; "[daughter] of" or 
 "[wife] of" 217; "[I do] not [say] 
 that " or "[I say this] not because" 
 219 ; "I AM [HE] 220 foil. ; omission 
 of interrogative particle 236 foil., and 
 see especially 240 a; comp. 142a; 
 "his own [family, or possessions]' 
 378, 728 
 
 (v) miscellaneous 372/', 570/' 
 
 /"vnacoluthon 919-27*, 957*; w. subj. 
 suspended 920-2*, 421. (?) 422 
 
 Anaphoric article, the 670 a 
 
 Anew, s. " New " 
 
 Anointing of David, the 502/' 
 
 "Another," meaning God, in Epictetus 
 791-2 ; connected with the Paraclete 
 in Jn 793 
 
 "Answered and said," a Johannine 
 phrase 271; "made public answer" 
 537 
 
 Antithesis 209, 263/, 553 <?, 568; s. 
 Emphasis 
 
 Aorist : imperat. aor. and pres. 437-9 ; 
 indie, aor. and imperf. 465 c, 584; 
 aor. and perf. 440-9, 753; aor. for 
 Eng. pluperf. 459-62 ; in fin. aor. 
 and pres. 496 8, 767 ; particip. aor. 
 276, 499—505 ; subjunct. aor. and 
 pres. 511-35 ; aor. of experience or 
 habit 443 r, 522 /», instantaneousness 
 443 c, 522/', 755, persistence 443 c; 
 anticipatory 635 (ii), epistolary 691 a 
 foil., 785-90; "gnomic" and "in- 
 stantaneous " distinguished 754-5 ; 
 aor. of special verbs, see Index III 
 
 "leaping to life" or " leapin s 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Bc-forc members with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999* ; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 66? 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 Apocalypse, the, s. Revelation 
 Apodosis, ellipsis of 192 ; see also 
 Index III &v, iav, el, iva, naduis, Kai, 
 
 OTCLV, OTI. 
 
 Aposiopesis, s. Ellipsis 
 
 Apposition, w. proper names 928" ; in 
 subdivisions 929-30* ; explaining or 
 defining 931-6 * ; \v. particip. 937-45"; 
 noun repeated in 946* ; pronoun in 
 appos. w. preceding subject 947*, 386 
 
 Aramaic, s. Hebrew 
 
 Arimathaea, Joseph of 291 
 
 Arrangement and Variation 544 foil. 
 
 Artemidorus ( Oneiroeriticd) quotations 
 from 907 d* , 211 b, c, 216 b, 642 b 
 
 Article, the, w. nouns in general 948* 
 (s. also 194 b); w. "fathers" 949- 
 50*; "feast" 951*; "heaven" 
 952-8*; "king "966*, 669; "man" 
 959-61*; "mountain" 962-3*; 
 "only begotten" 964*; "prophet" 
 965* (comp. 492) ; "teacher" 966* ; 
 "the woman [of the house]" i.e. 
 " wife" 948* ; w. names- of persons 
 967-70 * ; w. names of places 670 
 foil. ; in "the [? daughter] of" 217 ; 
 w. "God," Philo on 594a; "the 
 love" (like "the Name," "the Will ") 
 035; w. adjectives 982-9* ; w. infin. 
 995*; w. particip. 275-6, 507; w. 
 particip. and "is" or "are" 971-81*; 
 quasi-vocative 049 (comp. 679 foil.) ; 
 omitted or misplaced 990-4*; redu- 
 plicated 982* foil.; in Codex B 652 ; 
 " Teuphilus [the] Jew " 683 a 
 
 Ascending 211a foil., 489; "a. to 
 heaven" 211-12, 275 
 
 Asking 516, 536 foil. ; "a." and "re- 
 questing" 630 
 
 Asyndeton 996* foil. ; instances of, 
 classified 000-8 ; used by Jn w. 
 historic pres. 482 ; introducing paren- 
 thesis 639 
 
 Attraction of relative 405-7 
 
 Authority 250; "I have a." 644; 
 Epictetus on 798-9 
 
 B i.e. Codex Vaticanus, readings of, 
 rejected by W.1I. 650-62; pause- 
 spaces in 663 ; important readings 
 of, in special passages 053 c, 079, 166, 
 401, 407, 428 b, 455 a, 507 a. 521, 530, 
 768; its authority great on TncTtvw 
 528r/; its weak points 895". 925a*, 
 961 , 968</*, 530 c, 650 2; inter- 
 changes -at and -e 658 c 
 
 Baptist, John the, 898 * foil., 927 \ 303, 
 
 330. 350, 371, 479, 480 a, 501-2; his 
 " testimony " 401 ; twofold repetition 
 in his teaching 601 (comp. 927*) 
 
 Before (ambig.) 330, 381 
 
 Began to do, to say etc., expr. by 
 imperf. 463, 470 
 
 " Beginning, from the " 251 a, 254 
 
 Beholding 318, 473, 516 a ; in a bad 
 sense 212 
 
 Belief 475 
 
 Believe, believing etc., 302-4, 438-9, 
 466, 475. 496, 499. 506, 695 ; aor. and 
 pres. 438-9, 524 foil. ; imperf., ambig. 
 466; perf. meaning "have fixed belief" 
 442, 474-5 ; " believe ye," ambig. 
 238 foil.; "believe" and "know" 
 in juxtaposition 226 c (see also Joh. 
 Voc. 1463—1561) 
 
 Bethany, connected w. Lazarus 290 ; 
 twofold mention of 641 ; beyond 
 Jordan 648 
 
 Bethlehem 289 
 
 Binding and loosing 517 e foil., 517-9 
 
 Blending two constructions 923*, 189c, 
 468 b, 482 c 
 
 Blinding (metaph.) 449 a 
 
 Blood, of Christ 269 b foil. ; of the cir- 
 cumcised 269 c ; of the passover 269 c 
 
 Boldness of speech, Christ's, why em- 
 phasized 917 (i)* foil. 
 
 Bread, the, that descended from heaven 
 503 foil. ; "buying b." 745-6 
 
 Brethren, Christ's 395 ; " He is not 
 ashamed to call them b." 307 b 
 
 Bridegroom, the 371 
 
 Buying (metaph.) 745-6; "buying 
 food," Origen on 746 
 
 Cana, the "sign" at 281-3; meaning 
 of the name 386 (i) 
 
 Case, s. Accusative, Dative, Genitive 
 etc., also Contents p. xv 
 
 Causation, notion of, prominent in In 
 174 ; expr. by conjunct. 174 foil. ; by 
 particip. 271-3 ; by prepos. 295 
 
 Cedars on Mt of Olives 671 
 
 Chiasmus 544. 554-7. 568 
 
 Choosing, God's 441 /' foil. 
 
 Chronological order, not always fol- 
 lowed by Jn 632 
 
 Chrysostom, compared with Origen 
 757c; ? alluded to by Jerome 786; quoted 
 or referred to 897** 903*, 916*. 934*, 
 942*, 020, 062/', 066. 083, 091-2, 
 102 a, 115, 122/% 124-5. 154-6, 163, 
 169, 181, 184 a, 195, 199. 207. 209, 
 211, 212/, 214,/, 215, 218 a, 231/', 
 
 This Index exten 1886 /,> 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 
 , . 1 1 ]999 ; before others, 2, e.g. 1 2 1000. 
 
 668 
 
SUBJECT-MATTER (ENGLISH) 
 
 232, 240 <?, 263 if, 264/7, 268, 281 /?, 
 290, 300 a, 308 a, 322,, 323,?, 329 (i), 
 331 c, 338, 342//, 350//, 351, 355, 357, 
 362, 372 c, 384-5, 386 (i), 396/, 397//, 
 398,/, 401, 403, 408, 412/, 433, 439 (i), 
 452,461a, 465,, 466 (i)<z, 472,/, 478, 
 479,/, 489 <?, 491/, 508c, 512,, 514 (i), , 
 515,?, 520, 537(i)c, 540-1, 543,, 549,?, 
 554,/, 566/, 570/, 573, 620,/, 630/, 
 635(h), 649 (i)/?; 649 (iii); 675-6,686-7, 
 689/, w, 691,/, 692, 694-5, 697, 701,/, 
 703 /, d, 707 a, 714, 716, 718, 722, 
 724-5, 727-8, 730, 732, 734, 736, 
 739,/ foil., 740/, 745, 753 c, 756, 
 757,/-,', 758-9, 762/, 764, 767, 786, 
 788, 793/, 794, 797, 799 (ii), 799 (iii) 
 
 Clean, man made clean by the Logos 
 799 (iii) 
 
 Codex Bezae, s. D 
 
 Codex Vaticanus, s. B 
 
 Come, applied to Christ 440, 482, 490 ; 
 aor. 457 ; imperf. 465 ; pres. 482-6 ; 
 "he that is to come' 1 940*; "he 
 that cometh after me" 507 ; "coming 
 into the world" 508; "came" and 
 "have come" 440; "the hour 
 cometh"' and "hath come" 485,/, 
 604 a 
 
 Comparative degree 896* — 901*, 918*, 
 092, 772, 775/; comp. 733/? 
 
 Concessive particles 158-60 
 
 Conditional sentences 078-86, 158-9, 
 513-5, 517-23 
 
 Conjunctions : for most, s. Contents 
 pp. xv-xvii ; for others, s. Index III ; 
 for omission of conjunctions, s. Asyn- 
 deton 
 
 Connexion of sentences or clauses 996" , 
 278-9, 628 foil. ; adversative or con- 
 secutive 069-76; with "and" or "and 
 yet" 136-45; with "that" or "be- 
 cause " 174-86 ; doubtful instances 
 278, 414, 636^40, s. also Conjunctions 
 and Pronouns 
 
 Consecutive particles 191—200, 203, 694, 
 697 
 
 Construetio ad Sensum, s. Anacoluthon 
 
 Convicting Spirit, the 649 /, // 
 
 Corrective manner, a Tohannine charac- 
 teristic 939*, 380, 628-30 
 
 Correspondence between the visible and 
 the invisible 122 foil., 148 
 
 Crasis 150, 151, 383, 769 
 
 Cross, taking up the 515 
 
 Crucified, "the crucified feeds many" 
 211 c, 642 b 
 
 Crucifixion 211 b-c 
 
 Crying and crying aloud 479, 618 
 
 1), i.e. Codex Bezae, corrects irregularity 
 926*, 990*, 014, 258, 422; alters pres. 
 to aor. subjunct. 524, 530,?; some 
 readings of 942*, 053 c, 422, 428/, c, 
 637 a, 664, 797 c 
 
 Dative, of instrument 020; of time 
 (completion) 021-4; of point of time 
 025-6; of advantage, 776, 784 a; w. 
 special prepositions 027, 338, 355, 
 357-9 ; w. special verbs 019, 506 
 
 Daughter (or wife ?) ellipsis of the word 
 217 
 
 Day, "three clays," "third day" etc. 
 331; day of judgment, the 521-2, 535c? 
 
 Dead, the, (?) prayer for the intercession 
 of 630 i 
 
 Death, " tasting of d." and " beholding 
 d." 576 
 
 Decalogue, the, second half of 676 
 
 Deliberative subjunctive 512, 766 (i) 
 
 " Delivering over to Satan " 520 
 
 Demonstrative, s. Pronouns 
 
 Descending from heaven 275 ; of the 
 Son of man 503 
 
 Digression, causes anacoluthon 923-4 * 
 
 Diminutives 235 /^(s. Joli. Voc.) 
 
 Disciple, the beloved, Origen on 545 c 
 
 Dispersion of the Greeks, the 046 
 
 Distributive use of ava 281 foil. 
 
 Domicile and birthplace, how denoted 
 289-93 
 
 Double Tradition, the, parallels be- 
 tween, and Jn 026, 165 ; "laying the 
 head to rest" 644 (i) 
 
 Dove, "as a d." 955* 
 
 Dreams, Artemidorus on 211c, 642/ 
 
 Drinking and eating at the Lord's 
 Supper 759/ 
 
 Dying 530. 576 
 
 Eating in the presence of Christ or the 
 disciples 335 ; " eating and drinking" 
 at the Lord's Supper 759/ 
 
 Ellipsis, of two kinds 204; contextual 
 205-9; idiomatic 213 foil. ; of apo- 
 dosis 210-12 ; of " some " 213-5 ; 
 (?) of " gate " 216 ; of " daughter " or 
 "wife" 217; of copula 229-30: w. 
 "I am" 220 foil. ; between "but" 
 and "in order that" 063-4, 105-12; 
 s. also 386 c, 698 
 
 Emphasis, caused by insertion of word 
 not needed for sense, e.g. of pron. 
 375, 399; of "is" 972*; of redupl. 
 article with adj. 982* foil., 993*; 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 669 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 caused by unusual position 515, 553, 
 e.g. of pron. 552 c, 553 a, c, 692 ; of 
 "this" 553 c; of adverbs 554 b, 668 
 (comp. 902*); of "is" 353, 553/, 
 555 a, 579 ; caused by chiasmus, 555; 
 by antithesis 564(5, 566 c (which may 
 be expressed or implied 399) ; on two 
 pronouns in juxtaposition 564, 783, 
 784 6-; on contingency 566; diverted 
 from possessive genit. to noun 558, 
 569, 776-84; confusable w. contrast 
 399; s. also 902*, 979 a*, 983*, 993*, 
 267, 555, 566 a, b, 605 a 
 
 Entering the Kingdom of God 496 
 
 Ephesians, Diana of the 743 
 
 Epictetus, quoted or referred to 907 c*, 
 917 (v)*, 960 c*, 049, 228 a, 229-30, 
 297 c-^e, 305 a, 334 d, 404, 439/', 
 439 (iv), 473 a, 493, 532 d, 570/', 664/', 
 683, 695, 697/', 702/, 705, 717 b~d, 
 719 a, c-d, 728 d, 736/, 743 a, 755 a, 
 758 a, 763, 766 (i), 778-80, 791-2, 
 798-9, 799 (ii), 799 (iii) 
 
 Epistle, of St John, the first : general 
 "duality" of its style 610; its use 
 of "now" 915(iii-iv)*; of "we" 
 399 c; of "He" absolutely to mean 
 Christ 382; of "the true [One]" 
 936*; of "the love of God" to 
 mean " God's love for men " 032 foil. ; 
 its emphasis on" confidence" 917 (ii)* ; 
 its universal negations 262/; on 
 "asking" and "requesting" 121a, 
 630 f-g; peculiarities of construction 
 or meaning in 159, 392, 515-6, 528 
 
 Eucharist, symbols of 746 . 
 
 Exclamatory Tone, s. Interrogation 
 
 Face of God, the 765 
 
 Father, ambig. 193, 359 ; "the fathers" 
 
 and "your fathers" 949-50*, 553c-/" 
 Feast, "the [principal] feast [of the 
 
 Jews]" 951*; "at feast-time" 
 
 ambig. 464 c 
 Feminine, in Heb. and LXX, a cause 
 
 of error 621-2 ; s. also ' ' sheep-gate " 
 
 216 
 First, different meanings of 899* foil., 
 
 665-7 
 lib, a symbol 703 
 Following 497 
 I onn of ( hkI, the 765 a 
 bruit (metaph.) 120 
 Future regarded as past 444 ; included 
 
 in pres. partic. 507 ; fut. panic. 
 
 a corrupt reading 500; fut. in 
 
 apodosis 515 b ; fut. and subjunct. w. 
 
 ov /j.rj 255 ; w. 'iva 114, 690 ; s. also 
 484, 660 e-d, 762 a and 960 a* 
 
 Galilee, "from out G." 289; "out of 
 G. . . .no prophet " 492 ; " sea of G. " 045 
 
 Gender, 216, 378, 621 2, 738 
 
 Genitive, absolute 028-31 ; objective 
 558 c ; objective or subjective 032-40; 
 partitive 041-2 ; before nouns 043 ; 
 in special passages 044-8 ; possessive 
 558-69 ; unemphatic or "vernacular" 
 possessive 563 d, 776 foil. ; emphatic 
 possessive 558 /', 563 d ; ordinary 
 possessive 558, 563 d, 779, 781 a-b ; 
 for gen. w. special verbs, s. the 
 several verbs in Index III 
 
 Gennesar 045 a 
 
 Gennesaret supplanted by ' ' Tiberias " 
 045 
 
 Giving 454-5 ; Hebraic use of " I have 
 given" 444; " g. by measure" 714; 
 "g. commandment " 742a ; "giving," 
 in Jn, parall. to "grace" in the 
 Pauline epistles 742-3; "all that 
 thou hast given" 740-4, 798a 
 
 Glorify, "glorifying God" 117; "the 
 Father was glorified " 393, 446 
 
 Glory 211 a-b; connected with spiritual 
 unity 946*, 455 
 
 Gnomic aorist 754-5 
 
 God, "the face of" 765; "the form 
 of" 765a; "the word of" 799 (iii) 
 
 Gods, " I said ye are g." 799 (iii) 
 
 "Going up to the feast " 265 ; to Jeru- 
 salem 265/, s. "Ascending" 
 
 Golgotha 738 
 
 " Grace and truth " 286, 415 ; "grace" 
 corresponds to the Johannine 
 "giving" 742-3 
 
 Greek, non-classical, disuses the opta- 
 tive 252 ; uses /j.tj with particip. 
 253 a ; literary as distinct from vernac- 
 ular 799 (ii); later Greek introduces 
 other developments not found in In 
 694, 697, 702, 718-22 ; the futility of 
 judging Jn's Gk as Byzantine 747-53 
 
 Greeks, " the Dispersion of the ( i." 046 
 
 Hardened, confusable with "blinded" 
 
 449 a 
 Harvest, waiting for 230 (iii) 
 Mate, "hating one's father" 228a; 
 
 "I hated," meaning "I steadfastly 
 
 hated" 443; "I have hated" 475 
 He=HE 382 foil. 
 Head, "laying the head to rest," 
 
 Origen on 644 (i), 713 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with 
 1 1 1999 ,- before others, 2, e.g. L2]000. 
 
