Sources of New Testament Greek or The Influence of The Septuagint On The Vocabulary of The New Testament (PDFDrive)

THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
PRESENTED BY
PROF. CHARLES A. KOFOID AND
MRS. PRUDENCE W. KOFOID
Just published, in large 12mo, price 5s. Qd. net
SYNTAX OF THE MOODS AND TENSES

IN
NEW TESTAMENT GREEK

BY PROFESSOR E. D. BURTON, CHICAGO
'Professor Burton's treatise is one of great merit one

of the very best books indeed on its subject. ... It is a
most valuable addition to our grammatical literature.'
Tlie Critical Review.
SOURCES OF FEW TESTAMENT GREEK
PRINTED BY MORRISON AND GIBB,
FOR
T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.

LONDON : S1MPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, AND CO. LIMITED.
NEW YORK CHARLES
: SCRIBNER*S SONS
TORONTO : THE WILLARD TRACT DEPOSITORY.
SOURCES
OF
NEW TESTAMENT GREEK

OK
THE INFLUENCE OF THE SEPTUAGINT

ON THE VOCABULARY OF THE
NEW TESTAMENT
BY THE
REV. H. A. A. KENNEDY, M.A., D.Sc.
EDINBUKGH
T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEOKGE STREET
1895
PREFACE
IN the preface to his Essays in Biblical Greek, the late

"
Dr. Hatch speaks of these as being designed to point
out to students of sacred literature some of the rich
fields which have not yet been adequately explored, and

to offer suggestions for their exploration." This book is
an attempt to deal with some of the matters which
formed the subject of Dr. Hatch's investigation, and,
indeed, owes its origin to the results at which that most
independent and keen -minded scholar arrived as regards

the special character of Biblical Greek. But while the
writer began with a complete, though provisional, accept-
ance of Hatch's conclusions, the farther the inquiry was
pushed, the more decidedly was he compelled to doubt

those conclusions, and finally to seek to establish the
connection between the language of the LXX. and that
of the New Testament on a totally different basis.
The discussion is purely a tentative one. Further

research may modify many of the results which are here
presented. But it seems to the writer that the lines for
investigation laid down in this dissertation are at least
M348740
VI PREFACE
trustworthy, and lead to the true standpoint for the
study of Biblical Greek as a whole.

A list of the chief authorities referred to and consulted
is given. But the writer must express special obliga-

tions to two books Mullach's Grammatik der griechischen
Vulgarsprache, and Thayer's edition of Grimm's Lexicon

of the New Testament. The admirable lists in the
Appendix to the latter work have formed, to a large
extent, the basis of this investigation.
CALLA.NDEE,
February 1895.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
PAGE
INTRODUCTION . . . 1
CHAPTER II
NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE SUBJECT
investigation .......
Limitations of such an inquiry Its possibilities Method of
5-10
CHAPTER III
CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE IN

THE THIRD CENTURY B.C.
The Attic ofXenophon and its formative elements The new

The Macedonian dialect Transition-stage of language
....
spirit
in Aristotle Character of the Attic diffused by Alexander's
conquests The literary dialect 11-20
CHAPTER IV
THE SEPTUAGINT: (1) ITS ENVIRONMENT; (2) ITS VOCABULARY,
AND THE SPECIAL INFLUENCES WHICH MOULD IT
General character of Egyptian Greek The language of Alexandria
Origin of the Septuagint Special considerations affecting
the investigation of the vocabulary of the Septuagint Tables
illustrating the various elements in the vocabulary (1) old :
poetical words (2) Ionic words

; (3) affinities with Xeno-
;
phon and the writers of the xotvv words
..... ; (4) colloquial (5)

;
diminutives in common with the Comic writers ; (6) new

formations ; (6) foreign words 21-45
yiii CONTENTS
CHAPTER V
PAGE
BRIEF SURVEY OF THE MAIN FACTS IN THE HISTORY OF THE
VOCABULARY OF GREEK LITERATURE FROM ABOUT (200-160
B.C.) THE COMPLETION OF THE SEPTUAGINT DOWN TO
C. 100 A.D.
The "Common" and "Hellenistic" dialects as parallel growths

The Common dialect Polybius The writers of the
Apocrypha Philo Josephus Plutarch Summary of results 46-59
CHAPTER VI
THE VOCABULARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
Problems affecting the investigation of the vocabulary Numerical

statistics General tone of the language Tables illustrating
the elements in the vocabulary The classical element
Affinities with the writers of the xoivj The colloquial
element Points of contact with Comic writers
: lists ; ;
affinities with Aristophanes Parallels between the Greek of

the Comic Fragments and the late language Colloquial
element, continued :
"Weakening of strong terms . . 60-83
CHAPTER VII
COMPARISON OF THE VOCABULARY OF THE LXX. WITH THAT OF

THE NEW TESTAMENT
The LXX. familiar to the New Testament writers Dr. Hatch's

dicta Classification of possible relations between two vocabu-
laries List of words peculiar to LXX. and New
Testament
List of words peculiar to LXX. and New Testament along
with Philo List of words common to LXX. and New Testa-
ment with " Biblical
"
meaning Summary of results 84-93 .
CHAPTER VIII
THE INFLUENCE OF THE LXX. ON THE THEOLOGICAL AND RELI-

GIOUS TERMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT VOCABULARY
Formation of a theological terminology Discussion of words

exemplifying the influence of the LXX. on the theological
and religious terms of the New Testament Cautions to be
observed in estimating this influence . . . 94-109
CONTENTS IX
CHAPTER IX
PAGE
DISCUSSION CLASSES OF WORDS IN THE NEW
OF VARIOUS
TESTAMENT, WHICH EITHER IN THEMSELVES OR BY THEIR
PARTICULAR USES SUGGEST A CONNECTION WITH THE LXX.
Actual Hebrew words Words expressing Jewish customs and

ideas Words with exceptional meanings in the LXX. and
words .......
New Testament "Alexandrian" words New compound
110-133
CHAPTER X
DISCUSSION OF THE GENERAL QUESTION OF THE INFLUENCE OF
THE LXX. ON THE VOCABULARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT,
BASED ON THE RESULTS REACHED
Subdivision the New Testament vocabulary

of Numerical
statisticsExaggeration of the influence of the LXX. on the
vocabulary of the New Testament Marked differences
between the two vocabularies Application of the criteria
laid down on p. 87 sq., to the case of the LXX. and New
Testament 134-145
CHAPTER XI
COLLOQUIAL GREEK, THE LANGUAGE OF THE LXX. AND OF THE
NEW TESTAMENT
The striking resemblances between the language of the two
groups of writings due to its "colloquial" character in both
Statistics The spoken language, and its diffusion and
developments Distinction between the colloquialism of the
New Testament and that of the LXX. . 146-151
CHAPTER XII
CORROBORATION OF THE COLLOQUIAL CHARACTER OF THE

LANGUAGE OF THE LXX. AND NEW TESTAMENT BY THE
PHENOMENA OF MODERN GREEK
Introductory note on
...... continuity of the spoken language

the
down to modern times Brief discussions of illustrative
examples 152-156
X CONTENTS
CHAPTER XIII
PAGE
EXAMINATION OF PECULIAR FORMS WHICH GO TO PEOVE THE
COLLOQUIAL CHARACTER OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE LXX.
AND NEW TESTAMENT
" "
Prefatory Remarks Verb-forms Popular spellings . 157-164
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
......
. . . . . 164-166
LIST OF AUTHORITIES 167
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS .... 171