 67O 
 
 supply 1, 
 
SUBJECT-MATTER (ENGLISH) 
 
 Healing at a distance 026 
 
 Hearing 450 foil., 586 
 
 Heaven, " the h. opened " 958* ; "from 
 
 h." and "from the h." 952* foil. 
 Hebrew or Aramaic, influence of, in 
 
 N.T. 915(v)*, 920*, 938*, 019, 041, 
 
 133-4, 137, 145, 260 foil., 277, 332, 
 
 347, 443-5 (see especially 445 a) , 482 a ; 
 
 Hebraized Gk 216, 666, 671, 793 
 Hellenistic, s. Greek 
 Herod the Great and Herod Antipas 
 
 737 a 
 Hide, "Jesus hid himself" 538 foil., 
 
 724 
 Hireling, the years of a 230(h) 
 Historic present 482 
 Holy 411 c, d 
 Homoeoteleuton 490 a, 549 a, 654 c, 
 
 657 c, 659 c', 736 c?, 759 
 Hoping 474, 476 
 
 Horse, allegorized by Origen 362 a 
 Hour, the, "cometh," "cometh and 
 
 now is," "hath come" etc. 485a, 
 
 604 a ; the hour of trial 523 a (see also 
 
 770 and 799 (i)) 
 House, allegorized by Origen 329 ; 
 
 mention of, peculiar to Mk 711-13 
 
 I emphatic 401 ; in the Baptist's testi- 
 mony 401 ; Epictetus on " the I " 
 228 a 
 
 I AM and " I am" 205, 220 foil., 487 a 
 
 Illuminating 532 c 
 
 Imperative, aor. and pres. 437-9 ; imp. 
 pres. confusable w. indie. 439 (ii), 
 with interrog. 238-44 (especially 
 240 a, 243 a) ; first aor. imp. authori- 
 tative 437; differently used by different 
 writers 437 a; (?) " concessive " 439 
 (iii-v), might be called "judicial" 
 439 (v) ; implied by prohib. conjunct. 
 208-9; expressed or implied before 
 "but if not" 080; s. also 233 
 
 Imperfect 463-6 ; imperf. and aor. 
 584 ; of special verbs 467-70 ; with 
 neg. = " would not " 466; "it was" 
 or "it had been" 466 (i) 
 
 Impersonal, s. Subject 
 
 Impressionism, results in anacoluthon 
 925* foil. 
 
 "In you" may mean "among you" 
 353 a 
 
 Inaccuracies, so called, deliberate 629 
 
 Indefinite " they" 424 a 
 
 Indicative: tenses of 440-94, and see 
 Contents p. xxii ; interrog. or non- 
 interrog. 238-44; confusable w. im- 
 
 perat. 193, 194 c, 439 (ii-iii), 760; 
 
 for subjunct. 114, 515 (i), 771 
 Indirect interrogative 249-51 
 Infinitive, aor. and pres. 496-8, 767 ; 
 
 compared w. 'iva and subjunct. 495 ; 
 
 accus. and in fin. 375 c/, 495; infin. w. 
 
 article 995* 
 Instantaneous aorist 755 
 Instrument, expr. in Hebrew by "in " 
 
 332 ; instrumental dative 020 
 Intercession of dead for living, (?) 
 
 prayer for 630 i 
 Interrogation expr. by particles 231-5 ; 
 
 without particles 236-48 ; sometimes 
 
 exclamatory 142, 146, 486 ; confusable 
 
 w. imperat. and affirmation 238-44 
 
 (esp. 240 a); indirect 249-51 
 Iota subscript 515 (i)6, 772-5 
 Irony, in Jn 960*, 046, 570 c/, 643-5 
 Isaac, i.e. "laughter" 689 
 Ishmael, (?) alluded to 263 c 
 Israel = "seeing God " 765 
 
 Jacob, described as seeing God 765 
 
 Jerome, (?) alludes to Chrysostom 786 ; 
 mentions Origen 789 a 
 
 Jew, "a Jew" 350; "the Jews" (?) = 
 citizens of Jerusalem 942* ; "many of 
 the Jews," ambig. 941* foil. 
 
 Jewish canons of repetition 588, and of 
 negation 591; Jewish Prayer-Book, 
 repetition in 587 a ; s. Hebrew 
 
 John the Baptist, s. " Baptist" 
 
 John the Evangelist, style of (see Al- 
 lusiveness, Ambiguity. Anacoluthon, 
 Asyndeton, Emphasis, Epistle, 
 Impressionism, Irony, Metaphor, 
 Mysticism, Narrowing Down, Paren- 
 thesis, Quotation, Repetition, Self- 
 correction, Symbolism, Variation) 
 shews traces of more than one writer 
 891-2*; intervention of, where Lk. 
 omits or deviates from Mk 917* (iii) 
 foil., 918*, 945*, 963*, 039, 045, 047, 
 048, 088, 173. 293, 346c?, 396, 464/', 480cz 
 
 Joseph (husband of Mary), Jesus called 
 "son of J." 289, 643 
 
 Joseph (son of Jacob) seeking his 
 brethren 649 b-c 
 
 Josephus, his rendering of Heb. names 
 673 
 
 Judges, addressed in the words " I said 
 
 ye are gods " 799 (iii) 
 Judging, judgment, 334<$, 695, 799; how 
 regarded by Christians 182 a 
 
 Kidron 671-4 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with " supply 
 e.g. [1]999* ; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 ' 1, 
 
 671 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 King, "a k." and "the k." 245(7, 669 : 
 the natural k. 798 
 
 Knowing 491 foil., 511, 515, 760 foil. ; 
 "knowing"' in juxtaposition w. "be- 
 lieving" 226 c; "I know" 448 a; 
 "they have not known" 448; "know 
 ye" ambig. 243, 762 foil. ; "know 
 thyself" 126, 763 
 
 Latin versions 895 a*, 901a*. 926 a*, 
 118 0", 154 a", 168 a, 190 a, 210 a, 
 289 a, />, c, 290 a, 331 b, 343 a, 350 c, 
 491a, 569 c, 687, 702 a, 711a, 715 a", 
 727 a, 767 a; infin. and subjunct. in 
 687, s. also 688 a 
 
 Latinisms 213 a, 258, 288 
 
 Law, the 286 ; " Present of Law " 484 
 
 Life, hating, loving, losing one's life 485 
 
 Lifted up — crucified 211 b, c ; double 
 meaning of 642 b 
 
 Lifting up the eyes 616-7 
 
 Logos, the 269 b, 308, 410 ; action or 
 agency of 296a, 301; titles of 938*, 
 964*, comp. 410 
 
 Looking to 317 
 
 Loosing sins 517 ; binding and loosing 
 517 foil. 
 
 Lord, used by Epict. in a bad sense 
 799a 7 ; meanings of "my lord" 050 
 
 Losing one's soul 228 b 
 
 Love, "love of God," two meanings of 
 032 foil.; "the Love," like "the 
 Name," " the Will " 035 
 
 Loving 476, 529 a; loving one another 
 529 
 
 Luke, literary style of 781, 799 (ii) ; 
 various styles in his Gospel and the 
 Acts 913*, 563a, 677, 686, 759 e ; 
 peculiarities of 737 a ; optative in 
 252; differs in construction from Jn 
 972*, 995*, 191a, 307, 593. 799 (ii) ; 
 deviates from Mk, or omits what is 
 in Mk, where Jn intervenes 917 (iii)* 
 foil., 918*, 945*, 039, 045, 047, 088, 
 173, 276, 293, 346 a, 396, 464/', 480 a 
 
 Man, emph. 412a; "the man" 959-60*; 
 "the new man" 959*; perh. = " hus- 
 band" or "bridegroom" 371, 722; 
 the ideal, in I'hilo 649 b ; in Epictetus 
 960,* 
 
 Manifestations of Christ 331c foil., 414/, 
 619 foil., 699, 701-3, 715 
 
 Mark, style of 065, 380/', 513/;, 649 (i)/, 
 686; his use of hist. pies. 482; of 
 article 967*; of the word "house" 
 711 ; .Mk regarded as a Petrine 
 
 Gospel 913*; similarities in Mk and 
 
 Jn 917 (vi)*, 112, 238, 240, 380b, and 
 
 s. "John, intervention of" 
 Mary " those that had come to M." 380 
 Master, the natural m. of men 798 c 
 Matthew, John agrees with 026, 537 (ii)/; 
 
 Mt's use of "this is come to pass" 
 
 478 a, 758 ; s. also Joh. Voc. 1745-57 
 Mean, " he meant to say " 467 foil. 
 Messiah, Talmudic Traditions about 
 
 736 c 
 Metaphor 948*, 955-8*, 120, 197/-, 
 
 211 a foil., 230 (ii-iii), 281-3, 300. 
 
 329, 346 a, c, 355, 449 a, 520, 642 b 
 Middle voice 536 foil., 660 ( /, 688, 689/-/ 
 Mis-spelling, s. Spelling 
 Mood 889*, 252; see also Imperative, 
 
 Indicative etc., Tense, and Contents 
 
 p. xxi foil. 
 Moses, Chrysostom on 745 a 
 Motion, implied without verbs of 
 
 motion 305 
 Mountain, the, meaning of 962'" 
 Mysticism, 890*, 985*, 134, 168, 265, 
 
 281-3, 329, 384, 426, 483 a, 543, 587- 
 
 627, 611a, 641-9, 702-3, 712-3, 731, 
 
 736-7, s. also Metaphor 
 
 Name, God's 409-10; "myn." 411 b; 
 "a new n." 409, 412 ; " thy n." and 
 "thy Son" 769; "thy n. that thou 
 hast given me " 744 c 
 Names : Proper names in apposition 
 928*; article with 967*foll.; indeclin- 
 able, with article 968*; declinable 
 and indeclinable 672 foil. 
 "Narrowing down" 290 (esp. 290/'); 
 
 908*, 303, 310, 629, 636 c 
 Nazareth 289 ; "Jesus from N." 292 
 Negation, repetition through 591, 598 
 Negative particles 253-65, 704; double 
 negative 257; negative w. imperf. 466 
 Net, of the Gospel, the 703 c 
 Neuter plural 267, 419-20 
 New 907*; the word in Aramaic and 
 Greek 906*; "then, birth" 906* foil. ; 
 " the n. man " 959 ; " a n. command- 
 ment " 412 ; " a n. name " 409, 412 
 Nicodemus in Acta Pilali 461 
 Nominative 049-51, S. Subject 
 Nonnus, quoted or referred to 156 a, 
 235c. 338a, 350, 384a, 386c, 386 (i)«, 
 419/', 435 a, 461a, 478, 487 a, 489 a, 
 508,, 514a. 515, 537 (ilc, 540a, 586c, 
 635 (i)a, 642a, 649 (iii). 657 a 1 , 664a, b, 
 666, 668 a, 682/', 683, 687 8, 689/', 
 692. 694. 701/-, 702, 703 c, 704, 714. 
 
 This Index extendi front 1886 to 2799. Before 
 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, c 
 
 6/2 
 
 numbers with 
 
 -. [2 ]000. 
 
 supply l, 
 
SUBJECT-MATTER (ENGLISH) 
 
 716, 722, 724-5, 727, 728 a, 730-2, 
 733 a, 734, 736, 739/), 740 c, 742 a, 
 743, 744 c, 745, 753 d, c, 756, 757, 758, 
 759, 760, 762, 766 (i) a, 767, 768-9, 
 793/, 796/, 799 (ii), 799 (iii) 
 
 Nouns, indeclinable 968*, 970*, 673 c ; 
 neat. pi. 267, 419- 20 ; repeated in 
 apposition 946* ; genitive before 043, 
 558 toll., 776 foil.; with article 948* 
 foil. 
 
 Number, sing, and plur. 266-70 
 
 Numbering the people, under the Law 
 010 
 
 Numbers, mystically allegorized 281-3 ; 
 " perfect " 283 c 
 
 One, meaning unity 118 b 
 
 One, meaning " anyone " 379 
 
 Only, " the o. man of Italy" 895* 
 
 Only begotten, with and without article 
 964* 
 
 Openly, confidently, or plainly 917 
 (i-vi)*, 727, comp. 798/ 
 
 Optative 252, 514 (i)/ 
 
 Oratio Ohliqiia 189 
 
 Order, chronological, broken 460 ; of 
 words 544-86, 776 foil., s. Emphasis 
 and Variation 
 
 Origen, compared with Chrysostom 
 757 c; mentioned by Jerome 789 a; 
 quoted or referred to 895*, 897*, 
 903 a*. 934*, 942^1*. 965*, 022 a, 
 079c, 110/, 118/, c, 184.7, 209, 218a, 
 222 a, 263 a', 269 a, 275 a, 283 c, 285- 
 6, 304/, 307 a'. 316/, 324 c, 329, 
 329 (i), 335 a, 338, 346 a, 357, 362 a, 
 386 (i), 396/, 397/, 412a, 414/-//, 
 428 /foil., 430, 434c, 439 a, 439 (i), 
 (iii), (v)a, 452, 464/, 479, 489 a,/, 
 490 a. 492 a, 507 a, 508 c, 540/, 543, 
 545 c, 549 a, 553/, 573, 584c, 586 c, 
 622. 635 (i), 644 (i), 649 c, 649 (iii), 
 659 c, 664, 666-7. 668 a, 680, 682 a, 
 685, 688 a, 689, 692. 695, 703, 713, 
 716/, 722, 724, 725, 726, 728, 730, 
 736 a, 740-2, 744, 746, 756, 757 c, e, 
 758, 759, 765 a. 766 (i) a, 767, 770, 
 793/, 799(h), 799 (iii) 
 
 Orthography 114, 691 ; Augustus, 
 negligent of 790 
 
 Papyri, quoted or referred to 049, 114, 
 173 a, 235 a 7 , 252, 282,?, 332 a, 334 a', 
 386 a, 414 a, 416 a, 465 a", 479 a, 520a, 
 554 c. 630 0", z, 640 c, 642/, 665 a, 
 
 667, 678 a, 683 a, /, 690, 691, 693, 
 696, 697 c, 698 a, 708 c, 711, 717, 
 729, 771, 775 a 
 
 Paraclete, the 932*, 352-3, 793 
 
 Parallelism, as distinct from Chiasmus 
 544 a 
 
 Parenthesis 070 foil., 164, 168, 180, 
 631 foil. ; w. Asyndeton 639 ; avoided 
 by SS 631 ; comp. 018 
 
 Participle 271-9; in apposition 937* 
 foil. ; w. negative 253-4, comp. 704 ; 
 aor. 499 — 505 ; fut. a false reading 
 500; fut. comprehended in present 
 500 ; perf. 506, 517 ; pres. 351, 
 507-10 ; probably expressing cause 
 924 a*, 273; see also Article and 
 Genitive Absolute 
 
 Partitive Genitive 041 foil. 
 