SOURCES OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
CHAPTEE I
INTRODUCTION
THE study Language, like all other provinces of

of
investigation, has been influenced to a high degree by

the modern scientific spirit. Not that this influence
has come from without and forced itself
upon philological
inquiry. The process has been evolved from within,
and under conditions marked for it by the principles
inherent in Language itself. One main result is that
the sphere of investigation is ever being widened.
Light thrown on important problems from directions

is
the most various. Fine Art, Antiquities strictly so

called, Epigraphy, Folk-lore, each contributes its quota
to linguistic research.
But perhaps nothing has tended so powerfully to

give this particular department a place among the exact
sciences as the rapid advance which the latter half of
the present century has seen in the field of Comparative
Philology. Now, investigations in this province have

not only reached results quite invaluable in themselves,
2 SOURCES OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
and for their own sake, but have brought into prominence
certain leading regard to language
conceptions in in
general which will inevitably impress themselves on all
future study.
Not the important is that which regards a
least
particular language as a living whole, an organic unity,

which, while from time to time it presents varying
an indestructible common principle which
aspects, retains
is really a thread of life, preserving it throughout its
entire history from utter disintegration. In this way,
every stage of a language is of paramount importance

for the history of the whole. Of course, some periods
will always have, and justly have, a special attraction.
The reasons are various. One stage of a language
becomes of special moment because it is the formative
epoch. It displays the birth, so to speak, of the
principles which are be the determining elements

to
throughout the history of the speech. Another stage

absorbs interest as the culminating point, the zenith in
the language's life. All rudimentary strivings after
expression have been mastered. The language has

become plastic. It is an artistic instrument. Its
products are works of art. It has a freeness and large-
ness of sweep,it has a grasp of technical details. There

is balance, symmetry, proportion. -
No doubt this will
"correspond to a unique era in the nation's history. The

life of the people is untramelled and broad. The
national spirit has reached a summit, and this wealth of
splendid energy calls for expression. It creates expres-
sion. So the language becomes the mirror of the

national life. It is therefore necessary that this
INTRODUCTION 3
definite period should, above all others, call for considera-
tion. And any language, but especially in one so

in
rich, and subtle, and strong as that of Hellas, a grasp, of

itsculminating epoch and its great masters is' that which
alone affords a standpoint from which to survey the
language as a whole. When that epoch closes, the

Greek tongue enters on a new and, in many aspects,
disastrous career.
But, though its grace and charm are seriously impaired,

though corruption spreads with extraordinary rapidity,
the history of the language never loses in interest.
Indeed, the interest deepens as we find it striving to
become the world-speech, passing through a new mould

of foreign influences and alien tongues, and coming forth
with the stamp of cosmopolitanism upon it, the fitting

instrument of a world-wide empire.
The later stages, therefore, of Greek have a special
importance of their own. On the one hand, they are a

comment on the earlier life of the language, inasmuch as
they show the forces inherent in that life, their powers

of self-preservation, the points where they are liable to
attack, the conditions determining their development or
decay. On the other hand, they look forward to the
future, revealing the particular adaptabilities of the

Hellenic tongue, suggesting its lines of further dissemina-
tion, affording in a special case a remarkable forecast of

modern linguistic developments. But not this alone.
The corruption has in it seeds of life. In this decaying
stage of Greek, striking light is shed on many phenomena

which otherwise would appear abnormal in the history
of the language. Its latent resources are displayed with
a new and astonishing clearness. So that, on the whole,

the materials gained by investigation of Greek when its
palmy days were over, are both valuable in themselves,

and exceptionally valuable for the insight they give into
the innate essence, and potencies, and influence of the
speech of the Hellenic peoples, viewed in its entirety.

CHAPTEK II
NATUKE AND SCOPE OF THE SUBJECT
ONE of these later stages of the Greek language has been
taken as the subject of this Dissertation. Or rather the

attempt is made to trace some special elements in the
history of Greek through several stages. But in en-
"
deavouring to estimate The Influence of the Septuagint
on the Vocabulary of the New Testament," it is necessary
to make a preliminary inquiry as to the general nature

and scope of an investigation like this, its limitations
and its possibilities, the results which may be expected
and those which need not be.
An investigation like the present must be entirely
tentative, for the important reason that the language of

the Septuagint, as a whole, has never been accurately or
rigidly examined and classified. Indeed, anything like

precise assertion must be made from the New Testament
as starting-point. Much
has been written in a vague
way as to points of contact between the two groups of

writings, but when one attempts to distinguish some
solid facts which may be taken as results arrived at,
scarcely any such are to be found among a hazy mass of

broad asseverations. This holds as to the relations of
the language of the Septuagint to that of the New
5
Testament, viewed generally. But, no doubt, definiteness

is not so easily reached in such inquiries. Especially
is such a statement true of our subject which deals with
the language of these two large collections of books, in

one particular aspect, the relation of their vocabularies.
Yet this means a definitely-marked province, a fact
which, to some extent at least, may preserve our in-

vestigation from mere vague generalities.
One fixed point there is from which to start, and that
is the vocabulary of the New
Testament, which is being
investigated from year to year with increasing accuracy
and scientific precision. Working back from this to the
Septuagint, we
gain lines of procedure and standpoints
for a general survey. The object of our inquiry is to
ascertain, as far as possible, the various stages in the
" "
development of the so-called Hellenistic dialect of
Greek, the literary language of contem-

its relations to
porary writers, and the amount of its connection with the

colloquial language of the period. For this purpose a
distinct field of investigation is necessary, and that
chosen appears, in some points at least, adequate to the
end aimed at.
The limitations of the subject are not hard to discover.

It need scarcely be said that it would be impossible
within reasonable limits to take up the separate vocabu-

laries of the various writers either of the New Testament
or Septuagint. In the case of the latter, absolutely so,

as the various hands in its compilation can only be
hypothetically distinguished. But this is not necessary.
In any case only approximate results could be looked

,
for, and so, roughly speaking, our inquiry is in no way

NATUKE AND SCOPE OF THE SUBJECT 7
hampered by taking each group of writings as a whole.

In the case of the New Testament, of course, a period of
about fifty years comprises all the writers. Perhaps a

hundred and fifty would be nearer the mark as regards
the Septuagint but the Pentateuch, which all scholars
;
admit to be the nucleus of the whole translation, and its
most careful part, may be regarded in all probability as

finished within less than half that time.
But there is a further limitation inseparable from the-
subject. The comparison of two vocabularies must

always be a relative process. In this inquiry it is
especially so. For not only is each of these vocabularies

made up of several types of language, so to speak, due
to writers of varying individuality, but we possess no
contemporary literature
precisely of the same class
which might be used as a standard or norm to guide

our determinations. Accordingly we must often be
content with provisional results, the only ones which
can be arrived at with our present data.
Still further, the estimation of the influence of one
vocabulary upon another has a certain incalculable

element which must not be lost sight of. The biography
of words is often almost incredible. Thus, a word
peculiar in form and of uncouth appearance may be
found in the Septuagint repeatedly as the translation of
a more or less common idea. This word may occur
nowhere else save in the New Testament. But con-
stantly has a submerged history.
it It may be a local
peculiarity. It may be a derivation from some special
dialect, all the circumstances of which are unknown. It
may be one of the most common forms of the vernacular.

It may have become stereotyped by means of the Sep-

tuagint, and thus have passed into the New Testament
through its direct influence. All these possibilities and
more will present themselves, and often it will be im-
possible to come to a decision. Again, in the two

vocabularies with which we are concerned, there is, of
course, an unusual number of terms which express moral
and and theological conceptions.
religious But it is
quite possible that an unusual term which is found in

the one may be found in the other with something like
a complete change of content. No doubt this can be
usually determined with a sufficient degree of accuracy.
Still, as regards the influence of the one vocabulary on
the other, in such cases the question is a delicate one,
in which hasty assertions are unsafe. Once more, the
conditions under which each of the vocabularies is
found must not be overlooked as determining factors.

It is here we are most heavily handicapped. It is not
overstating the matter to say that our knowledge of the

special circumstances which may have led the separate
writers of the New Testament to display particular
characteristics in their vocabularies is scanty in the
extreme. More so is this true of the Greek translators
of the Old Testament.
But in spite of all these limitations which look so
formidable, there is a wide area for research, and results
may be obtained more valuable than would have been
anticipated. It does not affect the inquiry whether

these are predominantly positive or predominantly
negative. In either case, light will be thrown on
biblical Greek as a whole.
NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE SUBJECT 9
But there are further important possibilities. The

special phase of the Greek language which we have to
consider has, at least, the advantage of being unartificial.
So that we should expect side-lights on questions outside
the scope of our main inquiry. Also, the subject brings
us face to face with a peculiar phenomenon in the
history of the Hellenic tongue its employment by an

;
alien and deeply-prejudiced race to set forth their own

highest conceptions. This means a new demand on the
resources of the Greek speech, a new test of its plasticity
and scope. But besides, we have in the vocabularies of

the Septuagint and New Testament, apart from special
Hebraistic traits, a character and colouring quite distinct
from the literary language of the time. Such a fact
must suggest new points of view from which to regard
the development of Greek in its later stages.

The most important feature has still to be emphasised.
We have the right to expect that a very direct relation
will be found to exist between the language of the
Septuagint and that of the New Testament. There

are various reasons for the expectation. The chief one
is that these two groups of writing are the only monu-
" " " "
ments of the dialect they represent. This dialect
attains definite form in the Septuagint. It has a fixed
stamp put upon it. It is therefore natural to believe

thatwhen we meet it again it will show the impress of
its earlier life. More especially will this be the case

with conceptions and modes of thought peculiar to the
Jewish people. The very fact that Greek is not their
native language will be found to make it harder for
them to deviate from a standard once laid down, espe-
cially when their own rites and usages and charac-

teristics are involved. Eeference has been already
made to the abundance of terms which translate par-
ticular religions and theological ideas. With regard to
them, we are justified in expecting that in many cases,
at least, the language the Septuagint will be found to

of
be the basis on which the New Testament structure is

reared.
Having examined the nature and scope of the investi-
gation, linger long over the method to be

we need not
employed. Clearly the question is one of facts, and
where there is so much room for hypothesis, its use
must be scanty. Our first task is to ascertain as dis-
tinctly as possible the actual data which we possess.

Thisis, indeed, the most important part
of the inquiry.
For here there is a solid foundation. But these data
have to be viewed, above all, in their historical setting.

If they can be connected by links of historical evidence,
all will have been gained that can be gained. But

whether or no, the investigation is a record of facts, and
the inferences which these facts permit. It is useless
to attempt anything more.

CHAPTEE III
CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE GREEK

LANGUAGE IN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C.
THE first matter to be examined is necessarily the

conditions and circumstances of the Greek language in
the third century B.C., the period in which our inquiry
starts. The tone and character of the Greek which
then prevailed should give the key to its subsequent
development. But it would be wrong to limit ourselves

to this single epoch. It cannot be understood apart
from currents and movements in the language which go
back at least a century earlier, and which are anticipations
of the processes which were afterwards to be dominant.
Nothing is
strikingmore change which than the
meets one on passing from the Attic of Plato and
Demosthenes to that of Xenophon. At first sight the
difference is not so obvious. But when we begin to
examine rigorously the vocabulary of the earlier writer,
it is easy to trace in him a totally divergent conception

of what the range of Attic Greek is, and a complete
disregard of its precise limitations. In making this
statement, however > regard must be had to the well-
known phenomenon, apparently peculiar to Attic, in
which the earlier stage of the dialect, after becoming
11
the parent of a new and more perfect form of speech,

continued to exist in healthy vigour, and to be used
exclusively for one particular type of poetical composi-

tion. This, of course, holds good of Athens alone.
But this earlier Attic had countless affinities with the
cognate Ionic speech prevailing in numerous regions of

the Greek-speaking world. Indeed, that and the earliest
Attic might be said to have the same basis.
It is difficult to conjecture even as to the relation
between the earlier Attic, which always remained the
vehicle of tragedy, and the popular spoken language of
Athens in its best days, though probably there can be

little doubt that the latter closely approximated in kind,
ifnot always in quality, to the Greek of the orators and
Aristophanes. But, at anyrate, this earlier Attic was

known and recognised within certain limits, and it would
be the delicate and subtle feeling for language which
would chiefly secure the mature Attic against its en-
croachments.
To return to Xenophon. His experience was a
peculiar one. His was deliberately spent away from
life
his native land, and a large portion of it in foreign

countries outside Greece
proper altogether. this In
way he mingled with men of many dialects. His pride

in Athens and her glory of life and language vanished.
This must consciously or unconsciously affect his language
also. His sense of proportion, his appreciation of the
just mean to be observed, and the strict standard of
speech, must unconsciously be marred. And so, in the

midst of dialects cognate to his own, in which the
subtle shades of meaning and the refinements of
THE GREEK LANGUAGE TN THE THIRD CENTURY B.C. 13
pure Attic were replaced by laxness of usage and clumsier

notions of the requirements of language, he abandoned
the purity of Athens and became a noteworthy pre-
cursor of the future history of the Greek tongue.
It is interesting to find the Mysian Galen, in
his Commentary on Hippocrates (quoted by Eutherford,

New Phryn. 161), comparing Xenophon with the cele-
brated physician in the use of ovo/juara fawo-o-y/LLaTiica
KOI Tpowi/cd. And Helladius (fifth century A.D.) is
quoted by Photius (Bill. 533. 25) as saying:
Qav/jLaarbv avrjp eV (TTpareicus <7ôA,a&>z> ical
<Tvvov<iiai<$ ei Tiva TrapatcoTrrei, rrjs Trarpiov <f>o)vf]S' Sto
voôOer^v avrbv OVK av Tt9 CLTTIKKTÔV 7rapa\d{3oi.

Many instances might be given to illustrate what has
been said of Xenophon. The following (from Euther-
ford's list, New Pliryn. 165 sq.) will suffice:
" hunt " = Orjpevw, 4.

dype'uw, /cvi/r/yeTw. Hipp. 18; Cyn.
12. 6 ;
Anab. 5. 3. 8 ; LXX., KT.
Mpoifa. 14; Anab. 7. 3. 48; Herod.
Cyr. 1. 4.
1. 79, 5. 15, 7. 12; Eurip. Herod. 403; KT.

6/377/>ta
= 8wpov. Hier. 8. 4; Aesch. P. V. 626; Pers. 523;
Soph. Aj. 662 ; Eurip. Hel. 883 KT. ;
A7rw = 0ep/xatW Cyr. 5. 1. 11; Horn. Od. 21. 179;

Hes. Theog. 864; Aesch. P. V. 590; LXX., KT.
yyai/w = a7rro//,ai. Cyr. 1. 3. 5, etc.; Aesch. P. V. 849,
etc. ; Soph. Oed. R. 760, etc. ;
Eur. Hec. 605, etc. ;
KT.
0fya> in LXX.
= 7TOV05. Conviv. 2. 4, 8. 40 ; Hes. Sc. 306 ; Aesch.,
Soph., Eur., LXX, KT.
w = v</>aipto. Cyr. 4. 2. 42; Aesch. Cho. 620; Soph.
Phil. 1427; Eur. Sup. 153; LXX., KT.
pax<>5 = Tapaxr/. Anab. 1. 8. 2 ; Cyr. 7. 1. 32; Hippoc.

300. 41 ; LXX, KT.
14 . SOURCES OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
Already in Xenophon's days tokens of change in the

fortunes of the Greek peoples might readily be found.
Yet the separate States had sufficient pride of independ-
ence to preserve their national life a stage further.
But the old restrictions of nationality could not much

longer endure. A new spirit was beginning to pervade
Greek life, no doubt, in many aspects, a weaker and

more nerveless spirit, yet one which contained within
itselfthe potency of a wider civilisation, a more cosmo-
politan existence. Thus it was that neighbouring

peoples began to aspire to a new and higher cultivation.
Barbarian Macedonia claimed a share in the refinements
of her more polished neighbours. It need not be
doubted that political motives had a large part in such
aims. But, granting this, the issue was not affected.
The Attic language became the language of the Mace-
donian Court. The modifications which it underwent in
this new phase of its history cannot be accurately de-
termined. For this purpose a clear notion would have
to be formed of the precise character of the pre-existing
Macedonian dialect. As it is, fragmentary hints must

suffice as to its nature and constitution.
A passage in 9, 35-36 (quoted by
Curtius, vi.
Mullach, Grrammatik, p. 14), seems to say that Mace-
donians and Greeks could not understand one another.

And certainly, if reliance can be placed on the collec-
tions made by Sturz (De Dialecto Macedonica, etc. pp. 30,

31 sq.) and others, it is no wonder that this was so.
A few instances will make this clear.
aKoimov among Macedonians = pdx^, chine, ridge So

Hesych. and Phavorinus.
THE GEEEK LANGUAGE IN THE THIED CENTUEY B.C. 15
Saves = Oavaros (Plut. de and. poet. 5).