 Passive voice, avoided by Jn 373 ; 
 passive and middle 538-43 
 
 Patriarchs, the 949-50* 
 
 Paul, St, the Apostle, his handwriting 
 114, 691, 785-90 ; his view of God's 
 preordinance 689/ 
 
 " Pause-spaces" in Codex B 663 
 
 Penuel, meaning of 765 
 
 Perfect tense, as result of Johannine 
 style 473-5 ; as result of Johannine 
 thought 476-7 ; compared with aorist 
 440 foil.; meaning "it is on record 
 that " 758 ; denoting instantaneous- 
 ness and permanence 517-20 ; in 
 Heb. 443 ; second perf. 478-9 ; some 
 act. perfects in Gk seldom used 441, 
 747-53 ; perf. partic. 506 ; s. also 
 683 a, / 
 
 Personal, s. Pronoun 
 
 Pharisees 214-5 ; chief priests and P. 
 regarded as one council 991 a * 
 
 Philo, on the " laughing" of Abraham 
 097 ; quoted or referred to 890*, 
 895*, 905*, 907 c*, 917 (v)*, 935*, 
 964*, 097, 223, 275/, 281, 283/, c, 
 285, 295 6, 307 c/, 346 a, 386 (i), 410, 
 414//, 494, 535 a, 579 a, 588-90, 
 594a, 602, 616, 617a, 647 (n.), 649, 
 665, 676, 689 c, 743, 765 
 
 Philosophers and kings 799 
 
 Phrynichus on 17s 772 foil. 
 
 Pilate's judgment 799/ 
 
 Plato, on " knowing " 763 a-b ; his use 
 of the "vernacular genitive" 776 
 
 Pleonasm for emphasis 606 
 
 Pluperfect 480-1 ; aor. for Eng. p. 
 459-62 ; no p. in Heb. 480 ; no p. 
 partic. in Gk 506 
 Plural 417 ; pi. vb w. sing, noun 278 ; 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999* : before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 A. VI. 
 
 $73 
 
 43 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 pi. referring to sing. 266 ; neut. pi. 
 
 267, 419 20 
 Position of words, 544-86; see also 
 
 Emphasis and Variation 
 Possessive adjectives 987-9* 
 Possessive genitive 558-69, 776-84 
 Prayer 452 ; the Lord's Prayer, reference 
 
 to, in Jn 053 
 Praying 536 ; the Son not described as 
 
 "praying" to the Father 630// 
 Predicate, when before subject 994*: 
 
 p. in one clause subject of next 596 ; 
 
 "such " used as p. 398 
 Preordinance, divine 093, 102-5, 109 10 
 " Preparation of the Passover," meaning 
 
 of 048 
 Prepositions 280 foil., and see Contents 
 
 pp. xix-xx 
 Present, imperat. 437-9 ; indie. 482-94 ; 
 
 historic 482-3 ; of prophecy and of 
 
 law 484-94; infin. 496-8; aor. and 
 
 pres. infin. in LXX 767 ; particip. 
 
 507-10; pres. part. w. "was" 277; 
 
 subjunct. 511-35 
 Privately, Christ does not teach privately 
 
 202, 348, 251 b 
 Pronouns, demonstrative 374-98 ; 
 
 personal 399 — 404 ; relative 405-16 ; 
 
 ins. for emphasis 399 foil. ; in appos. 
 
 to preceding subject 947 * ; ambiguous 
 
 378-9 ; emphasized by juxtaposition 
 
 784 c; see also possessive genit. 
 
 558-69 and 776-84 
 Proper names, s. Names 
 Prophecy, " present of p." 484, 509 
 Prophet, " a, or the, p." 492 a ; " the p." 
 
 940*; "art thou the p.?" 940*, 965* 
 Prophetic present 484, 509 
 Proselytes 907-8* 
 Punctuation 996*, 186. 225 a, 248 a, 278, 
 
 314, 372/;, 414, 508, 799 (i), s. Con- 
 nexion of Sentences 
 Purpose, how expressed in Jn 093, 097, 
 
 173, 524-9, 68690, 693, comp. 995* 
 
 "Question" (vb) meaning interrogate 
 498, 577 
 
 " Questioning" (n.) meaning discussion 
 or dispute 349-50 
 
 Quotations and repetitions 190a-c, 275a; 
 variation in 544; of Christ's words by 
 Himself 545; conformed to txt. rec. 
 269 a, 357/'; introduced in Aboth 
 470 a; s. also 079 c, 412 b, 745 a 
 
 Rab, root of " Rabbi," two meanings 
 Of 899 * 
 
 Rachel, regarded by Justin, Iren., and 
 Orig. as type of the Church 944* 
 
 Reception of Christ 448 a 
 
 Recognition 491, s. "knowing" 
 
 Regeneration 903 * foil., 268 foil. ; "from 
 above " 573 
 
 Relative (Pronoun) 405-16; attraction 
 of 405 ; s. also 738 
 
 " Remembering " after the Resurrection 
 469 
 
 Repetition, or Refrain 587 foil. ; varia- 
 tion in 544 foil. ; in Jewish Prayer 
 Book 587 a ; Jewish Canons of 588; 
 through negation 591, 598 ; in 
 Synoptists 592; of Vocatives 592 a; 
 twofold, in the Baptist's teaching 
 601-2 ; in Christ's words 603 foil. ; 
 in narrative 607 ; twofold or threefold 
 608-11; threefold 396, 612-23; seven- 
 fold 624-7 
 
 Resumptive clauses 633 
 
 Resurrection, manifestations after the 
 335, 699-700, 703 b, d ; the period of 
 331 r, comp. 715 
 
 Retaining sins 517-20 
 
 Revelation of St John, the 890*, 892*, 
 964*, 011, 176", 270 c, 288, 329, 349, 
 624, 640. 781, 799 (ii) 
 
 " Right side of the ship, the " 703 c 
 
 Samuel, the call of 307 d 
 
 Saul, Abba 227 
 
 Saying, vbs of 456, 469, comp. 251 b ; 
 
 "began to say " 467, 470 
 Scripture 339 ; difficulty of identifying 
 
 129; Orig. on lit. interpretation of 
 
 545 <• ; Christ's quotations from 626 ; 
 
 "searching the scriptures" 439 (i) 
 Sea, " on, or near, the s." 340-5 ; Jesus 
 
 standing "by the s. " 354 
 " Searching the scriptures " 439 (i) 
 Seeing = experiencing 576 e; s. and 
 
 beholding 572 ; s. and knowing 491, 
 
 764-6; s. the kingdom of Cod 573 
 Self-correction 628 foil., 635 lii) 
 Sending 277, 440, 453 
 Sentences, connexion of 628 foil. 
 Septuagint, variety of styles in 349a, 
 
 536, 649 (i)/; 689a 7 , comp. 911* 
 Serving 515 
 " Seven," the number, in Revelation 
 
 624; sevenfold repetition 624 foil., 
 
 comp. 411 d-b, 529 d 
 " Sheep-gate, the," an error 216 
 Singular number 418 ; referred lo as pi. 
 
 266 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2J000. 
 
 674 
 
SUBJECT-MATTER (ENGLISH) 
 
 "Six," the number 283 0; six days, 
 mystically implied 647 
 
 Slave, the, does not " abide in the 
 house" 263 £ 
 
 Son of God 410, 798-9 
 
 Sower, Parable of the, "word" how 
 used in 799 (iii) 
 
 " Speaketh of his own " 728 
 
 Speaking, vbs of, see " Saying" 
 
 Speech, direct or reported 926*, 189 ; 
 speech confusable w. narrative or 
 comment (see Preface, pp. vii-ix) 
 936*, 949*, 956 7*, 066, 128, 203, 
 com p. 925* ; speech assigned wrongly 
 by Chrys. 734 d, 745 (see esp. 745 a), 
 by Cyprian 737 c, by Aphraates 768, 
 comp. 061; change of "him" to 
 "me" in 695c 
 
 Spelling, St Paul's 691 ; Augustus's 
 790; misspellings freq. in Mk 513 £ 
 
 Spirit 315 foil., 407; different meanings 
 of 976<7*; not given "from a 
 measure" 714; "the Holy S." 488 ; 
 "the S. of truth" 352 
 
 SS (see p. xxv) 926 a*, 942a*, 944a*, 
 977*, 990*, 079, 083, 186 f', 235 a, 
 329(i)/>, 448a, Slid, 632a, b, c, 
 739 b, 756, 760, 769 ; its avoidance of 
 parenthesis 631, 632 a, 639 a 
 
 Stand, "Jesus stood" 307 a foil., 703, 710 
 
 Stone (metaph.) 397; "a white s." 
 409; "the s. that the builders re- 
 jected" 622 
 
 Style, Johannine 891-3*, 112, 132, 134, 
 455 ; its abruptness 135 ; contrasts 
 140a; rarely resembles that of Lk. 
 335a; s. "Ambiguity," "Epistle," 
 " Hebrew," " Speech " 
 
 Subject 417 foil.; collective or noun- 
 group 417-8 ; neut. plur. 419-20 ; 
 suspended 421-2 ; omitted in partitive 
 clauses 041-2, 213-5; "they" non- 
 pronominal 424-6; "we" non-pro- 
 nominal 427-35; "[any]one" 379 
 
 Subjunctive aor. and pres.893*, 511-35; 
 deliberative 512, 766 (i) ; in final 
 clauses 093 foil., 524-30, 687-9; in 
 conditional clauses 513-5, 517-23 ; in 
 temporal clauses 531-5 ; after the 
 indef. relative 516 ; in strong negation 
 255 
 
 Suspensive sentences 122 foil., 175 foil. 
 
 Symbolism, s. Metaphor and Mysticism 
 
 Synonyms (on the meaning, see p. 
 
 645 n.) 630//; juxtaposition of 570, 
 
 576-7, 584 a-c, s. Joh. Voc. p. 151 
 
 Tabernacles, the feast of 265 a 
 
 Talmud, the 196 
 
 Tautology, Philo on 588 d 
 
 Teacher, "thou art the t. of Israel " 
 966* 
 
 Temple, the, rebuilding of 021 foil. 
 
 Tense 893*, 436, 753, s. Contents, 
 p. xxi — xxiii, also Aorist, Future etc. 
 
 They, non-pronominal 424; THEY 426 
 
 Third day, the 982* 
 
 This, "this is he" etc. 957/;*; "this 
 [thing] is the Lord's doing " 396 
 
 Thomas, his confession of faith 049-51 
 
 Three Witnesses 588 9 
 
 Threefold repetition 612-23, comp. 
 411c; thr. rep. of " remembering " 
 639 ; twofold or threefold rep. 608-11 
 
 Tiberias, the sea of 045 
 
 Time, completion of 021 foil.; duration 
 of 013 b, comp. 678 ; interval of 
 331 c, 715 ; point of 013, 025, 331 ; 
 simultaneousness of 531 
 
 Transliteration 216, 666, 671 a, 793 
 
 Transposition 915 (ii), (iii); s. Emphasis 
 and Variation 
 
 Treasury, the 333 
 
 Two, "t. witnesses" 588; "t. or three 
 firkins " 281-3 
 
 Twofold attestation 589 ; twofold mean- 
 ings and events 641-9, comp. 172 ; 
 twofold repetition : in the Baptist's 
 teaching 601-2 ; in Christ's teaching 
 603-6 ; in narrative 607 ; twofold or 
 threefold rep. 608-11 
 
 Understanding, or knowledge, moral 
 491a 7 
 
 Variation in repetition or quotation 
 544 foil. ; in sympathy w. meaning 
 565; miscellaneous 570 foil. 
 
 "Vernacular genitive, the" 558 foil., 
 776 84 
 
 Vernacular and literary Gk 781, 799 (ii) 
 
 Vocative 052-3 ; expr. by article 
 679 foil. 
 
 Voice, middle 536-7 ; passive 538-43 ; 
 s. also 563 c, 689 c foil. 
 
 Walking 342 ; =" teaching " ib. 
 
 Water, connected with "life" 314; 
 " rivers of w." 316^ 
 
 "We," meaning of 287; non-pronomi- 
 nal 427 
 
 "Which" and "who" in A.V. and 
 R.V. 273 a 
 
 Wife (?) ellipsis of the word 217 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999* ; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 675 43—2 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 "Will of God, the," parall. to "the 
 
 word of God " 799 (iii) 
 " With "= "in the sight of" or "in the 
 
 house of" 355 ; ambig. 363, 799 (ii) ; 
 
 "questioning \v." 349 
 Witnesses, "two" and ''three" 588; 
 
 "three" 306 
 Witnessing 383-4 
 Wonder, in bad sense 338 
 Word, "the word," "the word of 
 
 God," "my word" etc. 799 (iii) 
 
 Worshipping 019 
 
 " Would" = "was minded to" 471; 
 
 "would not," how expr. 463; "would 
 
 have liked" 472, 498 
 
 Year, the agricultural, how divided by 
 the Jews 230 (iii) ; "forty and six 
 years" an error 021-4 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers 'with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999~ ; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 676 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 III. WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 [ This Index deals mainly with conjunctions, prepositions and pronouns. Nouns 
 and verbs in it are regarded mainly in their grammatical and syntactical aspects 
 and not so much with reference to their separate meanings— for which the reader is 
 referred to Index III of " Johannine Vocabulary." If a word, e.g. dyarrdw, is 
 occasionally mentioned in a non-grammatical aspect, it is because of a desire to 
 supply some defect in " 'Johannine Vocabulary" e.g. the testimony of Origen to the 
 difference between dyarrdui and cpiXecj (2584 <-).] 
 
 'A- privative expr. by ov 143, 248, 256 
 
 'Aj3/3d 679 
 
 dyaXXidofxai : w. tva 097, 688-9; -adr)vai 
 
 v. r. -acrdrjvai 655 a ; active form of 
 
 689/ 
 dyarrdw : aor. 323, 515 b ; aor. and 
 
 perf. 443 ; perf. 476-7 ; 17 dydrrr) rjv 
 
 rjydrrr)ads /xe 014 ; Origen on d. and 
 
 (piXew 584 c 
 dydrrr] 581 ; rarely w. objective genitive 
 
 033 foil. ; r) d., in Jn, "the love of 
 
 God revealed to men " 035 
 dyopd'Cw : dyopdo-w/xev in Mk and Jn 
 
 428 a, 512, 745-6 
 dypos : et'r dypdv 711 b 
 ayw : dywpLev 428 
 d5tX<p6s : rots d. /jlov 307 b 
 -at interchanged w. -e 4:28 b, 514<7, 658 e 
 alfia and a'i/j.ara 268 
 aireofiai, s. cu'rew 
 alrioj : pres. and aor. subjunct. 516 ; 
 
 d. and direo/mai 536 ; a., airio/xaL, and 
 
 epwrdco 630/ foil. ; rrpoaevxeode ko.1 
 
 airdcrde 536 a ; airrjcracrOe imper. or 
 
 inrin. 514 a 
 
 airia, r) 295 b 
 
 alcbv : els rbv d. 312 ; ov (or fxr))...eis rbv 
 
 d. 263 e-g 
 dfcoai = ' ' ears ; ' 709 a 
 duovui : aor. and perf. 450-2 ; fut. act. 
 
 660 c—d ; w. accus. and w. gen. 586 
 aXrjdavos in Codex B 654 
 dXXd : —contrariety, "not this but 
 
 that, or, something more " 055-7 ; = 
 
 difference, "nevertheless" 058-9; 
 
 in special passages 060-2; d\\' 'iva. 
 