Kapa/?os
= 7rv\rj. Hesych. Phavor.
Two of the words quoted in this connection have a

more interesting irapeô^ and pv/jLtj.
history, viz.
7rap6fJLJ3o\ij, which seems properly to mean "in-

sertion," "interpolation" is described by Phrynichus, 353,
as 8az>w? Mafce&ovifcov ;
and all the old grammarians
apparently assent to this. Starting from its original

"
signification, it would first come to mean method of
arrangement of camp," and finally reach its ordinary

" "
Macedonian sense of camp," encampment." It occurs
often in Polybius = (1) Locatio in castris.

Ipsa castra.
(2) Aciei instructio. (3) Special manoeuvres in a naval
battle. It is found in an inscription of Thessalonica
(c.
118 B.C. -Dittenberger, Sylll 247. 20), êre-Tre/iâro
et9 Trjv 7rape/jL/3o\rjv. Countless instances in the Septua-
gint where, almost without exception, it translates the

" "
Hebrew term for camp," encampment." It occurs ten
times in the New Testament. (1) Camp, Heb. 13. 11 ;
Apoc. 20. 9. (2) Encampment, almost = army, Heb.

11. 34. (3) Barracks, Acts 21. 34, 22. 24, 23. 10.
It isused in jest by Diphilus as = o-TpaTotreSov, and also
found in the comic writers Theophilus (Mein. 3. 630),
and Crito (Mein. 4. 53).
pvfjLij. Phryn. 382: pvfjLij'

ical TOVTO ol
'AdrjvatoL 7rl T?}? o/3/z% eTiQecrav, ol Se vvv d

eVt rov (TTevcoTTov. Bo/cel Be /JLOL KOI TOVTO fjLa/ceSovi/cbv
elvai. Suidas explains ajviai by pvîr). Eustathius on
Horn. H. (3. p. 166 (quoted by Sturz), says pvprj is used
1
Sylloge Inscriptionum Grcecarum^ W. Dittenberger.
in this sense in the Koivr\. The earlier signification of

"rush" "onset," is found in places like Thucyd. 7. 70:
TTI fjuev TTptorrj pv/j,f} eViTrXeo^re? /c.r.X.
Polyb. 6. 29. 1 : al pvjjLai = roads in a camp.

In the Septuagint: Isa. 15. 3 : teal ev TCU? pvâl^ avrwv
TTCLVTW oXoXufere street. In the New Testament four
times, and = street or lane. Used by the comic writers
Antiphanes and (Mein. 3. 26,
Philippides = street
4. 471). The stages in the history of the word are well

pointed out by Carr (on Matt. vi. 2) (1) rush, impetus :
;
"
(2) going ; (3) lane or street ;
cf. English alley," from
"
French aller."
We have dwelt longer on these two terms for a
special reason. They open the way to a large question,
the intermingling of foreign elements, or, at least, usages

with the pure Greek tongue at an exceedingly early date.
The constant voice of tradition makes them Macedonian
words. But when we find them in Attic writers like
Antiphanes (380 B.C.), Theophilus (330 B.C.), Crito
(330 B.C.?), Philippides (323 B.C.), and Diphilus (300
B.C.), the suggestion naturally presents itself that there
was a far closer connection between the colloquial
language of everyday life and the alien dialects of

Greek than has usually been believed, or that original
elements of current Attic speech were preserved outside
the strict limits of the dialect. It would be absurd to
make the slender basis of a few examples support any
far-reaching hypothesis, but these give rise to the belief

that a greater mass of materials came to light, the
if
problem would be far on its way towards solution.

But .besides the appearance in the Macedonian dialect
THE GREEK LANGUAGE IN THE THIED CENTURY 17
of peculiar terms, such as dSr)

= ovpavos, fiedv = dtfp,
Scopaj;
= crTfKriv, and the like, peculiar consonantal
changes are said to have prevailed, which appear to have

a phonetic character e.g. ftaXa/cpos = fyakaicpos, Ke/BdXtj
;
= tcetyaKij, dSpala
=
alOpia K.T.\. Probably such lists
have to be taken with caution, as so little is known
of the sources used by the old lexicographers who are
our authorities. In any case, the Macedonian type of

Greek, whether or not it is admissible to call it a special
dialect, was so far removed from ordinary Attic as to
make it certain that the latter, on Macedonian lips, must

soon and inevitably suffer thoroughgoing modification.
Even the Greek polish itself of Alexander the Great and
his associateswas only skin-deep.
But apart from the process of change experienced by
the Attic dialect in a semi - barbarian country like
Macedonia, the world of culture, as well, was opening the

way for results of that kind. Aristotle himself marks
the beginning of a new era. Looking at his language
alone, one is struck by the number of new words and
new forms which he admits into his prose. The perfect
Attic sense for language seems to have become relaxed
in him. The
transition to the KOLVTJ has already begun.
Naturally, the tendency increases rapidly. It is found
in an intensified degree in writers like Theophrastus,

who may almost be reckoned with the writers of the
"
Common Dialect." And, as has often been pointed
out, it is noteworthy that contemporaneous with this
weakening of purity in language is the growth
of the Asian rhetoric, which seeks to make up for
nerve and force by florid colouring and exaggeration.
Thus, within Greece itself, the degeneration had

set in.
Alexander's conquests formed the determining factor

for the language, as for the whole life of the Greek
peoples. Now, as has been said, the Attic dialect was

undoubtedly recognised as the basis of the language
spoken at the Macedonian court. This meant that
henceforth theofficial and imperial speech throughout the
Eastern world must be Attic at root, whatever varying
aspectsit might present in particular cases. It did not
a priori follow that the language of the conquerors

should become that of the conquered. But Greek
civilisation had been making rapid advances. Even the
interior had not been left wholly untouched. The
maritime regions were already thoroughly leavened by
Greek influence. But the language which Alexander
and his victorious armies brought with them found
special points of contact in the several countries through
the remnants of old Greek colonies, so that, even in
districts where they did not themselves settle as rulers,
Greek idioms became familiar. The dialect which they
introduced was Attic, but the Attic of a non- Athenian
people. Accordingly, from the first, there would be a

laxity as regards the words to be used, and the nature of
their usage. This was an element sure to lead to further
corruption. And so we find that in each province the
Greek spoken there assumed a distinctly local colouring,
reflecting at many points the dialect originally peculiar

to that province. Our data on this point are somewhat
fragmentary. But there are constant traces of local
dialectical variations. We shall find the most note-

THE GREEK LANGUAGE IN THE THIRD CENTURY 19
worthy instances when we come to examine more care-

fully the Greek of Alexandria. But such phenomena as
the late Aorist form in -oa-av, on which Eustathius,
p. 1759, 36, says: ol rfj Âcnavr) xpw/jievoi, cfxavfj TTOIOVCTI
TO ecfrvyov KOI rj\6ov irapevBecrei -n}? aa (rv\\aj3f)<;
ecfrvyocrav \eyovres KOI rfKdocrav. (frwvfjs XaX/aSeW ISia
elo-i ;
the substitution of the weak Aorist endings in
strong forms, as e\apa, eirea-a /c.r.X, which the old

grammarians hold to be originally a Cilician peculiarity ;
and the appearance of many uncouth words in the later

language, principally associated with the requirements of
common life, give some colour to the idea of a wide-
spread local on the language

effect which Alexander
established in his new domain.
Another point has to be strongly emphasised. The
one aim of the Macedonians who diffused the Attic type
of Greek was to be intelligible. They had no thought

for refinement of idiom or purity of vocabulary. They
were not themselves cultivated men, and their language
was not a cultivated language. The important con-
sequence followed that it never became a literary instru-
ment. No doubt this would have given it fixity and a
standard. became the parent of a new type
Instead, it
of colloquial Greek, the speech of the mixed popula-

tions of Asia, Syria, and Egypt. This is a most
important fact. All those who afterwards laid any

claim to literary power or skill must be held rather to
carry on the tradition of Aristotle and his contemporaries,

(
than to belong immediately to the circle of the E\\yvi-
foj're?. Of course they are conditioned by their environ-
ment. The Greek which Aristotle had handed down to
them was already in process of fusion. Words, forms,

and phrases distinctly non-Attic had been admitted by
him. It would be absurd to suppose that amidst the
mixed populations of the countries where these writers
lived, the tendency already manifested could be checked.
Everything was in favour of its growth. Still, it was
regulated and kept, to some extent, within bounds by the

general culture of these writers, their acquaintance with
the early literature of Greece, and a more or less earnest
attempt to preserve alive the literary succession by direct

imitation of some of the great masters of speech.
Thus arose the literary language, the KOLVT) BiaXe/cros.
More will have to be said of it in tracing the linguistic
history between the time of the Septuagint and that of

the New Testament. No doubt great caution must be
used in drawing a strict dividing - line between the
literary dialect and the colloquial speech of everyday

life. We
must rather regard the boundary as fluctuat-
ing and undefined. Yet it may be said that while the
.
writers of the Koivr) frequently descend to the ordinary

level of the current popular language, or nearly so, the
literary monuments which we have of that

popular
language rarely reach, so far as style and idiom and even
purity of vocabulary are concerned, the common standard
of the Koivr)
CHAPTER IV
THE SEPTUAGINT:(1) ITS ENVIRONMENT; (2) ITS
VOCABULARY, AND THE SPECIAL INFLUENCES WHICH
MOULD IT
AFTER the foregoing very brief account of the general
condition of language in which the LXX. arose, we must

next investigate its immediate environment, and this
will form the transition to the discussion of our special
subject itself.
In no country did Macedonian influence produce more

rapid and far-reaching effects than in Egypt. Alexandria,
the capital, founded under the auspices of the Macedonian
conqueror, formed a centre of new prosperity for the

country. Favoured by natural situation, the glory of its
founding, and the benign rule of the early Ptolemies, it
could not fail to be a most potent instrument in the
diffusion of Hellenism among the Eastern peoples. As
has been already said, the Macedonians brought with
them, as their ordinary language, the Attic dialect, not,
however, unadulterated and pure, but modified in many
directions by reason of having become their official and
conventional mode of speech. Accordingly, Egypt too
must yield to the new tongue. Not, of course, that
Greek was a strange language there, but that from this
time it be the language of court life and letters,

was to
of trade and commerce, soon also, through the mixed
population of a great national centre like Alexandria,

the language of common life and ordinary intercourse.
Now the conditions under which the Macedonian Attic
took rootEgypt could only lead to one result.
in
Nowhere was there a more remarkable blending of
diverging elements than at Alexandria. Egyptians, pure
Greeks, Macedonians, representatives of the various
Asiatic kingdoms, Africans, Jews, all combined to form
a motley crowd yet they must have constant dealings
;
with one another. The medium of intercourse must

inevitably was impossible that it could
be Greek. It
retain even the purity of its Macedonian type among

elements so conflicting.
The question accordingly arises, What special colour
would Greek, as spoken by the Egyptian people, be
likely to assume ? We know that they had deep-seated
Oriental tendencies. We are told that their temperament
was melancholy ;
that they were possessed by a strong
bias towards the formless symbolism of their ancient
worship that their imagination was eager and excitable.

;
Accordingly, we are not surprised to find from the

remains preserved, a certain unwieldiness and capricious-
ness about their language, which displays itself especially
in harsh and fantastic word-composition. Besides, this
might naturally be looked for, as Greek came to them,

not by free and spontaneous diffusion, but in the stilted
guise of officialism.
Many instances from their vocabulary, as exhibited by
the Eosetta Inscription, Papyri, etc. etc., are given by
THE SEPTUAGINT 23
Mullach, Bernhardy, and others. From these the follow-
ing are taken :
dSi'/ciov, aia>j/o/?tos, aTroStetrraA/xei/tov, avro/cpacna,
Aoyeveiv, ovcria/co?, Trapacrvyypaêtv, 7rpa>TO7rpaia, TO reAc-
As to the Greek of Alexandria proper, it seems-

erroneous to give it the name of a dialect, as many
scholars have been accustomed to do. In all probability
the language of the Egyptian capital had no more right

to be called a dialect than the vernacular of any other
great centre of population and commerce. On the other
hand, it does appear that, owing to the unique position

and circumstances of Alexandria, a certain type of Greek
arose there, or was stereotyped there, which was rapidly

diffused. It was no literary language, and could not be. It
was a blending of words and idioms on an Attic basis, con-

tributed to the common stock by the shifting masses which
made up the population of the city. Thus East and West
alike impressed their stamp on the Alexandrian speech.
There is no need to say, as some scholars have
asserted, that no memorial of the Alexandrian type of
Greek has come down to us. We believe that the more

the language of the LXX. is studied, the more clearly it
will be seen that, in spite of strong Hebrew colour-
ing and the moulding force of Jewish conceptions, the

LXX. does afford a lucid and graphic view of the Greek of
Alexandria. And more importance attaches itself to this
because Alexandrian Greek be regarded as a typical
may
representative of thelanguage then spoken throughout
the provinces which had yielded to Alexander's sway.
It is unnecessary for us here to do more than state

the views generally held by modern scholars regarding
the date and origin of the Greek translation of the Old
Testament. There is a consensus of opinion that the
whole, or, anyin case, the greater part of the under-
taking, was carried out at Alexandria. This rests on an

unbroken line of tradition. The question cannot be
decided as to whether any of the kings took a special
interest in the work. A
mass of legend has grown
round this report. The nucleus of the translation was
the Pentateuch, a fact to be expected, seeing that for
the Jews the reading of the Law formed the chief part
of synagogue worship. In all probability this portion of
the Old Testament was translated about the middle of
"
the third century B.C., and the prologue to Ecclesi-
asticus" says that by 130 B.C., not only the "Law"
"
but the " Prophets and the other books of the Old
Testament were extant in Greek. The translation, as
a whole, reveals several hands, at least five, differing to
a considerable degree in acquaintance with Greek, power
of grasping the original, and skill in translating. The
Pentateuch has been done by the most competent trans-
lators. The internal character of the version makes it
almost certain that the translators were Egyirtian Jews.

Thus, to give one or two instances
(I)
1
The Hebrew "shekel " is translated by the Alexandrian
"
didrachmum," not by the tetradrachnmm, to
which it was equivalent.
(2) Hebrew " ephah "
is translated by OMI, Egyptian
1
Most of the instances quoted are taken from Hody, De Bibliorum
Textibus Originalibus.
THE SEPTUAGINT 25
pronunciation. This measure still exists among

the Copts.
(3) Hebrew " Thummim," translated by dX^cia, the Greek

name of the ornament worn by the chief Egyptian
judges.
(4) KovSv, a special name for a particular kind of Egyptian
cup, used in the LXX.
(5) a^t, used of anything growing in a marsh Trarrvpos.
Oiftis ark in which Moses was exposed.
(6) A numerous class of nouns beginning with the prefix
cf. in Papyri and Inscrr. a/>x i ~

ap^t is said to denote simply a
court official.
These, of course, are only hints but when corroborated

;
by the general nature of the version and an unvarying

tradition handed down by the oldest Jewish - Greek
writers themselves, who had every opportunity of know-
ing the facts, there is little room for doubt. No one has
ever doubted that the translators were Jews.
The raison d'etre of the version is not hard to seek.
Besides several very ancient colonies to be found in
Egypt, Jews flocked in multitudes to the new city,

induced by the splendid opportunity for commercial
pursuits, as wellas by the kindly disposition of the
Egyptian kings and their own less favourable lot in

Palestine. Soon we find that Jews occupied some
of the highest posts in the whole country. In the
natural course of things, half a century or less would
see them thoroughly subject at least to the more ex-
ternal influences of their new abode, and none of these
could be so powerful as the language commonly spoken,
the language, besides, which was the special medium
of their own cherished pursuits. Accordingly, the
staple of their ordinary speech would come to be

the language of Alexandria. This would be modified
by their original dialect of Hebrew or Aramaic, but

would gradually approximate to the common ver-
1
nacular of the city population. Wellhausen, indeed,
supposes the existence of a kind of Jewish-Greek jargon,

"
already developed, which was really Hebrew or
Aramaic in disguise," and employs his hypothesis to
account for the extreme literalness and frequent harsh-

ness of the Septuagint version. But this is a pure
hypothesis, and the literalness of the translation is best
accounted for on other grounds.
Thus situated, and with their synagogue -worship,
which was the very centre of their national life, in full
exercise, it must soon come to be the case that many
Jews of the generation native to Alexandria, could no
longer intelligently the reading of the sacred
follow
books in their public worship, and the demand would
speedily arise for a rendering of, at least, the Law into

the language which they could understand. And the
great majority of modern scholars hold that these
circumstances explain the origin of the Septuagint
version. would be going too far afield to make any
It
particular mention of the peculiar theory of Professor

2
Gratz, who places the first nucleus of the translation
about 140 B.C., in the reign of Ptolemy Philometor.
Again it must be noted that the prophetical and
poetical books were translated at various times, later than
Art. " Septuagint in EncycL Britann.