 063-4, 105-12, 387, in the Synoptists 
 
 111 ; d\\' ov^l rrdvres 265 (i) ; owe... 
 
 dXXd 593 ; 06 followed by tcai instead 
 
 of dXXd 598 ; ovre...dX\d in Papyri 
 
 683 a, b 
 dXX-qXwv : fxerd d. 349 
 dXXo/xat. 314-6 
 dXXos : ctXXos ioTiv 972*, 675 foil., 730; 
 
 dXXos and 5l dXXov in Epict. 791 foil., 
 
 297 e ; dXXa 7roXXd 335 a ; dXXos and 
 
 erepos 675-7 
 dixr)v d/xrjv 611 a, b 
 &v : its omission 079, 213 a, 698 ; its 
 
 position 566, before a pause 1 739 < ; 
 
 1 To the instances of dv at the end of a sentence add Lucian Hermotim. § 24 
 (i. 762) i'crws yap dv avrd rjdrj dp.(pl rd rrpodo~Teia Kai rrpbs reus rrvXais r)v dv. 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2J000. 
 
 supply 1, 
 
 6/7 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 bans dv, 8 dv (or edv) etc. 516 ; ware 
 di»...0A« 697 <"; dv and edv inter- 
 changed 739; dv "if," only in Jn 
 739 ; s. also edv 
 
 dud 281 3 
 
 dvafiaivu 264 a, 265; with eoprr; 264-5, 
 771 ; quoted as nopevo/xai 489 a 
 
 dvrip : applied to Christ 371, 722/5, c ; 
 distinct from dvdpwn-os 009, 571 ; 
 8e\r]p.a dvdpbs 269; ioov dv-qp in Zech. 
 662 a 
 
 dvdpwTroi 386 b ; emphatic 412 a ; how- 
 used in Jn 934* ; 6 d. 959 61* ; 6 a. 
 in Epict. 960 c* ; a. contrasted w. 
 X670S 277. distinct from dvqp 009, 571 ; 
 ovk a. or d. ov in LXX 586 d 
 
 dviarrifii in repetition 609 a 
 
 avrl 284-7 
 
 dirXew 281 foil. 
 
 dvwdev 903-8*, 403, 573, 734,/ 
 
 dwdpTL, S. dpTL 
 
 d.vepxop.a.1 : W. eV 334 rf ; direXrfXvdev 
 and dwrjXdev 753 a foil. 
 
 aVo : transposed 288 ; ambig. 215 b, 
 291 ; dirb and £k meaning ' ' [some] 
 of" 213-5, denoting domicile and 
 birthplace 289-93, interchanged in 
 LXX 293 a, w. XaXew 293^, 586a; 
 aVo, €K, and napd, w. e^epxopLai 326-8 
 
 d-Kodv-qoKW : ovk dirodvqaKet 486 ; 6 
 dwodvqcxKuv " he that is under sentence 
 of death " 530 ; iva p-rj aTrotfvrjaKTj v.r. 
 for diroddvy 530 
 
 dTTOKpivo,uai : diroKpideh 271 ; direKpivaro 
 and dirtxpldr) 537 ; direKp'idr) (Ir/a.) 
 kclI elwev 611 a-c ; dTreKpidr] w. 'It/ct. 
 (not w. 6 Tj?o\ ) 968* 
 
 aVoMw : Kara 5e eoprrjv direXvev 464 ^ 
 
 d-rroareWu : aor. and perf. 440, 453 ; 
 aVeoTaXyueVos 7rapd 0eoO contrasted 
 w. tJv 7rpos rbv 6ebv 111 ; d. and 
 e£a7ro<7Te'XXu; 753 b 
 
 aTTOTivdaau) : air or iv da a ere and eKrivd^are 
 437 a 
 
 dpL0fxos : tov a., adv. accus. 009 
 
 dprt and vvv 915 (i)-(vi)*, 246 
 
 dpros : 6 d. 6 Karafiaivwv and 6 d. 6 
 Ka.Ta.3as 504 ; 6 d. ot'ros and ovros 6d. 
 553 < 
 
 dpx 7 ? : ttjv dpxv" on Kai XaXw vfuv 
 154-6 ; d. tQv arjfieiwv 386 (i) ; e£ d. 
 and air' d. 254 a 
 
 dadevew : dadevovvrwv, ambig. 930* 
 
 darpawri 532 e , 
 
 ai'7-77 s. ovros 
 
 ai)r6? 374-80, meaning "God" 731, 
 change from to iiceTvos 302 ; at^ToO etc. 
 possessive, emphatic and non-em- 
 phatic 558, om. or rep. 395 ; avrov 
 ambig. 378-9 ; avrbv ins. and oin. 
 537 (i) a ; ai'ros 6 931 a* ; avrbs p.bvos 
 and /xovos avrbs 724-6 ; avrbs vepl 
 iavrov 723 ; £701 el/u avrbs 220, 221 a, 
 224, 699—700 ; 6Y avrov ambig. 302, 
 595a; avroi ia/xev "we are by our- 
 selves" 699 ; Kai avroi yap em ph. 
 692 ; ai'-ros v. r. avrb 727 ; avroh [6] 
 'Irjaovs, why a doubtful reading 656 c 
 
 Bai'a : rd /3. tQv (poiviKuiv 047 
 
 iSawTifa : w. els 706 a 
 
 jSaaiXeia : eiaeXOeiv ei's, or ideiv, rr\v /3. 
 
 roO 0eof> 573 
 (3aaiXevs : with and without article 966 *, 
 
 669 : av Xeyeis on /3. elfd 245 a ; s. 
 
 also 798 9 
 ftaaiXiKbs : £k tuv fiaaiXiKuiv 215 b 
 /3aaTafa : aor. ami pres. infill. 497 
 B-rjdavia : dird B. 290 
 Br]dXee/j. : dwb B. 289 
 j3rjfia 537 (ii) b 
 (BX^ttuj : hist. pres. 482; ftXeTTtre, initial, 
 
 imperat. 237 ' 
 
 1 In 2237 it was said that " /3\^7r«Te would naturally be imperative." In N.T.. 
 fiXtweTf — except with relative or negative — is almost always (abt 20) initial and. 
 when initial, alw. imperative (1 Cor. i. 26 being no exception). In Poet. Seen. 
 ft\i-Kiri is only in Kurip. Cyc. 211 (imperat.). Initial bpdre in Poet. Seen., though 
 possibly interrog., prob. always means "See!" — Aesch. Prom. 119 " See [me 
 outraged because of my love for mankind] !," Ag. 1217 " See [these spectres] !," 
 Soph. El. 122S 30 "See [Orestes restored to life] ! " to which the Chorus replies 
 "We do see," Oed. Col. 871 — 2 "See [these insults]!" to which Oedipus replies, 
 "They do see," Ant. .Xofi " See [me led away to death] !," Eurip. Fragm. A km. 
 11 " See [the tyrant in exile]!" In Aristoph., too, bpdre initial, or after a pause, 
 is almost alw. imperative, or may be so taken. In N.T., bpdre \> alw. imperat. 
 exc. perh. in [as ii. 24 bpdre 6n (after /SXeVm on) R.V. "ye see that " ; and, even 
 there — in view of Epictet. iii. 13.9 bpdre yap 6rt, "videte enim" anil the frequency 
 
 75iM Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 
 [1]999*,- before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 678 
 
WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 Ta^o0v\d.Kiov : ev rip 7. and Karevavri 
 rod y. 333 4 
 
 yap: Synoptic and Johannine use 065-6 ; 
 sometimes an indication of evange- 
 listic origin 066 A; in special passages 
 067 8. 683 ; Kal yap 167, comp. 692 ; 
 oi' yap, not interrogative in Jn 683 ; 
 various ellipses before 683 a 
 
 yepdfa : w. (k 329 (i) 
 
 yifxw : \v. eK 329 a 
 
 yevvdop.at 904-8 *, 573 
 
 yevopat : w. accus. 016-18 ; y. Oavdrov 
 576 
 
 -}T) : eis rr)v lovdaiav yijv 670 b ; yrj 
 'JovSa 670/' 
 
 •)ivonai : eyevero contrasted w. tjv 277 , 
 596-7 ; yiyova 396 6, 478 b ; yeyovev 
 'iva 478 a ; yiyova and eyev6/j.rjv 440 ; 
 7670^05 758 ; Yevd/xej/cu 472 /> 
 
 yivcbcrKw : aor. and perf. indie. 448, 
 511 a ; aor. and pres. subjunct. 511 ; 
 $yv(ov 328, 511 a, 582; £ypwv = " I 
 knew [at once]" 443 <• ; yivwaKere 
 ambig. 243, 491, 760 ; yivwaKere 
 combined w. ewp&Kare 491 ; 7. and 
 olda 491, 757 d, 763 ; yvudi eavrov and 
 to eavrov yivwo-Keiv 763 
 
 yvcopifa : aor. 447 
 
 ro\7otfd 738 
 
 ypdppa : tttiXIkois ypdppacriv 691 </-.?, 
 785-90 
 
 ypdrpw : eV' avrip yeypap.pe'va 339 ; 5 
 yiypatpa yeypa<pa 473 ; £ypa\pa in 
 letters 691 a foil., 785-90 
 
 7w?7 : w. article 948 a * ; ? ellipsis of 7. 
 or dvydr-rjp 217 
 
 Ae : consecutive or adversative 069-73 ; 
 third word, or later, in its clause 
 074-6; denoting antithesis 209; intro- 
 ducing parenthesis 633 b ; in doubtful 
 connexion 636 ; a oV-clause before an 
 o5j/-clause 634 ; w. '4\eyev 468 ; w. 
 pluperf. 480; Kal... 84 076; p.ev...84 
 077; p.ev ends Thucyd. iii. 116 foil, 
 by 8e ib. iv. 1 638 ; s. also 635 (i)a 
 
 del: ZSei 272a, 635 (i) a ; Set written 81, 
 confusable with oV (prep.) 428 c 
 
 5e/cds 283 c 
 
 did : w. accus. of pers. 294—300, 705 ; 
 w. gen. of pers. 301-4; w. gen. of 
 time 331<r foil., 715; oV &v...KaX 81 
 
 oil 294 ; ov 8id rod deov dXXd wap 
 
 avrov 296 a ; 81a rl ; 231 c ; 5id toPto 
 
 387 foil.; (?) 6V vfias 428 c ; 5td <xo0 
 
 for 5td o-e 729 a 
 Scaairopd : i) 5. tcoi/ ' EXXtJi'wi' 046 
 <5i5d<x\-a\os : w. article 966*, 195, ? vo- 
 
 catively used 680 
 dLdup.1.: aor. and perf. 454-5; imperf. 
 
 465 b ; pres. and perf. in LXX 444 ; 
 
 5 5e8(j}Kas pol 422 ; wdv 6' dVoWaj 
 
 740-4 ; ZSwKev, v. r. for 8e~8uKev 687 c ; 
 
 late forms of, e.g. e'oWa 690 ; 56s, v.r. 
 
 in ch. xvii. 740 
 8iu)KU) : 6 Sllokujv "the prosecutor" 537 
 SoKeoj : aor. and imperf. 464 a; p.ij 
 
 8oKelre 235 a ; rl 8oku iip.lv and rl 
 
 SoKetre 766 (i) a 
 5o£dfa> : aor. 441 ; various meanings of 
 
 edo^daOr] 446 
 8ov\os 263 g, 584 b 
 dpaxpal om., e.g. apafiGiva (5.) rj "eight 
 
 [drachmae] as earnest money " 729 
 Svvauai : w. aor. and pres. infin. 496, 
 
 767 ; 8vvarai dprrd^eiv and apvaetei 
 
 767 ; 5. ins. by LXX = Heb. interrog. 
 
 767 
 8vo 281-3 
 
 E, 6, O and C interchanged in B 650-2 
 -e interchanged w. -at 428/', 658 c' 
 edv or av : w. aor. and pres. subjunct. 
 511, 513-5; w. indie, in 1 Jn 515 (i), 
 comp. 771 ; edv p.r\ 521-3, w. pres. 
 subjunct. in connexion w. the hour of 
 trial 523 a; edv rts 580; idv and ns 
 separated 552 <• ; Kal edv 158-9 ; &v 
 rivuv Kparrjre 517-20 ; edv ovv dewprjre 
 210-12 ; oaris edv ambig. 414-6 ; 
 Sans av, 6 dv (or edv) etc. 516, 660 /> ; 
 av and edv interchanged 739 ; edv for 
 av in Papyri 416 a 
 eavrov : ev eavrip, -oh, how used in Jn 
 039; Trpbs eavrovs 366 c; avrbs irepl 
 eavrov 723 
 «77i's 909* 
 eyelpw : TrpcKprjTTjs ovk eyeiperac 492 
 
 of opa on in Epictet. , as well as i. 3. 9 opare ovv Kal irpoo~e'x eTe — 'he meaning may 
 be "see [and no?e~] that." These facts bear on 2762 a, which rendered //. i. 120 
 XetWere imperatively, though rendered in Monro's Horn. Gramm. p. 190 " ye see." 
 The scholiast says, " opare, /3\eVeTe," perh. intending not only to explain the 
 poetic XeiWere by a prose word, but also to shew that it was imperative, like 
 initial opare and (iXeTrere. 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999* ; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 679 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR 
 
 eyw 401 ; eydi ei/xi 220 foil. ; (yd) ei/j.i 
 avrbs 221 a, 224, 699 foil. ; oirov vwdyw 
 and ottov eyw vvdyui 578 ; Xe^o; om. 
 after ^716 658 />, 660 ; e/xov, not in 
 N.T. without (1) prepos. (2) antith. 
 or parall. (3) v.r. 566 c ; /j.ov emph. 
 and non-emph. 559, 776 foil. ; fxov, 
 v.r. for /J.0L 563 ; fxov and aov confused 
 768 ; /j.e ravra for fiera radra 659 ; s. 
 also i)fj.sis 
 
 f^Aw, s. deXw 
 
 el: written 1 659 c, comp. 428c, 515(i)£", 
 650 a, 654 b, 798 e ; corresponding to 
 av, in words of the Lord 078-9 ; el 
 w. fut. 514 (i) a, w. optat. 514 (i) b ; 
 el ov 256 ; el be fiy) 080-6, in LXX 
 foil, imperat. 080 
 
 dbov : ideiv " to experience"' 576 e; ibetv 
 Ti]v fiaaiXeiav and daeXdeiv (is ttjv /3. 
 573; TidiafJ.ai...i(p' 6v dv 'i5rjs...ed)paKa 
 572 ; l5ti and etSij confused 515 (i) e, 
 798 e 1 
 
 etdos 8eov 765 a 
 
 elfil : (yd) eifii 220 foil. ; eyd) ei/xi avrbs 
 224, 699 — 700 ; bwov elfiX (v.r. efyu) 
 €701 and oirov iyw inrdyw 190a, 487a; 
 irbd(v el av 733-7 ; ellipsis of ecrrl 
 229-30 (i) ; iarl w. particip. 971-81* ; 
 daiv ol 971c*; i)v, contrasted w. 
 eye"veTo277, 596-7; iji'w.pres. particip. 
 277 ; otl iariv and on -ijv after ddov 
 466 (i) ; 6 w in various phrases 938*, 
 964*, 275, 308, 358, 711 foil. ; 6...ovk 
 div 704 ; div referring to the past 274 ; 
 iva waiv, seven times repeated in the 
 Last Prayer 529 a ; forms of elfd 
 emphasized 972*, 979 a-d* , 553/', 
 555 a, 579 ; repeated for emphasis 
 606", (dv av y)ada 515 (i) ; r}s and 
 r)ada 515 (i) b ; Phrynichus on the 
 spelling of r>s 772-5 ; iaai 711 
 
 dpi : not used in N.T. 171 d, v.r. for 
 eifxi 190 a, 487 a ; els KStttov (I/xl 711 ; 
 (?) flat spelt eaai. 711 
 
 (Ittov 456 ; 6v dirov v.r. 6 e'nrdjv 925 a", 
 
 507 a ; dire, differently used by Lk. 
 and Jn 456 a ; elirev and iX(y(v 469 ; 
 elprjicei 481 ; rl dirw; t'l a' (ittw; 512/'", 
 (iwbv and eine 658 c; dirov av vp.iv on 
 083-6, 186 ; dirov with and without 
 on 189 foil. ; eiprjxev, in Pap., = ewee 
 683 a, b 
 
 dprjvr] : e. ttjv i/x-qv 609 b 
 
 eis : without verb of motion 305-9, 706 
 foil.; "to" or "into" 310-11; e& 
 £u>r)v aid>viov 312-6 ; oif/ovrai (is 317-8; 
 eis tAos 319-23 ; Trepi.Tra.Teui eis 342 /; ; 
 TTiarevu) eis 506 (and s. Triarevw) ; 6 d)v 
 els tov koXttov 308-9, 706, 711 foil. ; 
 eis and eVi 310, 316 b ; iar-r) eis v. r. 
 iwi 307 a ; eis to in St Paul's Epistles 
 689y' ; Xtyu eis implying publicity 709 
 
 eis : used with dative 118 b ; els Kad' eh 
 348 ; eis [e/c] 586a; ev "one" in juxta- 
 position with ev " in*' 118 /< ; ot5e ev 
 or oi>5ee 660 
 
 eiaepXOfxai : eiaeXdovaai 311 ; e. eis, or 
 ideiv, tt]v fiaaiXdav tov deov 573 
 
 eZra, see below 3 
 
 e'Cwda: eididei parall. to imperf. 464^ 
 
 eK: " from" or " (some) of" 042, 213-5; 
 " native of" (but diro " resident in ") 
 289-93 ; e'/c and dwo in LXX 293 a ; 
 eV and d-rvb w. XaXew 293 b, 586 a ; eK 
 w. e^px°M a ' 326-8, w. irX-qpbui 329, 
 w. yefxifa 329 (i), w. ctifw and Tt]peu> 
 325; e*S ^wv 110 a-b, 263 c foil.; e/c 
 fxeTpov 324, 714 
 
 e\'et r; conf. \v. ticelvq 687 a' 
 
 eKelvos 381-5, 729 ; emph., change to 
 from avros 302 ; contemptuous 732 ; 
 meaning "HE" 132/;, 382, 731; 
 eicelvr) conf. w. e/ce? 77 687 a 1 ; ndxdvos 
 150-1 
 
 eKKevTe'u) 317 // 
 
 eKXeyo/j.ai : aor. 441, and see esp. 441 4 
 foil. 
 
 inXeKTOs : v.r. for vids 386 a 
 
 eKfxdaau) : t\ eK/ud^aaa 276 
 
 ^KfxeTpos 324 a" 
 
 1 For ?5e, see Jo h. Voc, where it should have been added that ?5e, foil, by 
 Dom. without verb, is pec. to Mk and Jn. 
 
 - Comp. Epict. i. 14. 13 — 14 p.^fxvrjaOe fj.Tjde'TroTe Xiyetv utl /xdvoi eare' ov yap 
 iari. dXX b Oeos tvoov earl, nal b iifxirepos Aai/nuiv eaTi. 
 