1 "
2
Geschichte der Juden, Band iii.
THE SEPTUAGINT 27
the date of the Pentateuch, and that this was often due,
in all probability, to private enterprise. These facts,
however, do not affect our investigation of the vocabulary

of the LXX., as one hundred and thirty years at most
comprise the whole translation, and there is no evidence

to show that any part of it was executed outside
Alexandria.
In investigating the vocabulary of the LXX. we are
investigating the vocabulary of a translation. This
translation, moreover, is of a peculiar nature. It is
intended to bring out every jot and tittle of the original,

because the original is held to be sacred, and not a
syllable, therefore, must be lost. Accordingly, the

rendering is extraordinarily literal. This implies restric-
tion of vocabulary. But when the range of the collection
of writings is so wide, the restriction is scarcely felt.
Still, we cannot expect to be able to make the same

deductions from what is a rigidly literal translation, as
might be looked for in a spontaneous literary product.

Further, the translators are Jews. They write in a
language whose conceptions are alien to their type of
mind. The language is acquired. There must therefore
be a certain artificiality of expression, a certain clumsi-
ness both as to forms and structures. Their vocabulary
and style cannot fail to show a real Hebraic element,
their inheritance from the past. But, apart from this,
they are sure to reflect with more or

accuracy the less
exact type of speech which surrounds them, the par-

ticular form of Greek to which they have been first
introduced in their everyday dealings with neighbours

and traders.
The vocabulary of the LXX. has Attic for its original

basis, and so we meet, in ever-varying proportions, with
much of the ordinary stock familiar to us in earlier and
purer writers. This part of the vocabulary, which is,
however, far less in proportion to the other elements

than the corresponding part of the New Testament
vocabulary, we need not for the present dwell upon.

It is the common store of most writers in a greater or
less degree down to a fairly late date in our era.
But, before discussing the other and far more

characteristic elements in the vocabulary of the LXX.,
itappears to us in place to give a rough analysis of a
few chapters taken entirely at random from its pages,
which will afford, in brief compass, a general view of its
language, and serve as a basis of illustration for the
principles in the formation of the vocabulary which

have still to be investigated. In the case of the LXX.,
representative illustrations are specially admissible,
seeing that, as a matter of fact, the same elements are

found throughout its vocabulary.
We take the first ten chapters of the Book of
Deuteronomy, a fair specimen of the ordinary character

of the LXX., neither distinguished for special excellence
nor special harshness and incorrectness, though perhaps,
on the whole, it would among the better parts of the
fall
work rather than otherwise. Words and forms belonging

to the common stock of Greek writers are, of course,
unnoticed. The writers are given by whom the word or
form is used. When a word in common use is given, it
is because of some special sense in the LXX., and those
writers alone are quoted who employ it in that sense.
THE SEPTUAGINT 29
LIST OF WORDS
a. ayoi/o?
= barren. Hippoc., Aristot., Theoph., Soph., Plut.
Horn., Soph., Eurip. (Isocr.).
Polyb., Philo.
aTTocTTTJTO)cra.v. Form.
apo-vi/cos. Very late. Callim., Anthol.
curaAeirros = unmoved. Eurip., Diod., Plut. Adverb
in Polyb., KT.
a.o-r)TTTo<s
= not liable to rot. Hippoc., Xen.
=
dâTTTw fasten on. Hdt, Hippoc., Theocr.
ft. /?a8tw = go. Colloquial here. So constantly in Comic
writers.
fiS&vyiJM. Pecul. to LXX. and KT. Verb in Hippoc.,
Aristoph., Plut.
ftyjfjia
= treading of sole of foot. Xen., KT.
(TO.) ftovKoXia. Hdt., Theocr.
y. yap/3pevo). Pecul. to LXX. and Josephus.
yvo<os
= 8i/o</>os.Only poetical and late prose. N.T.
y/aa/A/Aaroetoraycoycts
= Heb. word meaning (1) scribe,
(2) magistrate.
8. SctXtaw. Diod., N.T.
Siayiyvwo-/c<D.
Loose use = memoria revocare.
Stayoyyv^w. N.T.
= riseup. Polybius.
Plato, Polyb., N.T.
. Form. N.T.
= ordinance. Peculiar to LXX. and N.T.
.
yKa.6rjfjLai
= lie in a place. Polyb., Antiph. Com.
Form. KT.
Aristid., N.T.
(o. Transitive, Diod.
K<f>opo<s. Aristot., Plut., N.T.
= righteousness. N.T.
= believe.
begin (without ritual sense). Polyb., Plut.,
KT.
i/o7rAta>. Once quoted, Lye. 205.
N.T.
7ravao-Tpe<(D
= (simply) return.
eu/cA?7pos
= fortunate. Anthol., Suid. eu/cArjp^/xa in
Antiph. Com.
al\. Plato, Theocr.
Late. In Xen. Cyr. 8. 6. 16, of an officer
who visited annually the satrapies of Persia.
Timocl. Com.
.
o>ypeta
= Heb. word for "survivor." In Hdt., Polyb.,
Strabo = one taken alive.
77. ?)XOa.T. Form. N.T.
Form. KT.
Very late. Dion. Hal.
OvcXXa. Entirely poetical. N.T.
Passive form. Scarcely in prose. N.T.
Form. N.T.
tepareva). Herodn., Inscrr., N.T.
Katpos
= xpoVos. Late. N.T.
Hdt., Aesch., Galen., N.T.
= grind down. Horn., Hdt., Hippoc., Strabo.
(
= /caTcurKOTreoo). Xen., Polyb., Plut.
= plant. Plut., Lucian.
= encourage. Dion. Hal. = strengthen KT. ;
= prevail.
Pindar, Lesbonax, N.T.
Aristoph., Lysias, and late writers ;
N.T.
= go to bed. Pind., Polyb.
KOTTOS. Late in prose = trouble, burden. Poetry and KT.
= Heb. word "
Koo-fjios for heavenly hosts as ornaments
of the heavens."
Kparatos. Poet. Only late prose. Plut., etc. ;

N.T.
Polyb., N.T.
Hdt., Horn., Xen., KT.
X. AaKKos = cistern. Hdt., Aristoph., Xen. (Demos.).
Xaev(a. Eumath. (Aaêvo-t?. Schol. ad Theocr. ;
, N.T.).
THE SEPTUAGINT 31
uto = serve God. N.T. Used by Eurip. = serve the

gods.
A.6/xayxoi/ea>
= reduce by hunger. Hippoc., Antisth. ap.
Stob.
/x. fjLa.KpoY)fjLpev<j). Peculiar to LXX.

/xoAa/a'a
= sickness. Vit. Horn., N.T.
v. vdTrr). Poet., Hdt., Xen.
o.
otfyyew
= Pseud.-Phocyl., Hippoc., Aesch., Eur., N.T.
All = lead.
Theocr., Anth., N.T.
os = one out of a few. Plut.
opa/xa. Aristot., Xen., Aristid., N.I.

os = strong (military term). Xen., Polyb.
slave. Late. But Menander. N.T.
= slave. Tragg., Comm., late prose, N.T.
Polyb., N.T.
Polyb., N.T., Theophil. Com.; Crito
Com. ; Diphil.
kill. Late. N.T.
N.T. fr. TrfpLovcrLa
= property (TrepUij^L
have over and above).
7rA.a = flat stone. Lucian, N.T.
jrXr)Ovi/<t)
= increase (trans.), N.T.
Eorm.
Poetic word.
).
Plut., Herodn.
Pecul. to LXX.
Pecul. to LXX.
vco =
plunder. Dion. H. often, Polyb., Plut.,
Posidip. Com.
oovcei/xai. Used of devotion to God. So in Dion.
Cass. and Epictet.
oo-oxOio-fjia. Pecul. to LXX. Verb in Orac. Sibyll.
and N.T.
fjfjiw. Scarcely in'earlier lang. ; cf. John 1. 15,
fJLOV Y)V.
Hdt., Tragg., Plut. (once in Plato).