 ■ s elra occurs Mk (2), Mt. (o), Lk. (1), Jn (3), comp. Mk iv. 28 etrev (bis). In 
 canon. LXX, efra occurs only in Job (12, with v.r.), Prov. (2). It is one of 
 several points in common between the style of Job and Mk. In N.T. (outside 
 Gospels) it is only in 1 Cor. xv. 5 (txt), 7 (txt), 24, 1 Tim. ii. 13, iii. to, Heb. xii. 
 9, [as i. 15. 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. ll]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 680 
 
WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 (Kvevto : ££4vevffev, v.r. 'ivevatv 541 
 
 (KT tv acrati) : airoTivaaaeTe and eKTivd^are 
 437 a 
 
 cXaiwv : how accented 673 
 
 "EMi^ces : 77 diaenropd tCjv E. 046 
 
 iXirifa : imperf. 472 />, 474 ; rjXTrl^apiev 
 472 />; perf. 442, 474 
 
 ep.fiXeiru> : twofold use of epjiXi^as 649 
 
 c/ul6s : 6 £(i6s... and 6. ..6 £p.6s 987-9*; 6 
 i/j.6s, r) ifXTj etc. emphatic 559, 581 
 
 ip-wpoadev 896*, 330 
 
 ev : temporal 025-6, 331, om. by B 661, 
 ins. and om. before ijp.e'pq., eopTrj, and 
 cra/S/Sdru) 715 b—d\ instrumental and 
 quasi-instrumental 332 ; = " into " 
 334 c, d ; ev rovrip 332, 392 ; ev t<? 
 yafofivXaKiip 333-4 
 
 eW/ca 300 
 
 evriXXopcu 742 a 
 
 evroXi] Kaivi]...8 412 
 
 evixnriov 335 
 
 e't 281-3 
 
 e^epavvdu} 439 (i) a 
 
 i^pXOfiai 263 (foil., w. o.tt6, ix, and 
 Trapd 326-8 ; aor. 457 ; ei;rjXdov ambig. 
 
 110 Or-b 
 
 e^ovaia 798-9 
 
 eopr-q : w. article 951*; ava/3aiv(i} eis e. 
 264-5 ; Kara oe eoprrjv 464 c ; iv ins. 
 and om. before 715 d, comp. 771 
 
 ewaipa} rous d<paaXp.ous 616-7 
 
 eirei and eTreidy) 087-8 
 
 eirepwrdu) and eptordw 577 
 
 cttI : w. accus. 336, 342 </, i\ w. dat. 
 337-9 ; w. gen. 340-7 ; iirl and ets 
 307 a, 310, 316 b ; hrl tovtlo 338 ; iwi 
 tt)i> ddXaacrav and iirl rrjs daXdao-rjs 
 340-6; 'iarr\ ewi 336; iir clvtc3 yeypap- 
 p.iva 339 ; eviypaepij eV a.i>rqi 339 ; eirl 
 rod crravpov 347 
 
 eVi/3dXXu> x f 'P as 575 a 
 
 (.TTLpXtwo) : eirtfiXtipovTai -rrpSs pe 317 c 
 
 twiyivuxTKco 511 a 
 
 iinypa<pr) eV avTw 339 
 
 ewieiKuis 233 a 
 
 (TriKadlfa : iirenaffiaev v. r. enddicrev 756a 
 
 ewiridepiai : how used by Origen 412 a 
 
 epavvdu : of "searching" the Scrip- 
 tures 439 (i) ; epavvdre ambig. ib. 
 
 epyd^opai 226/' ; epydfeadai v.r. -#e 428/' 
 
 Zpxop.a.1. : aor. and perf. 326, 457 ; aor. 
 andpres. 490; hist. pies. 482; r\pxovro 
 465 ; rjXdav 472 b ; y\\Qev and ij'tfeXop 
 342 (/, 346, 717 c; epxip-evos and 6 
 epxbp-evos 940*, 277, 553 r/; 6 dirlaw 
 Plov epxipevos 507 ; epxbpevov (neut. 
 or masc.) ets tov KdcrpLov ambig. 277, 
 
 508; ews Zpxop.cu 089; £pxerai...Kal 
 eXi)Xvdev 604a, 625 *•; lpxerai...Kal 
 vvv iariv 799 (i) ; s. also els 310-11 
 
 epwrdw 498, 630 ; i. , aire'op.ai, and cuYew 
 630 f-/i ; e. and eVepcordu; 577 ; e. in 
 Alexandrian Gk 630 0"; (?) epwra virep 
 rj^uv in Christian tombstone 630 i 
 
 eraipoi in Aquila^^iXoDyres in LXX 
 584 c 
 
 erepos: erepos and dXXos 675-7; ttoXXcl... 
 Kal erepa 335 a 
 
 'in : '£. uiKpbv 230 (i) ; i. Terpap-r/vos iariv 
 230 (ii) foil. 
 
 i-Tos : ^reaiv, dat. pi. of duration, when 
 used 021 
 
 evdtws, evdu, and evdvs 910-15* 
 
 evpiaKui : hist. pres. 482 ; evpwv om. in 
 xii. 14 756 
 
 evxapi<TTt'w 614 c 
 
 i<pdXXopai 315 
 
 fxu • ^X« s T ' .' 235 /' foil. 
 
 ews (conj.) 089 ; (?) ws for ews 201, 696 ; 
 e'ws tpxop.a.i 089 
 
 Zdw : w. did and accus. of pers. 297, 
 
 705 ; w. irpbs and accus. of pers. 366 ; 
 
 col fa), iJToi. did ffi 297 € 
 fijr^w 375 a, 398; w. infin. 575, 727; 
 
 first use of in LXX 649 b ; forms of 
 
 748 
 j"??T?7<m 349, 350 a 
 fa*?? : ets i'uriv aiwviov 312-6 
 
 "H 090-1; after negative (ov...ko,L and 
 ov. ..7)) 549a, 759; omitted 628a 
 
 t] rod 'A. ? the [wife, or, daughter] of A. 
 217 
 
 iip-eis : perh. applied to Christ 428 /> ; 
 how used in 1 Jn 399 c; ?;. 7rd^res 
 287; rip.£>v and vnuv in v.r. 428 c 
 
 7}pepa : rpirr] rjpepa, did rpiwv Tjpepuiv, iv 
 rpialv rip.ipais etc. 331 ; KaO' ijpepav, 
 inserted by Lk. 515; iv ins. and om. 
 before 715 b-d 
 
 ■qirep 092, 685 
 
 'Epdi5r]s 737 a 
 
 0, e, O and c interchanged in I! 650 2 
 OdXaacra : eiri ttjv 0., (tti rfjs 6., and 
 
 7rapd ttjv 6. 340-6, 354, and see 
 
 specially 341 and 344 
 ddvaros : w. yevopiai, Oewpew, and ideiv 
 
 576 
 ddo-ffov 918 a * 
 dedopai : twice applied to Christ 617 a : 
 
 Te8edp.e6a 473; Te6£ap.ai...i<p' 5v b\v 
 
 idrjS...€ibpaKa 572 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before 
 
 numbers with 
 e.g. [1]999* ; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 supply 1, 
 
 68l 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 OeXtjpa dvSpos and 6. vapKos 269 ; 8. t. 
 
 deov parall. to Xoyos r. 8eov 799 (iii) 
 d^Xui: ijtfeXev of unfulfilled desire 716-7 ; 
 
 (?) ijdeXev, t)de\ov and rjXdev 342 d, 
 
 346, 716-7 ; -rjdeXev and ^diX-qaev 
 
 471-2, 716-7 ; w. accus. and infin. 
 
 495 ; edeXe s 717 6 
 deos : the distinction between deos and 
 
 6 deos 594 a; irapa 6e(p 027, 355; 
 
 6 UP -rrapd [roO] deov 358 ; eldos 0eov 
 
 765 a 
 deupew 210-12, 318, 576, 739 b ; deupdre 
 
 ambig. 439 (ii) 
 0vy&TTip : (?) ellipsis of 6. in the phrase 
 
 7) tov 'A. 217 
 
 I : sometimes written ei, and ei written 
 I 659 c, comp. 428 c, 515 (i)e, 650 a, 
 654/', 798 e 
 
 ideiv, iduv etc., s. elSoi' 
 
 ibiav : k<xt iBiav 348 
 
 ISios : tov d8eX<pov tov i'diov 985-6 * ; eK 
 tu>v idiwv 378, 728 ; oi i'Sioi 570 a-b 
 
 l8ov 246 
 
 'lepoaoXvpa w. article 670 
 
 'lijaovs : with and without article 968* ; 
 in B written IC, liable to confusion 
 661 c ; Irjcrovv (Jn) and Kvpiov (kn) 
 confused 662/'; avrois [6] 'lyjaovs, 
 why a doubtful reading 656 c 
 
 ip.dTi.ov : sing, and pi. 270 ; in ellipsis 
 216 b 
 
 'iva : freq. in Jn 686 ; expresses or 
 implies purpose 093-6 ; special 
 passages 097 — 103 ; 'iva and subjunct. 
 compared w. infin. 104, 495 ; 'iva w. 
 indie. 114, 690 ; w. aor. and pres. 
 subjunct. 511, 524 30 ; omission of 
 principal vb before 'iva 105-12 ; de- 
 pendent on vb implied in question 
 113; its connexion 115; 'iva. ..'iva 
 116 21 ; dXX' 'iva 063 4, 105 12 ; 
 rjyaXXtdaaro 'iva idr/ 097, 100, 688 9 ; 
 iva tl ; not used in Jn 231 c ; oitois... 
 'iva 697; iva eiSys "to tell you the 
 plain truth" 729a ; tpx^Tai uipa.. iva 
 799 (i) 
 \ov5aios : oi'lovoaioi 941 * foil. ; noXXoi 
 iK tuiv 'I. 941 2*; (is tt\v 'lovdaiav 
 yrjv 670/' 
 
 'i<JTt)p.i : <-o-tt\ eh (v.r. e'iri) 307 a ; o-Trjvat. 
 eh to piaov 710; eaTuiTa, ofGod 307 d 
 
 i<rxi'poTep6s p.ov in Synoptists 667, 799 a 
 
 IX0YC 703 
 
 'lwdvys with and without article 968 c* 
 
 '\uiar)<p with and without article 970* 
 
 Kd>t6 : in crasis 150 ; after Kadois 123-7 
 
 Kadapos in Jn. and Kaddpios in Epictet. 
 connected with 6 Xoyos 799 (iii) 
 
 Kd6r]p.ai : forms of 751 ; Kadrfptvov eh 
 707 
 
 Kadifa : trans, and intrans. use 537 
 (i)-(ii) ; iicddio-ev eh 707 ; eKadiaev 
 v.r. iireKadicev 756a; to 'ovov (sn) 
 Kadiaai 756 a 
 
 Katfilis : suspensive 122, followed by 
 Kayw or Kai in apodosis 123-7 ; 
 supplementary 128-32 ; 'iva...KadCcs... 
 'iva 117 8 
 
 Kai : in narrative (Hebraic) 133-4; 
 connecting affirmation and negation 
 135; meaning "and yet," "but," 
 136-45. 265 (i) b, 439 (iii) ; parall. to 
 pivroi. 137 ; exclamatory 146 ; mean- 
 ing "[indeed] and" 157; meaning 
 "also" 147, 152-6; in apodosis 
 123-7, 148; in crasis 150; omitted 
 between two adjectives 168; Kai 
 vpeh 149 ; Kayw 123-7 ; K&Keivos 151, 
 383 ; xav 160 ; Kai yap 167 (comp. 
 692) ; Kai edv 158-9 ; Kai vvv, varies 
 in meaning 915 (iii) ; Kai...5e 076; 
 Kai. ..Kai 161-6; ou...Kai instead of 
 ov...dXXd 598; tt\v apxw 6tl Kai 
 XaXw vpiv 154-6 ; written K€ and 
 confused with K6 i.e. Kvpie 657 d ; 
 . oil. ..Kai and ov...fi 549 e, 759 ; Kai and 
 V interchanged 759 a foil. 
 
 Katvos : evToXr/v Katvqv 894 />* ; ivToXrjv 
 Kaivr)v ...o 412 
 
 Kaidpevos 275 b 
 
 KaKeivos 151, 383 
 
 KaXeuj and Xeyw 468 /< ; KaXeu foil, by 
 accus. and voc. 680 /' 
 
 KaXus Troir/aeis 729 a 
 
 Kav 160 
 
 Kara 348; eh Kad' eh 348; KaT idiav 
 348 ; *ard 8e eopr-qv 464 c 
 
 KaTayvvpi : 'iva KaTeayQiaLV avT&v rd 
 o-KiXr) 267, 419 
 
 KardOeais : inscr. on Christian tomb- 
 stone 630 i 
 
 KaTaXap./idvo> 596 
 
 KaTevdi'vcj 033 b 
 
 KeSpuv : how accented 671-4 
 
 KXdhos 047 
 
 KXdtrp.aTa 329 (i) 
 
 kXIvui Ke<paXr]v 644 (i), 713 
 
 Koipdopai : double meaning of 586 c' 
 
 k6kkos : w. article 948 * 
 
 k6Xttos : 6 u'v eh t6v k. tov waTpos 308. 
 706 foil. 
 
 V'/iis liu/ex extends from 1886 to 2799. Before /lumbers with 
 e.g. [1|999* : before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 682 
 
 supply 1, 
 
WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 KOfxi^ofiai 230 (i)a 
 
 k6tttui : Kd\povrat 317 £ foil., v.r. 6\povrai. 
 317,/ 
 
 Kopivdos : ttXovs ei's K. 1 263 
 
 Kocpivos 329 (i) 
 
 Koa/nos 508,' ; 6 K. ovtos and ovtos 6 k, 
 553 c ; in connexion with x w P e "' 
 414 /> ; epxbp.evov eh tov k. 508 
 
 KpdfiaTTOs 206 <^ 
 
 Kpafa : thrice applied to Christ 618 ; 
 Keicpaye 479 
 
 Kpaviov Tdirov 8 Xe~yerai. . .YoXyodd 738 
 
 Kpariio : how used in the Gospels 
 517,7 foil. ; av tivuv KpariJTe 517-20 
 
 Kpip.a. or Kpiais 799 f 
 
 Kpifw : KexpiKa, how used 473 ; KenpLrat. 
 695 ; Kpivei, unaccented, fut. or pres. 
 960 a* 
 
 Kpinrrw : the meaning of eKpv(3r] as 
 applied to Jesus 538-43, 724 
 
 Krifa : eKTiadij and eKTiarai 440 ; forms 
 of 747 
 
 Kvpios : 6 Kvpios fiov 049, 679 foil. ; vapd 
 Kvpiov 356; nvpte 680 foil., ins. or 
 om. 565 a ; written Re and con- 
 fusable w. Kai (k€; 657,/; Ktjpiov (kn) 
 confused w. 'l-qcrovv (in) 662/' ; used 
 by Epict. in a bad sense 799 d 
 
 Kiliixt) 746 a 
 
 ActXewand XaXid 251; XaX^co w. en and 
 airb 293 /', 586 a ; eV tQv iblwv XdXel 
 728 ; ravTa XeXd\r)Ka iifj.lv, seven 
 times repeated 625 
 
 Xap.j3dvoj : gXa/Sov and irapeXafiov 570 ; 
 Xr)p.\(/eTai and Xap.(3dvei 488, 583 
 
 Xaoi (pi.) "peoples," used of the Jews 
 317// 
 
 Xe-yu; : imperf. 467-70 ; ZXeyev and 
 eiTrev 469; Xdyu and KaXe'w 468 /s 
 crv Xeyeis and y^ets Xeyere 234 /», 
 245 ; orai' Xeywcnv 531 ; Xe'Yoj om. 
 after eyu 658/', 660 
 
 Xtflos 396-7 
 
 \6yos : distinct from XaXid 251 ; 6 X6709 
 r\v foil, by eyevero iLvdpum-os 277 ; 
 6 Xbyos in Christ's words (1) in the 
 Synoptists and (2) in Jn 799 (iii) 
 (1) and (2); 6 Xoyos fiov, t. deov, 6 
 <r6s etc. in Jn 799 (iii) 2 ; Xdyoi (pi.), 
 in Christ's words, only once in (n 
 580 
 
 Xoiiu) : w. eh 305 a 
 
 Xvxvos : w. article 948/'*; 6 X. 6 
 Kcuofievos 275 /' 
 
 Matf?/T7;s 545 <" 
 
 fMaKapios : paKapioi ecrre orav 499 /' 
 fxdXXov 733,;, w. 17 and w. i77re/) 092 
 j\[dp0a : ras 7rept Mdp#af, v.r. for 
 
 Udpdav 990*, 360 
 Mapi'a and Napidp. 586/' 
 IxapTvptw. perf. 473 ; fxaprvpels aavTtp 
 
 514(i)t'; (LXXos...b jxaprvpixiv 730 
 paprvpia 383 
 
 fxdxaipa : fJ 7 fJ.axo.ipri 332 ,? 
 ^ 169-70; p.ev...bi 077, in Mt.-I.k., 
 
 where not in Mk-Jn 998* ; /xev ends 
 
 Thucyd. iii. 116 foil, by 5e ib. iv. 1 
 
 638 ; pev ovv 335 a 
 fxivroi 170, parall. w. ml 137 
 ixivu 263 «>-/, 312, 313 a ; aor. and 
 
 imperf. 458 ; tp.et.va 458 ; /xevere 
 
 ambig. 915 (iii) * b\ fxevere and p-eivare 
 
 437 a-, - ; fxevei and /xei/el 762 a; eav 
 
 p.r) p.evr)re and f'dv fxeivrjre 523 ; yu. 
 
 /x€Tix 352 
 pierd : w. accus. 349 ; w. gen. 349-53 ; 
 
 p.. tovto and ,«. ravra 349 a, 394 ; 
 
 ,u. 'lovSaiov 349-50 ; oi p.. avrov 
 
 ovres 351 ; p.ivw p. 352 ; p.erd tlvos 
 
 compared w. Trapdrivi 352-3, and <ruv 
 
 run 799 (ii) 
 pLecrovvKTiov 678 
 peo~os : o~Tr}vaL els to peaov and cnr]vai ev 
 
 p.toip 710 
 p.eravoew : pres. and aor. subjunct. 
 
 521 2 
 pera^v 668 
 peTprirr)s 281-3 
 p.erpov, p-erpy, ev pLerpq), ix p.irpov 324, 
 
 714 
 p.rj (interrog.) 235 ; p.i) ti or p.-qri 701-2 
 p.7) (neg. ): encroaches on oi 253-4; 
 
 implies imperat. 208-9 ; w. particip. 
 
 499/'; w. 7ras 260 foil. ; 0V1 p.r] 187, 
 
 695 ; oi' p.r) 255 
 p.iKp6v : efri puKpov 230 (i) foil. 
 p.icrew : aor. and perf. 443, 475 
 fii<T06s 287 /' 
 
 pLOvoyevii? 938*, 964*, 308 
 piovov (adv.) 664 b 
 p.6vo$ : applied to God 895*, 664, comp. 
 
 168 ; p.6vovs inserted paraphrastically 
 
 1 Lucian Hermotim. § 27 foil. (i. 767) takes Corinth as the ideal city to which 
 all the seekers of truth are journeying. 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 683 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR'" 
 
 762 b ; avros uovos and fiovos aiiros 
 375, 724-6 
 
 N dropped or inserted, 6K6TH confused 
 
 w. 6K6IH 687 d 
 'Safape'r : rbv Atto N. 289 
 vvv and dpn 915 (i)-(vi) *, 246 ; Kai vvv 
 
 varies in meaning 915 (iii) * ; k<xi rd 
 
 vvv 915 (i)f* 
 
 O, e, 9, and c interchanged in B 650-2 
 O and to interchanged in MSS. 928 a*, 
 114, 691 
 
 6 and 6v, v.r. 925 * foil. 
 
 6, y, to : see Index II " Article" 
 
 6 &V 684 
 
 olda : oida and yivuaKu 491, 757 d, 763 ; 
 o'i5ap.ev "we know" (?) olda. p.4v 
 429-35; Kai eKelvos older 381b. 731: 
 edv o'idafiev 515 (i) ; 'iva eiSys "to tell 
 you the plain truth" 729a ; eidy and 
 idy confused 515 (i)e, 798 e 
 
 oiKia, oIkos : Mark's use of eh oIkov or 
 els tt)v oULav 711 a 
 
 6'Aos and 6'x^os 753 e 
 
 ovop.a : ev ru 6. aov y SeduKas /not 408 
 (conip. 740-4) ; toyn[om&], con- 
 fusable w. TOyN "the Son" 768-9 
 
 Sirov 171-2 ; Sirov eip.i (v.r. elfii), oirov 
 virdyu, and Sirov eyu ii7ra*yw 190 a, 
 487 a, 578 
 
 07rws 173 ; Situs dv 693 
 
 opdu : perf. 475, eopaKev and eupaKev 
 651; Tede , a/j.ai...idrjs...eupaKa 572; 
 eupaKare and yivuffKere 491 ; oipovrai 
 tis 317 ; o\povrai v.r. for KO\j/ovrai 
 317 a 7 ; Spare, after pause, mostly 
 imperat. or interrog., see n. on 
 p. 678. 
 
 6p0oypa<pia 790 
 
 bpdorepov : meaning of 775 i 
 
 opijoj : forms of 748 
 
 opos : w. article 962 3* 
 
 6s (demonstr.): 6s Si 380 b 
 
 Si (rel.) : in attraction 405 7; ev ru 
 dvo/xarl aov u SiouKas pot 408 11 ; 
 evroXyv Kaivyv.. .0 412 ; Kpaviov Toirov 
 S Xiyercu... 738; 5i' S, Si ov, v<p' oD 
 etc. 294 5 ; Ss dv and 6s idv 739 ; 
 v.r. oiis, S, u 740 foil., 744, 
 
 Sffos : Sera idv 660 b 
 
 Saris 413 ; 6,Ti dv (or idv) 414, 516 ; 
 
 ariva idv ypdtpyrai 414-6 ; Saris dv 
 739 
 
 Srav : parall. to y dv upa 533a ; \v. aor. 
 and pres. subjunct. 511, 531-5 ; orav 
 Xiyuaiv " in the moment when they 
 are saying" 531, in Epict. " when, at 
 any moment" 532a" 
 
 ore 799 (i) 
 
 on : (1) suspensive and (2) explanatory 
 174-7 ; suspensive, a characteristic of 
 Jn and Rev. 176, 236 ; in LXX 
 390 a; (?) "that" or "because" 
 181-6, 219; introducing (1) cause of 
 action or (2) ground of statement 
 178-80; recitativum 189-90; not 
 used interrogatively in Jn 231 c ; on 
 after vbs. of seeing 762 a ; on v. r. ri 
 on etc. in LXX 231 d foil. ; on p.y 
 187, 695 ; oi>x on 188, 218-9 ; eldov 
 on yv 466 (i); ryv dpxyv on Kai XaXu 
 vp.lv 154-6; on = uare 694; ovrus... 
 on 697 ; ri on and ri ianv on, for 
 ri yiyovev on 694; on... Kai on 757/' 
 
 ov(k) (interrog.) 231; ovkovv 233-4; ov 
 ixy 232 ; ovxi 231 (and see oi>xi below) 
 
 ov(k) (neg.) : encroached on by p-y 253 ; 
 v. r. for oSiru 264-5 ; ov and ovk£ti 
 583; oil py w. fut. and subjunct. 255; 
 ei ov 256 ; 01'.. ./jlovov 147$ ; oii...ov5eis 
 257; ov...ovKin 257a; ov combined 
 w. 7ras 260-3 ; ov followed by Kai 
 instead of aXXd 598; ov(K)...d\Xd 
 593 ; Xenophon uses oi>K, aXXd, but 
 Epictetus oil, d\Xd 265 (i) c ; ovxi 
 265 ( i ) ; ov = a- privative 143, 248, 253 a, 
 
 256 : ov yap. not interrog. in Jn 683 ; 
 o...oiiK uv 704; oil... Kai and oi>...y 
 549a, 759; ov...ris and oilSels 5S6d,e; 
 ov confused w. av 797 e 
 
 oi'de: v. r. forovre 258; introducing paren- 
 thesis 633/' ; ovSe ev or ovdev 660 
 
 oi'de is : Kai oi'deis 139; oi'...oi'5eis 257: 
 ov...ns and oi'»5ets 586a 1 , e ; ovdev, 
 emphasised by position 605 a; ot>5ee 
 or ovSe ev 660 
 
 ovKe'ri: repeated as ov 583; ov...ovKe'n 
 
 257 a 
 ovkovv 233 4 
 oil /xy 232, 255 
 ov p-Qvov 147 /< 
 
 ovv : in Christ's words 191 7; in narra- 
 tive of Christ's acts 198—200 ; after 
 parenthesis 631 foil. ; in LXX 640: 
 
 1 Add Epict. i. 24. 20 orav aoi <paivyrat....dTraWdaaov. 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999* ; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 i.S.| 
 
WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 in Papyri 640 e ; "pause spaces'' 
 before ovv in B 663 ; v. r. t6tc 637 a 
 ovttu) : v.r. oi' 264 5 
 
 ovpavbs : with and without article 952 8 * 
 
 otire...Kal 258-9; ovTe...dXXd (in Pap.) 
 683 a, b 
 
 ovtos 386-97 ; how emphasized 553 c ; 
 oi'ros eariv etc., used in testimony 
 957/-*; avrrj -'this [thing]" 396, 
 621-2 ; 5id tovto 387-91 ; ev tovtoj \ 
 332. 392-3 ; cttI tovto and eVi rovrifi 
 338 ; fxeTa tovto anil fierd Tavra 349 a, 
 394 ; raiira thrice repeated 396, 621, 
 tolvttjv inoiriatu dpxv v T ^ v arj/xeiwv 
 386 (i) 
 
 ovtws " unpremeditatedly "' 916-7*; 
 oSrus...uffTe 917r7*, 203, 697 ; ovtws 
 ...iva or oti or (is 697 
 
 ovx otl 188, 218 
 
 oi)x' : interrog. 231 a ; dXX' ovx'i vdvTes 
 265 (i) 
 
 6'xXos 417 ; 6 6'xXos woXvs 153 a ; 6'xXos 
 and 6Xos 753 1 - 
 
 6\fdpiov 235 d, 703 
 
 6\po/j.ai s. opdai 
 
 IIcud'dpto»'...6's 412/3 
 
 7rat5ioi' 701-3 
 
 7rais, iraiSLov, and SoDXos 584 /> 
 
 ird\ai dv (?) confused w. wdXiv 698 a 
 
 7rdXt^ : double meaning of 635 (i), 649 
 (i)-(iii), 711 a ; ? confused w. 7rd\cu 
 av 698 a 
 
 TravTeXeios : an epithet of the number 
 "ten " 283 e 
 
 wapd : w. accus. 354 ; w. dat. 352-3, 
 355, 363 ; w. gen. 356 ; w. gen. and 
 dat. interchanged 357-9 ; 7rapd tt)v 
 dd\ao-aav 341, 344, 354; 7rapd deuj 027; 
 ■jrapd to} deu} 355 ; napd tu3 waTpi and 
 7rapd tov iraTpos 357; 6 uv Trapa [tov] 
 Oeov 358 ; ov Old tov Oeov aX\d Trap' 
 (xvtov 296a; Trapa, drrd, and e/c w. 
 e£epxo,ucu 326-8 
 
 Trapaoiduifxi : Trapadoi 252 ; 6 wapadidovs 
 510 
 
 Tra.pdi<\r)Tos 630 //, 791-7 
 
 ■wapaXafijidvu : in Epict. 570 b ; irape- 
 Xa{3ov and ZXa(3ov 570 
 
 TrapaaKevq : it. tov Trdax a 0^8 ; eVei i^/ 
 7T. 087 a 
 
 Trdpeip.i 225 a 
 
 Tra.pepxofx.at. 342 </ 
 
 irapp-qala 917 (i)-(vi)*, 727; connected 
 w. Epict. 917 (v)*, 798/ 
 
 7rds : combined w. oi> or //tj 260-3 ; ira? 
 