Scarcely in prose. Poet. word.
Late form.
= thing. N.T.
~N. T.
Metaph., KT. Ord. sense in Hippoc

Aristot.
cwAoi/ = snare. Etym. M. and Hesych. = ovcwAos,
pointed stake ;
cf .
cr/cwAov/otat in Aquila = be offended,
ry/cvpto
= be adjacent. Polyb., Plut.
?.
Eurip., Dion. H., Plut., KT.
,eo>. Diod.
<rwrpi/3(i>. Pass = be beaten. Polyb., Plut., N.T.
T. TtLxriprjs
= fortified. In this sense only in LXX.
T
S .T., Apocr.
ow = swell. In Hdt., Xen., Theocr. = grow hard.
v. vTToVracris = Heb. word for "burden." Almost =
"
etymol. sense of Latin sustentatio."
= shrink from. Hippoc., Dinarch., N.T.
Eorm.
<Atat = doorposts. Horn., Bion, Polyb., Theocr.
<ovevnjs. Byzantine writers.
if/. i/fw/xia)
= feed. Aristoph., Hippoc., KT.
A rough analysis of this short index of the more

uncommon words in the first ten chapters of Deuteronomy
gives the following results. Of 110 words and forms
examined
50 occur in the New Testament.
17
THE SEPTUAGINT 33
so easily illustrated from the index above ;

but a wider
view of the facts will be gained if the results of an
examination of the whole Book of Deuteronomy, com-
prising thirty-four chapters, be presented. It will be
found that the inferences which can be deduced from the

investigation of the restricted area are precisely corrobor-
ated by the more extended inquiry. Both bring to light
definite elements, which form the determining factors in
the vocabulary of the LXX.
DEUTERONOMY CHAPS, i.-xxxiv
0/313 Words examined

37 per cent. 116 occur in the New Testament.
16 51 Plutarch.
14 43 the Tragedians.
13 42 Xenophon.
13 41 Polybius.
12 39 Comic writers.
12 38 Herodotus.
10 33 ,, Hippocrates,
7 c. 20 Diodorus.
5 c. 17 Plato,
5 c. 17 Philo.
11 36 are peculiar to the Septuagint.
These tables are suggestive in various directions.

(1.) In the first place, an important and interesting
element in the vocabulary of the LXX. is that which
consists of words belonging to the old Greek literature
as represented by the Tragedians and poets like Homer
and Pindar. These have fallen into abeyance in the
most flourishing period of Attic prose, and now emerge
again into the light. The history of this process is hard to
3
34 SOUECES OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
trace. It seems by no means unlikely that many of the
words, though confined to a particular type of literature

within the compass of our knowledge, really formed part
of the regular vocabulary in particular regions, and may
have been in constant use on the lips of the people. Of
course, it is possible that, merely through the general
mixture of dialects which took place, and the loss of
that refined sensibility which distinguished instinctively
between what was adapted for poetry and for prose
respectively, the words passed somewhat rapidly into the
ordinary store of words. But the former seems the more
probable hypothesis, and it is easy to see that the facts
which it supposes do not exclude, but are rendered more
plausible by the grounds alleged for the alternative sup-
position.
Many instances occur in the lists :

e.g.
deraAcirros. A poetical adjective in Euripides.

yi/o<os. Not in good prose.
6v\\.a. A thoroughly poetical word.
Kavxâ. Apparently almost peculiar to Pindar.
KO'TTOS. Never in early prose.
Good instance of thoroughly poetical adjective.
As happens, Homeric words are scantily represented

it
in the tables but in many parts of the LXX. which we

;
have examined, as, for instance, 1 Samuel, they are

extraordinarily frequent.
(2.) Another striking characteristic of the stock of
words exhibited by the LXX. is the well-marked Ionic
strain represented by terms which appear chiefly in

It is difficult to give an
Hippocrates and Herodotus.
entirely satisfying reason for this phenomenon. We have
THE SEPTUAGINT 35
no definite information as to the relation between Asiatic

Greek and that of Alexandria. Necessarily, this would
be intimate. There may in all probability have been an
old literary tradition which became a kind of standard
for the Greeks of the coast of Asia Minor, based on the
earlier Ionic literature. The Ionic
literary language
would originally be the popular speech purified, so to
speak, and stereotyped. So that all along, a close con-

nection would exist, as at Athens, between the spoken
and the written languages. But after literary production
had ceased, its particular type of speech would remain
a powerful influence in moulding the ordinary language.
In some such fashion as this, we may believe, the words
under consideration became part of the spoken vocabulary
of the maritime Greeks of Asia Minor, and in due course,
through commercial communication and the other cus-

tomary modes of intercourse, found their way into the
word-store of the Jews of Alexandria.
The following examples are from the lists :
a </> d 7TTw = fasten on. In Herod, and Hippoc. with the

interesting addition of Theocritus, an Alexandrian
writer.
ftovKoXia. Hdt. (again in company with Theocritus).

/caTaAew = grind down. Hdt. Hippocr. (also in Homer).
At/xayxovew. Hippocr. (Frag, of Antisthenes).
TV A. o'w. Hdt. (also in Theocritus and Xen.).
v7ro<7Te'AA.co = shrink from. Hippocr. (also in Dinarchus,
a Corinthian).
Many other instances could be given from the larger
group of words.
(3.) As might be expected from what has been said

in a former part of this dissertation, many affinities with
the language of Xenophon are to be found. This is the

natural result of the growth of the tendency to laxness
in observing the strict boundaries of correct prose, com-
bined with ever-increasing foreign influences.
Examples from our list are
= not liable to rot. Xen. (also in Hippocr.).

e tread of the foot.
Karaa-K07TV(n ( = Karao-KOTrew). First in Xen.
Krrjvos. Good instance of a thoroughly poetical word,
brought into prose by Xen.
a TTT;. Another term of the same class, etc. etc.
i/
This last class can scarcely be separated from a

(4.)
very large list of words which the LXX. has in common

" "
with the writers of the Common dialect, in short, with
the literary language which arose in the period which
gave it birth. This class, of course, is far wider in range

than any of those already glanced at, as it really
embraces all the outstanding peculiarities of the later
literary language. And, without doubt, the LXX. comes
" "
far nearer the literature of the Common Dialect in
actual vocabulary than in style, or syntax, or general

tone. The fact is interesting as showing that it was
easier for the literary men to model the structure of
their sentences after the great masters of literature than
to preserve their vocabulary, even by artificial means.
Still, writers like Polybius and Plutarch show a far more
intimate relation to Plato and Aristotle, even in voca-
bulary, than they do towards the LXX.

It is impossible, within our limits, even to indicate the
numerous points of contact between the vocabulary of
the LXX. and that of the writers of the Koivr]. A few
THE SEPTUAGINT 37
hints must suffice. Many of the points of contact

referred to come under the head of the classes already
examined. Polybius, Diodorus, Strabo, Philo, and
Plutarch all exhibit the characteristics looked at under
(1), (2), and (3) of this section.
But there are additional features. Perhaps the most

important of these is one common to the immature and
the decaying stages of a language. This is the habit of
forming compounds. As Eutherford well points out (New

"
Phryn. p. 6) Before a language is matured, and that
:
feeling of language developed which sees in a common

word the most suitable expression for a common action
or fact, there is a tendency to make work-a-day words
more expressive by compounding with a preposition." In
illustration, he quotes from Sophocles a long list of com-
pounds, especially with the preposition e'/c, ef, as efai/e-
êadai, %6\ev0poa-TOfj,iv, egaTifjLa&iv, and many others,

which no way from the uncompounded verbs,
differ in
except in having a touch of vividness or picturesqueness

added.
The same tendency displays itself in the later language
in a greatly intensified degree and harsher forms. But
now it is because language has lost its concentrated
force. Words adequate enough to express the intended
meaning have become weakened to the popular imagina-

tion. They are felt to be too vague just because
simplicity is so. The artificiality of language becomes
the reflection of artificiality of thought. It is imagined
that by heaping on prepositions or other elements to
a word it gains in content. The examples are partly
from the list and partly taken at random
SOURCES OF NEW TESTAMENT GEEEK
stand up. Polyb. (no meaning added).