 6 Sedwuev (dYoWas) etc. 921-2*, 422, 
 740-4; irepnravTwv, for TrepnraTwv 
 651 ; oi...irav Hebraic 759 <• 
 
 Trdo-xa : napaaKevi} tov it. 048 ; to irdcrxa 
 r; eopT?/ 654 a' 
 
 ■KaTijp : used vocatively, ndrep, Trarrjp, 
 and 6 vaT7]p, 052-3, 661 a, 679, v. r. 
 in B 659 /' ; Trapa tw vaTpL, Trapa tov 
 iraTp6s, and wapd tov 6tov 355 9 ; oi 
 TraTdpes 949 50*, 553 e ; oi 7r. and oi 
 7r. u/wup 957* 
 
 irarpidpxai 949 a* 
 
 Traxvvui 449 a 
 
 TreixTTw : twefxipa, in letters 691 < 
 
 wepa for rrepav 656 a 
 
 7repi 360, 370; rds it. Mdpdav 990*; 7r. 
 and vrrep 718, 719 b 
 
 ■jrepnraTeu) 342a foil., diff. from jSaSLfa 
 342/', =" teach "' 342 e ; TreptwaTuv 
 corrupted to TrepnravTwv 651 
 
 Tref.ippriyvviii, : active and middle, \v. 
 iixaTia 270 b, 563 C 
 
 TTTiyr) 316 /> 
 
 7T7;Xi/cos : Trr/XiKOiS ypdfJ.p.ao-iv Zypaipa 
 691 a ,-, 785 90 
 
 7ridj"u; : tirlaaav ovdev and oi'dtva £ireio~av 
 703 < 
 
 IliXdros : with and without article 969* 
 
 TwrpdffKU), forms of 750 
 
 iriffTevw: w. dat., els, ev, see /<?//• ^^*. 
 Index III and esp. 1470; irio-Teve and 
 TrioTevoov 439 /' ; TuoTeveTe ambig. 
 237-40 ; perf. 442, 474 ; tovs ireTno-- 
 TevKOTas avTip 506 ; ovk ewio'Tevoi' 
 466 ; oi Tno-TevovTes, meaning of 500 ; 
 aor. and pres. subjunct. 525 foil. ; 
 iri.aTevo-ujfj.tv v. r. -tvojp.ev 528; pres. 
 subjunct. altered by U into aor. 
 subjunct. 530 a; tt. did tivos 304 a 
 
 ttLcttis s. /oh. Voc. Index III 
 
 ttlcttos 304 a 
 
 tt\t)v : v. r. for 7rpo Trpoawnov 361 a 
 
 TrXrjpou : w. e* 329 
 
 TrXrjoiov " near " 368 a 
 
 ttXoIov : eopdaufitv to tt. 346 i 
 
 TTvev/xa : to 7t. eo"Tt to j"coo7roiof'^ 975 7* 
 
 ■n-bdev. tt. el av; 403, 733-7; 7ro0ee, a 
 corruption of 7ro#t 759 
 
 TToiew : w. and epyd^'o/xai. 226 /' ; tt. and 
 irpdaauj 584 a ; eTroiof^ 463-4 ; 7ro£etTe 
 ambig. 194 c, 359 ; tL iroi.ovfj.ev ; t'i 
 iroiwfxtv ; and t'i Troirjawfxev ; 493, 
 512, 766 (i) ; KaXQs Troi-qaeis 729 a; 
 TjKovaav 6'ti eTroirfaev 459 
 
 7roXi'$ : woXXoi sometimes ambig. 941* ; 
 ttoXXoI tQv, not in Jn 041; 7roXXoi... 
 tK tuiv 'lovdaiuv 941* foil. ; vdara 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with 
 e.g. [1J999* ; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 supply 1, 
 
 68 5 
 
INDICES TO "JOHANNINE GRAMMAR" 
 
 
 7roXXd 270 (' ; d\\a iroWd, iroWd... 
 Kai 'irepa and iro\\a...Kal d\\a 335 a 
 
 irovqpbs : <Tu>fto, rrjpeio etc. €K tov irovrjpov 
 (ambig.) 325 
 
 iropevo/j.ai and virdydi 082 '; ir. substi- 
 tuted for avafialvw 489 a 
 
 wbcros : Trocra v. r. o<ra and rocra 737 b 
 
 irori 351 /> 
 
 irbrepov 250 
 
 ■Kpaaaw ami ttoUu 584 At 
 
 7rp6 : 7T/30 e/nou 361-2 ; 7rpo irpocribirov 
 330, v. r. 7r\77)/ 361 a ; vpo ££ i]fxepu>v 
 toO 7ra(rxa 288 ; 7rp6 corr. to Trp6s 
 651, 655 
 
 irpopaTa (pi.) : collective and non- 
 collective 420 
 
 irpoftaTiK-q 216 
 
 7rpos : w. accus., w. vb of rest 363-6, 
 w. vbs of speaking 366 b-c, repeated 
 after vb of motion 367 ; w. dat. 368 ; 
 dvai irpbs nva 363 a; r\v irpbs tov 
 dtbv, contrasted w. direaTaXfj-ivos napa 
 deov 277; tl irpbs al; 229; irpbs a 
 corruption of irpb 651, 655 
 
 irpoodfijiaTOV 048 
 
 irpoaeuxofiai. 630 h ; irpoaevxeffde Kai 
 alrelcrde 636a 
 
 irpoaKwioj: w. accus. and w. dat. 019 
 
 irpo<j(p6.yi.ov 235 </, 701-3 
 
 wpbixwirov : irpb ir. 330, v. r. ttAtji' 361a 
 
 irpo<priTi]s: with and without article 
 940*, 965*; ■wpo<pr\ry)% for 6 irpocpTjTijs 
 (?) 492a; 5id rofi tt. 301 
 
 irpwi for irpwrov 901 £ * 
 
 TTpUJTOV, S. 7TpUJTOS 
 
 irpuiTos followed by genitive 896* foil., 
 665-7; irpuirov v/jluiv ambig. 901*; 
 irpuiTos or TrpdiTicrros Hebraized 666 
 
 irpijjTOTOKos 897 * 
 
 7^X77 216a 
 
 irvvOdvop.ai : aor. and imperf. 465 c-d 
 
 wwpbui: v. r. wr]pbw 449 a; aor. and 
 perf. 449 a-b 
 
 'Pa/3/3ei 680 
 
 pafibos : iv pdjidip eXOdv 332 a 
 
 C, e, 8 and o interchanged in B 650-2 
 
 udlijiaTov : crafifiaTu} and iv o-ajijBdTLp 715 c 
 
 trap!; : diX-q/xa crapKbs 269 ; t<xs <xdp/cas 
 
 dwoXXvovffiv oi (TTavpwlUvTes 211 c 
 
 ai)p.uov 386 b ; d-pxv T ^ v o~np-duv 386 (i ) 
 
 crKavbaXifa : variations of 6s av <tkclv- 
 SaXlffT] 513 A 
 
 crKeXos : i'ca Kareayuiaiu avTuiv rd (TKiXrj 
 419 
 
 CTavpboj : v\f/rjXbs 6 ffravpudds Kai 
 iroXXovs TpicpeL... ids ffdpKas a7ro\- 
 Xvovctlv oi ffravpuidevTes 211 <" 
 
 ctttjkw : <TTriK€Tf w. edi> and orai* 515 (i) 
 
 crri/3ri5as : v.r. crroi/3d5as 047 
 
 ol5 400 a. 402-4 ; <ri) Xe7«s 234 /; ; 7r6^ev 
 el o-v 733-7 ; cru with vocat. and 
 imperat. 734 e ; (rou and p-oi; confused 
 768; (tov unemph. 776 foil.; crv con- 
 fused w. ov 797 c 
 
 avfupepov : how used by Epict. 228 a 
 
 avv 799 (ii) 
 
 ffwuobs 798 c 
 
 crvv^rjTiw 349 
 
 o-vvf}deLa 464/; 
 
 crtoj'ui : w. e« 325 
 
 Tapdcnrco : applied to Christ 614 c 
 
 rdxeioi' " more quickly " : not the same 
 as rax<?us 918*, 439 (v) a, 554 c-e 
 
 raxf^s, Tayy, iv tclxo- 551 b-d 
 
 t€ : how used in Jn 929* 
 
 T^Xeios : applied to numbers 283 i 
 
 TiXos "eminence" 320a; et's r. 319-23 
 
 TtTpap.rjvos : frt r. e'crrtv 230 (ii) foil. 
 
 Ti)pi(i) : w. e\- 325 ; pres. and aor. sub- 
 junct. 515 ; iT7]povv...Kai e<pv\a^a 584 
 
 tI, s. TtS 
 
 Tij3epids 045 
 
 TlOrjfjii : late aor. of 690 
 
 •m : omitted 379 b ; rtvi supplied w. 
 i^eoTiv 379a ; ellipsis of tWs 213 foil.; 
 idv m 580 ; idv separated from tis 
 552c; ov...Tt.s and ovdeis 586a 1 , e 
 
 tls: t'l; (direct interrogative) t'l; 5td t'l; 
 iva tL ; 231 b-e ; t^ ; t'l otl ; and 8tl, in 
 v.r. 231 a" ; t'l otl ; tI 'icTLv otl; and t'l 
 ytyovev otl ; 694 ; t'l \a\e?s ; ambig. 
 231 b : t'l (lttu ; prob. = " what should 
 I say?" 512 /»,<•; t'l iroLov/xev ; t'l 
 iroL&p.ev ; tl iroLijcrio/jLev ; distinction 
 between 493, 512, 766 (i) ; t'l (/jlo'l Kai 
 aoi ; 229 30 ; ovtos 8e tl ; 209, 386 c ; 
 t'l irpbs at ; 229 ; Tiva r)v a c\d\(L 251 ; 
 ti's €cttlv 6 irapabucwv 251a ; tL 5okus; 
 in Epict. 766 (i)« 
 
 1 Add Epict. iii. 44. 44 — 7 flAets /j.€...iropevecrt)aL ;...5id tL p.r) diriXOrjs ; .. rl ovv 
 £ti iropfvopiai ; 'iva dirtXtfys. 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999* .• before others, 2, e.g. [2J000. 
 
 686 
 
WORDS (GREEK) 
 
 toiovtos 398; Toiavrr] "such a thing" 
 
 396 /> 
 T07ros : ? ellipsis of Tdirqi 675 
 TocrovTOi v.r. 745 
 r6re : v.r. for ovv 637 a 
 rpeis 281-3, s. " Three" and " Threefold " 
 Tpe<pw : 6 cravpudeh iroWovs rpe'cpet. 211 <', 
 
 642/' 
 
 'Tdpia 281 a 
 
 vditjp: v5ara woWd 270 c; e7ri id v. 342 d 
 
 vlbs: ? interchanged w. 7rcus 584 b ; v.r. 
 €k\€kt6s 386 a; ToyN i.e. tov vl6v, 
 confusable w. ToyN in rovvopia 768-9 
 
 iifieis : Jn's use 399 ; Kai vfieis 149 ; (?) dt' 
 vfj.as 428r; vp.Qv, unemph. 559a; v/meis 
 in LXX before ambig. forms in -ere 
 243 a ; vp.- and tj/j.- confused 428 c 
 
 vfjL^repos : rare and emphatic 988* 
 
 VTr&yui 486 ; distinct from Tropevop.ai 082 ; 
 bwov v. (and bwov eyu> v.) and bwov 
 ei/xi (v.r. elfiL) 487 a, 578; vwTJyou 464 
 
 i>7r<?/) 369-71 ; vwep ov 927 <6*, 360 ; vwip 
 twos masc. and neut. 718-22 ; vwip 
 and wepi 719 a-c 
 
 i'7re/3a7a7rdoj 323 b 
 
 vw6 : w. accus. 372 ; w. gen. 373 ; v. and 
 vwoKdroi 372 
 
 vwotcdrw 372 
 
 iVo/ueVw 322 /' ; 6 vwofieivas 499 
 
 v\j/-r}\6s : applied to 6 crravpudeis 211 c 
 
 i'^6w : applied to Christ 614 b 
 
 Qavepou : thrice applied 
 
 Resurrection 619 
 (pepu) : "bear fruit" 120 £ 
 
 to Christ's 
 
 <pr)lxL rare in Tn, freq. in Acts 1 
 
 (pi\tw 328, "584 c; perf. 442, 476-7; 
 
 Origen's distinction between <p. and 
 
 dyawdoj 584 c 
 (poivi^ : rd fiata rQv (poivlKoiv 047 
 (pv\daau> : err]povv...Kal i(pv\a£a 584 
 <pv\r) : ai </>uAai rrjs yijs 317 e-f 
 <pWTi£o} 532 c 
 
 Xdpis : Philo on 285 b ; Epictetus on 743 a 
 xeip : in var. phrases w. eh and iv 334 c ; 
 
 X«p<x or x € ip a s w - /3dXXa> and ^tti- 
 
 /SdXXco 575 
 Xopros 632 (J 
 Xpoy/fw : forms of 752 
 Xwpa : ^ 'lovdaia x- 670 A 
 Xwp^co 414^ foil. 
 
 tyfjcpos : 5Ldu>/j.L \(/r)<pov 409 a 
 
 fl and o interchanged 114, 691 
 
 d>5u/es 197 
 
 oipa : combined with tpxerac and e\y]\vdev 
 604a, 625c - ; ttji* w. ravr-qv "about 
 this time " 013 ; (iv) eKelvri rj) cU- 025 ; 
 di. e(356p.7]v 013, 206; 77 a? d>. parall. to 
 Stop 533 a ; u. 'iva and d>. ore 799 (i), s. 
 also 770 
 
 cis: (?) for ?ws 089, 201, 696; "as it were" 
 202; d>s 5<? "so when" 069; d>s b\v 
 696a ; oi!rws...d)?, for ovruis dicrre 697 
 
 uxxwep 066 <$ 
 
 wVre 203, 694 c; oiirws d>. 917 a*, 697; 
 in Egypt. Pap. 697 c 
 
 <h<pt\eia. : how used by Epict. 798-9 
 
 1 It should have been stated in 2456 a that Jn — who uses <pr)/j,l only in i. 23, 
 ix. 38, xviii. 29— never applies it (as the Synoptists do) to Christ. Mt. and Lk. 
 agree (agst Mk) in applying it to Christ in His answer to Pilate, " Thou sayest it." 
 It is a mark of classical style. In Pentateuch, of seven instances, five are in the 
 prophecy of Balaam, Numb. xxiv. 3—15. In N.T., it occurs mostly in Acts, 
 24 times. In the Synoptists, Mt. uses it most freq. (17), Mk (6), Lk. (7). It is 
 never used by three Synoptists in common. Lk. mostly uses it in traditions 
 peculiar to himself. 
 
 This Index extends from 1886 to 2799. Before numbers with * supply 1, 
 e.g. [1]999*; before others, 2, e.g. [2]000. 
 
 687 
 
BY THE SAME AUTHOR 
 
 Uiatcssartra, 13arts f— V 
 
 A. & C. BLACK, SOHO SQUARE, LONDON 
 
 $att i 
 CLUE 
 
 A GUIDE THROUGH GREEK TO 
 HEBREW SCRIPTURE 
 
 Demy Svo. cloth. Price js. 6d. net. 
 
 " So far as we can judge, they (the arguments) are learned and 
 ingenious, though perhaps insufficient to carry the whole weight of his 
 hypothesis." — Times. 
 
 "Worked out in great detail and with unflagging interest. For 
 Dr Abbott throws life into everything he touches.. ..A contribution to 
 the ' Synoptic Problem,' claiming examination and commanding atten- 
 tion." — Expository Times. 
 
 "We have nothing but thanks to offer Dr Abbott for the patient 
 industry with which he has collected and put before us, with great 
 clearness, dozens of experiments upon which even those who are not 
 experts either in Hebrew or Greek or Biblical criticism can exercise their 
 common sense." — Guardian. 
 
 "A very ingenious and very interesting argument."— Daily News. 
 
 " Of extraordinary interest and suggestiveness." — 
 
 Manchester Guardian. 
 
 " The theory may be commended as most ingenious, and its applica- 
 tion as very interesting and full of light on many vexed readings." — 
 
 Scotsman. 
 
 " Certainly, as far at least as the Septuagint is concerned, he has 
 found a Vera Causa." — Aberdeen Free Press. 
 
 " Learned, acute, and ingenious." — British Weekly. 
 
Hart » 
 THE CORRECTIONS OF MARK 
 
 ADOPTED BY MATTHEW AND LUKE 
 
 Demy 8i>o. cloth. Price 15s. net. 
 
 "There is something very attractive in the way in which Dr Abbott 
 forces the documents to tell their secret history, not by brilliant guess- 
 work but by the use of rigid scientific method." — Manchester Guardian. 
 
 " There is a great deal of valuable information in this second instal- 
 ment of Dr Abbott's great work, whether one agrees with the main thesis 
 or not." — Guardian. 
 
 " Full of acute and learned criticism." — Pilot. 
 
 " The industry and ingenuity displayed through the work are marvel- 
 lous. In this attempt to solve the Synoptic variations Dr Abbott is as 
 ploddingly persevering as he is dazzlingly original." — Expository Times. 
 
 " One excellent feature in it is the effort to bring the whole evidence 
 within reach of an intelligent English reader." — Dundee Advertiser. 
 
 "As an exposition of the documentary theory of the origin of the 
 Gospels, Dr Abbott's work promises to hold a high place." — 
 
 Glasgow Herald. 
 
 " Deserves to be read with the utmost care." — Outlook. 
 
 " A monument of patient, scholarly labour." — Christian World. 
 
 Hart HI 
 FROM LETTER TO SPIRIT 
 
 AN ATTEMPT TO REACH 
 
 THROUGH VARYING VOICES 
 
 THE ABIDING WORD 
 
 Demy %vo. cloth. Price 10s. net. 
 
 " The candid and reverent spirit in which the book is written wins the 
 reader's sympathy... .The criticism exhibited is often acute and it is set 
 forth with an accumulation of detail which is evidence of persevering 
 
 A. vi. 44 
 
research :... For the writer's ability, labour, and candour we have great 
 respect...." — Guardian. 
 
 " The book is noteworthy as a defence on new grounds of the historical 
 tradition present in the Fourth Gospel, and the author's diligence in 
 collecting details from every quarter must be universally admired." — 
 
 AtheruEum. 
 
 "A monument of painstaking comparison and analysis The 
 
 appendices and indices teem with suggestive material He has steeped 
 
 himself in the spirit, and he has logically explained much which to other 
 critics is mere opportunity for wriggling." — Outlook. 
 
 "The notion that St John wrote not to supplement the Synoptics but 
 to substitute a spiritual for a materialistic conception of Jesus... is 
 exceedingly suggestive and worked out with much ingenuity." — 
 
 Daily News. 
 
 "A fresh illustration of the author's sound learning and keen exegetical 
 insight." — Daily Chronicle. 
 
 " Very original and suggestive." — Cambridge Review. 
 
 "To the proving of his case Dr Abbott brings all the wealth of 
 curious learning and the singular fertility of linguistic conjecture for 
 which he is so justly distinguished among Biblical critics of the day." — 
 
 Scotsman. 
 
 "There is in the book... a large amount of careful work which will be 
 found helpful to all who are seeking their way through the letter to the 
 spirit of the Gospels." — Bookman. 
 
 " Has the true scientific temper The discussion does not fail to be 
 
 stimulating and suggestive." — Literary World. 
 
 " The result at once of great learning, indomitable industry, and 
 remarkable ingenuity, this is a work that stimulates and rewards." — 
 
 Aberdeen Free Press. 
 
 "Often throughout the book the incidental matters which crop up are 
 of the greatest interest. For instance, what Dr Abbott says on the 
 probability of Christ's teaching about 'taking on oneself the yoke' 
 becoming misunderstood and perverted to 'taking up the cross' is 
 
 luminously suggestive It is a storehouse of learning, and, quite apart 
 
 from the conclusions which Dr Abbott seeks to establish, it will be valued 
 for the recondite material both from Jewish and Christian early writings 
 which it brings together and makes easily accessible." — Christian World. 
 
 " He spares no pains to bring a very ingenious discussion up to date 
 and well within the reach of those who have no knowledge of Greek or 
 1 1' brew." — Dundee Advertiser. 
 
 " The accumulation of such facts is a task of great labour, but is 
 valuable to all workers in the field of Biblical criticism, whether they 
 
 agree with Dr Abbott's view of the Synoptic problem or not The 
 
 curious facts which he has gathered about the Rabbinical beliefs con- 
 cerning 'voices from heaven' contain much that is new to us." — Pilot. 
 
"A valuable contribution to the Synoptic problem.'' — Leeds Mercury. 
 
 "The strength of his position lies in the accumulation of particulars. 
 He must be examined page by page and point by point." — 
 
 Expository Times. 
 
 " Warm thanks are due to the author for the immense labour he has 
 undertaken." — Primitive Methodist Quarterly Review. 
 
 " With thorough and penetrating scholarship, and a degree of toil 
 beyond all praise, Dr Abbott has sought out parallels to facts and 
 expressions in the Gospels for the purpose of elucidating their meaning, 
 
 and tracing them to their original sources Such a work as this, which 
 
 certainly puts to shame the sluggishness and the spiritual indifference, 
 and the miserable formality ordinarily displayed in the study of the 
 Gospels, will require prolonged and serious investigation, such as cannot 
 be given to it in a notice like the present. It materially advances our 
 comprehension of the intellectual conditions and methods of instruction 
 of Christ's age...." — Baptist Magazine. 
 
 " They are full of minute and curious learning, and help to advance 
 Dr Abbott's plea that the study of the Aramaic versions is of essential 
 importance for the interpretation of the Gospels." — Manchester Guardian. 
 
 "The book is not more remarkable for its striking hypotheses than it 
 is for its careful and systematic collection of evidence. ...Dr Abbott's recent 
 series of volumes (soon happily to be followed by another) really constitute 
 a new and enlightening commentary on some of the most important 
 passages in the New Testament. And the commentary is equally 
 
 illuminative of the Rabbinical passages quoted It is full of learning, 
 
 of originality, but above all of suggestiveness Page after page 
 
 scintillates with brilliant points Dr Abbott has clearly relied a good 
 
 deal on secondary sources, but he has so carefully verified and examined 
 his materials, he has applied to them so penetrating and sound a criticism, 
 that his book is distinguished by its accuracy in details. Dr Abbott 
 stands forth as a conspicuous example of the salvation which lies in 
 precision of thought and exactness of method." — Jewish Quarterly Review. 
 
 The Classical Revietv, stating in detail " what results the writer has 
 attained which seem tolerably certain to be correct," adds " Incidentally 
 Dr Abbott gives us a most valuable dissertation of 43 pages on Bath Kol, 
 i.e. Voices from Heaven in Jewish Tradition, reprinting in an Appendix 
 Pinner's collection of examples from the Talmuds and Targums ; he 
 gives us a useful restatement in another Appendix of the reasons for 
 believing that the so-called Second Epistle of St Peter is a forgery, and 
 in yet another a convincing review of Eusebius' promise to record the 
 evidence accessible to him that bore on the canonicity or authenticity of 
 Christian writings. He demonstrates anew the correctness of Bishop 
 
 Lightfoot's interpretation of that promise The temper of Dr Abbott's 
 
 writing is worthy of his subject... lie has shown us the true significance of 
 unregarded words." 
 
ftart ¥0 
 
 PARADOSIS 
 
 OR 
 
 IN THE NIGHT IN WHICH HE 
 WAS (?) BETRAYED" 
 
 Demy 8vo. cloth. Price js. 6d. net. 
 
 " We are inclined to think that the present instalment, although the 
 
 thinnest in bulk, is the most valuable of the four Dr Abbott exhibits 
 
 his customary industry, acuteness, and learning One finds oneself, 
 
 much more often than usual, able to follow not only with interest, but 
 with willing assent." — Guardian. 
 
 The Dundee Advertiser, while calling attention to the " conjectures in 
 the chain of argument," says " There is, however, a strong temptation to 
 think Dr Abbott's hypothesis established when it is seen to be the key 
 that fits into one difficulty after another," and adds " For ingenious and 
 scholarly work there is nothing being done at present in the English 
 language like the series of volumes by Dr Edwin A. Abbott. It is 
 research work, painstaking and slow and elaborate." 
 
 "In great detail and with learned elaboration the various passages are 
 examined ; but the main topic of this book is often the occasion for 
 interesting digressions into paths in which Dr Abbott is always an 
 instructive, if not always a convincing, companion." — 
 
 London Quarterly Review. 
 
 "A marvel of minute scholarship and of patient industry." — 
 
 Westminster Magazine. 
 
 " He has, in a rare degree, the true scientific temper, which knows 
 that far-reaching implications may be hidden in apparently trivial facts. 
 Indeed it may safely be said that, had he never established a single 
 conclusion, his investigations would, for their patient and unobtrusive 
 thoroughness, alone suffice to earn him an honourable name. This latest 
 
 book, the fourth part of the ' Diatessarica,' is a case in point The real 
 
 value of the book, however, is not in the conclusion but in the way in 
 
 which the conclusion is supported Dr Abbott works out his argument 
 
 with great elaborateness and detail, and to follow it conscientiously is to 
 be amply repaid, whether one end in agreement or dissent. One of 
 Dr Abbott's incidental remarks is too valuable to pass without reference: 
 'We need,' he says, 'to become more, not less, anthropomorphic in our 
 thoughts about God, after the pattern of the best anthropomorphism of 
 
 
the prophets of Isi'ael and the Son of God.' Not many more useful 
 reminders could come to those who have the forming of modern 
 theology." — Christian World. 
 
 " Unwearied industry and remarkable ingenuity, a word which we use 
 honoris causa, distinguish this as they distinguish all Dr Abbott's 
 work." — Spectator. 
 
 "The criticism is marked by that singular nicety that marks Dr 
 Abbott's work, particularly in an explanation of the intrusion of 'Galilee' 
 into the Resurrection narratives." — Pall Mall Gazette. 
 
 " We are struck once more by the ingenuity with which Dr Abbott 
 follows his theory of an Aramaic original, and finds in subsequent 
 misunderstandings of its text a reason for many of the divergences in the 
 
 canonical Gospels The conjectural character of a great deal of his 
 
 work is inevitable in such an unexplored field, but he is providing us with 
 a mass of new material for the literary study of the Gospels, especially in 
 the direction of accounting for discrepancies in parallel narratives." — 
 
 Manchester Guardian. 
 
 " In fearless scientific criticism of the Gospels as documents, 
 Dr Abbott occupies a front place among modern scholars, but his 
 criticism is instinct with deep reverence, and always in his own happy 
 phrase 'an attempt to reach through varying voices the abiding 
 word.' " — Literary World. 
 
 " We gladly confess that we have learned a great deal from the work 
 before us." — Record. 
 
 " It is characterized by the same extreme care and minuteness of 
 detail and thoroughness of scholarship which are found in preceding 
 volumes." — Leeds Mercury. 
 
 "A scholarly work, worthy of Dr Abbott's great reputation as a 
 Biblical critic." — Outlook. 
 
 " This is the fourth part of Dr Abbott's great work, ' Diatessarica,' and, 
 like its predecessors, ' Clue ' and ' From Letter to Spirit,' is full of acute 
 criticism and painstaking inquiry. It is indeed monumental in its breadth 
 
 and thoroughness Novel as this interpretation is, no one has a right 
 
 to set it aside who does not study the contents of this learned, reverent, 
 and careful work." — Baptist Magazine. 
 
JOHANNINE VOCABULARY 
 
 A COMPARISON 
 
 OF THE WORDS OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL 
 
 WITH THOSE OF THE THREE 
 
 Demy Svo. cloth. Price \y. 6d. net. 
 
 "This is likely to prove the most useful of the five volumes that 
 have now appeared in the series which Dr Abbott has called ' Diates- 
 sarica.'...It exhibits the marvellous industry which is so characteristic of 
 Dr Abbott's work quite as much as any of the earlier volumes... the 
 accumulation of facts which it contains is likely to be of permanent 
 value to students of the language of the Gospels, and especially of the 
 Fourth Gospel." — Guardian. 
 
 " The whole inquiry is a wonderful exhibition of patient and delicate 
 scholarship. Both beginners and experienced students may profit greatly 
 from Dr Abbott's masterly treatment of verbal and grammatical minutiae. 
 The handling of tenses is especially instructive.... And as a storehouse of 
 facts laboriously collected from many sources and carefully marshalled 
 the work will be invaluable to students of the Fourth Gospel." — Christian 
 World. 
 
 "The Synoptic variations, similarities, and peculiarities are admirably 
 set out above condensed and lucid notes. It is a book full of good things 
 on a question already full." — Pall Mall Gazette. 
 
 "The reader, learned or unlearned in the technical sense, will find in 
 the book abundant matter to engross his attention and to stimulate 
 reflection. It is of the same high quality as Dr Abbott's other works, a 
 minutely accurate, scholarly, and stimulating production — another volume 
 of a remarkable series." — Aberdeen Free Press. 
 
 "No other work on Greek Testament synonymous words, especially 
 those in St John, so completely brings to light their precise difference and 
 applies them to the clearer elucidation of the Gospel narrative, as this 
 volume, which throws much original light on obscure passages, and often 
 reconciles seeming difficulties in text and context and shows that in some 
 cases what appears to be mere tautology or redundance is in reality a 
 most important statement of either incident or doctrine." — Academy. 
 
"The present sympathetic and laborious study promises to be an 
 extremely valuable addition to the literature of the subject... The book 
 is an extremely suggestive study, and the temptation to see more in the 
 original than can fairly be taken out of it is, on the whole, wisely 
 restrained." — Glasgow Herald. 
 
 " The plan, it will be seen, is thorough, and so is the execution ; yet 
 there is nothing abstruse, nothing beyond the comprehension of the 
 ordinary student of the New Testament. Almost every page of this 
 volume offers some fresh fact, suggestion, or discussion bearing on the 
 actual meaning of the evangelist, and there is none of that pedantic 
 philology which would confuse the real issues." — Dundee Advertiser. 
 
 "Dr Abbott has rendered very real services to students of the Fourth 
 Gospel by this scholarly and laborious work.... Sometimes he seems to us 
 to incline to draw large inferences from his own hypotheses, yet when 
 we turn again to these hypotheses they commend themselves to us, and 
 we feel that they have been reached by a very original and acute mind. 
 Dr Abbott has given us an invaluable guide to the interpretation of the 
 Fourth Gospel, a guide which some of us will very often consult." — 
 Examiner. 
 
 "With confidence we recommend this book to all serious students 
 of the gospels.... For English readers of the gospels it is, we believe, the 
 best piece of work that Dr Abbott has wrought." — Literary World. 
 
 " It is a good deal — but not too much — to say that no one can 
 thoroughly understand the Fourth Gospel who has not studied the 
 material brought together by Dr E. A. Abbott in his 'Johannine 
 Vocabulary.' It is a masterpiece of minute, patient, and ingenious 
 scholarship.. ..Teachers and preachers especially will find it rich in raw 
 material for their work." — Great Thoughts. 
 
 "A substantial contribution to the knowledge of the greatest of 
 Christian writings." —British Weekly. 
 
 "A marvel of industry and scholarship, into which it is impossible to 
 enter in any adequate way within the limits of an ordinary review." — 
 Record. 
 
 " An exceedingly useful theological text-book." — Globe. 
 
 " It is all that the title indicates.. ..But it is far more than that.. ..The 
 consequence of such an investigation is that new, or at any rate clearer, 
 light is thrown on passage after passage.... We hope we have said enough 
 to show our readers the value of this volume as a student's book." — 
 Church of England Pulpit and Ecclesiastical Review. 
 
 "The results which he brings out are very striking.. ..The upshot of 
 the whole is in accord with the general tendency of recent criticism — to 
 put the Fourth Gospel on a higher plane of authority."— Westminster 
 Gazette. 
 
" The author brings out the exact meanings and subtle inflections of 
 the original in a very striking manner. The different shades of meaning 
 and the manner in which such important words as believing, authority &c. 
 are exemplified, makes the work one of great value to the Bible 
 student." — Rock. 
 
 "The notes are packed with painstaking scholarship.. ..And the whole 
 evidence is surveyed in a masterly manner at the end." — Exfiositoiy 
 Times. 
 
 " The vocabularies, with their exhaustive apparatus of notes, represent 
 a large amount of patient linguistic research.. ..But it is only when we 
 approach the question of the right method of interpreting the Gospel 
 as a whole, particularly in its literary relations to the other three, that 
 the real value of all this critical spadework can be made apparent. We 
 hope that Dr Abbott's scrupulous scholarship will allow him before long 
 to attack this work of constructive interpretation." — Manchester Guardian. 
 
 "His discussion of Johannine synonyms, e.g. the words for 'seeing,' 
 'hearing,' 'knowing,' 'coming,' and other simple but fruitful ideas, is 
 most illuminating. Microscopic, it may no doubt be styled : but if 
 examination under a lens of high power reveals new beauties in the 
 structure of an organism, microscopic investigation proves both in- 
 structive and fruitful. We are inclined to say that this volume was 
 well worth publishing were it only for the complete account it contains of 
 the Johannine key-word 'believing.'... These minute linguistic inquiries 
 may at first sight appear to be meticulous' and useless. But it is only 
 by slow patient underground work of this kind that such subtle points 
 as the relation between the several lines of tradition concerning Christ 
 can be determined. And where the subject is so sacred and vital and 
 the end so important, time and trouble should not be begrudged. 
 Dr Abbott spares neither. He deserves the thanks of all careful and 
 earnest New Testament students for the work he is carrying through 
 with such patience and perseverance. Those who cannot accept all his 
 conclusions must admire his learning and his zeal, and they cannot help 
 receiving profit from his company and guidance." — London Quarterly 
 Review. 
 
 "The present volume is full of valuable material.. ..We do not know 
 of any investigation into the vocabulary of the Fourth Gospel so minute 
 and thorough as this. The labour expended in producing it deserves the 
 warmest recognition, and we shall look forward with great interest to the 
 publication on the JohanninejGrf^HfflsU^— P> 'imitive Methodist Quarterly 
 Review. ^V^*^* 
 
 — — — .. . .. • ** — 
 
 CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BV fOHH CI VV, M.A. \i mm I DIVERSITY PRESS. 
 
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY, 
 BERKELEY 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 Books not returned on time are subject to a fine of 
 50c per volume after the third day overdue, increasing 
 to $1.00 per volume after the sixth day. Books not in 
 demand may be renewed if application is made before 
 expiration of loan period. 
 
 121 
 
 t;nv 17 1959 
 
 1981 
 
 AUG 6 2000 
 MAR 2 1 2005 
 
 9, 
 
 RECEIVED 
 
 DLL V68-5^ M 
 
 LOAN DEPT 
 
 RECCIR MAR 3' 
 
 10wi-12,'23