= (practically) <TKop7uw. Polyb.
= walk, or, walk about. Philo.
= simple apô/Acti. Polyb., Pint.
= Suvaorrevw. Plut., Diod.
voo = (rrpaTOTreSeva). Polyb.
Plut.
TJsu. = simple " etc. etc.
go." Polyb.
Dion. Cass.
Diod.
There is also an inclination to form new compounds,

such as
Polyb., Philo.
Polyb.
e//,7rio-Tv<o. Plut., Polyb.
Polyb., Strabo.
a). Plut.
Plut., Polyb., Dion. Hal.

<n;//,/:?o/\oK07re'<o. Philo, etc. etc.
We purposely omit, for the present, the consideration

of the two chief remaining elements in our tables of
results, viz. the batch of words which the vocabulary of

the LXX. has in common with the New Testament, and
also those peculiar to itself, as these must be treated later
on with greater fulness and minuteness than belongs to

our present rough analysis.
(5.) The store of words on which the LXX. draws is
enriched further by a very interesting class of terms

which may be called " vernacular." large number of A
expressions which have evidently long been current in
the speech of the people, including almost certainly the
Athenian populace, appear now in the written language.
They belong to that "oral tradition" which Professor
THE SEPTUAGINT 39
l "
Jebb describes preceding the ancient literature of
as
Greece, coexisting with it and surviving it." It was
inevitable that they should find a place in the LXX.,

which is so much a transcript of the spoken language.
EXAMPLES
/?pX<D = vetv, /3pox*i

= VCTOS. The verb occurs in this
sense in Telecl. Com. (Mein. 2. 376). Phrynichus, 258,
holds that the verb in this sense is entirely to be
rejected. Lobeck considers that the word, originally

poetical, became vulgarised after the palmy days of
Greek literature, and so is found in Polybius, Arrian,
the LXX., and N.T. So ftpoxrj, found in Geoponica,
ii. 39, and Eustathius, as well as the LXX. and N.T.
Also appoxtoL in Josephus and Philo. It seems more

likely that, at an early date, these words passed into the
colloquial vocabulary and it is suggestive, in this con-
;
nection, to find that fipoxrj is a modern Greek term for

"rain."
yXwcra-oKOfAOV. Phryn. says on yXwrroKo/xetov CTTI

JJLOVOV
TOV TOJV avXrjTLKiov yA.wTTcoi' dyyet'ov. vcrrcpov oe KOLL ei?
crepav ^prjcrtv KaTeor/ceva^TO, /3i/3Ai'a>i/ rj tju,arta>v >) apyvpov

rj
brovovv aAXov KaXovtri 8' avro ot d/xtt^cis yA<o<r<roKO/AOi'.
The word is found in the Comic poets, Timocles (Mein. 3.
590) and Apollodorus Carystius (Mein. 4. 444), in the

simple sense of a box or case. This was evidently its
which is found also in Plut., Joseph.,
popular meaning,
and N.T.
yoyyv^w, yoyyv<r/AO9. Phryn. brands these words as
Ionian, and is only acquainted in literature with
irepiyoyyt^w, usedby Phocylides. The correct expres-
sions, he are rovOopv^w an
asserts,
Nunnesius, quoted by Lobeck, says: "Pollux TO
tribuit columbis quibus auctor Philomelae et turdis
by Vincent and Dickson, Appendix,

1
Handbook to Modern Greek,
p. 289.
gemere assignat." But the noun occurs in Anaxan-

drides' Com. (Mein. 3. 174).
The words are frequent in the N.T. = murmur, murmur-
ing. It seems, therefore, legitimate to assume that at
an early date they belonged to the vernacular.
Ketpta- cord or band. Aristoph. Av. 816, where the
Schol. says :
Ketptor etSos ^COK^S IK crxoivtW, TrapeotKos
IfJidvTL y Seo-jJiova-L ra? /cXii/a?. Sept., N.T., and Plut.
Evidently a vernacular word, which has all along formed
part of the popular language.
KOLTW = Attic Sco/xartov. (Poll. 10. 43, also quotes irpo-
KOITCOV.) Aristoph. Frag. (Mein. 2.
947). The word is
censured by Menander (Mein. 314), a fact proving 4.
that it was in common currency at that time. Athenaeus
gives a Fragment from Matron, the writer of parodies

(c. 370 B.C.), in which the word occurs. Several times
in LXX. and late writers, also N.T. Inscr. Delos
(130 B.C.) : eTTt TOV KotroWs T^S /3a(TL\L(TO">fj's (Ditten-
berger, 244. 5).
XVXVLCL. Phryn. 289 avrl rovrov Xv^vtov Xeyc. And in
:
his Appendix, p. 50 Xv^vtov ot d/Aa0ts Xv^vtav avro

:
KdXova-L. So Pollux,
10. 115 (quoted by Lobeck), says
" "
that Xvxviov is vulgarly called Xuxvc'o. It was clearly
a word in regular circulation, and probably from an
early date. Cf. Inscr. leronda (240 B.C.) :
rrjv re.
Xv^vtav
rrjv peydXrjv (Ditt. 170. 13).
606viov = linen cloth, in plur. = stripes of linen. Several
times in
Hippocr., Aristoph. Frag. (Mein. 2. 989).
Several times in LXX. and N.T.
oi/vx^w = pare the nails, or metaph., examine minutely.

Cratin. (Mein. 2. 214). Aristoph. Frag. (Mein. 2. 1217),
on which Suidas
ovvx^rat- aKpi/JoXoyetrai, ovrcos
:
'Aprro(/>ai/r7s. Evidently a colloquial word which the

translators of the O.T. used to express the cloven
hoof.
o-Krj. Phryn. 216 :

TraiSiovo}- TOVTO CTT! TT}S 6epa.7ra(,vr]<s
ot vvv TiOtacTLV, ot 5' apxaioL CTTI TTJS veai/tSos. Prof. Jebb

on Lys. Or. I. 11, 12, regards Oepa.Tra.wa and
THE SEPTUAGINT 41
in that passage as synonymous. So, too, Isaeus, viii. 35 :
KOLL &vo ê/aaTratVas /cat TraiSicrKiJv, where

av8pa.7ro8a . . .
there seems little distinction, though perhaps the latter,

as Schomann (quoted by Jebb) suggests, has less menial
work to do. More likely it is a term adopted from the
vernacular which had fixed to the word TrcuSio-K?; the
of
" as Scotch servants almost
meaning slave," just
"
invariably use the word "girl technically of those who
are in their own position. In the later Greek, this
is exceedingly frequent.
signification So in Inscrr.,
one of Delphi, 178 B.C.: *A<rav$po<s
e.g. avaTiO-yo-i . . .
Tak 'ATroAAaw rwt IIv$iak eA.V0e/mv T&viropiav rrjv . . .
O.VTOV TratSur/o?!/ (Ditt. 451. 4).

= strength (usu. in a bad sense, of strength which
o-rpfjvos
is eager to gratify itself lawlessly). Except a single
instance in Nicostratus Com. B.C. 300 (Mein. 5. 84), the
word is not found till Lycophron and the LXX. Pollux
(quoted by Rutherford, 476) says that Callias, the
p.
Comic poet (c. 412 B.C.), used the compound a-rprjvo-
(fxDvos
= loud-voiced. Also, the verb a-rprjvLav is found
in Antiph. Com. (c. 387), Sophilus (c. 350?), and
Diphilus (320). These various instances appear
to us to show, as conclusively as anything could,
that the word must have existed in the colloquial
vocabulary from the earliest times, and found its

way into the LXX. just for this reason. Also in
KT.
rpvftXiov. Found, curiously, in Hippoc. as a special
measure used in medical prescriptions. But this pre-
supposes its earlier existence in something very like the
sense of " cup," " dish," in which it appears in Aris-
toph. Acliar. 278, Av. 77. So that we may well believe

it belonged in this sense to the current popular speech
in very early days, though its use in books did not be-
come frequent tillthe later stages of the language, in

the LXX., KT., Plut. etc. etc.
<i/z oo)
= compress. Aristoph. Nub. 592. Not found again
till the LXX. and KT. The reason probably is that
it was a word of common life, not considered admissible

into literary works.
XapT?7s = paper. This word used to be supposed by some

scholars to be derived from Aramaic. Of course, the
converse is the case, as it is found in Plato Com. Frag.
10, and Cebes, Tab. Thayer also quotes Kirchhoff,
4.
Inscrr. Attic. I. no. 324 (dated 407 B.C.). It was clearly .
a vernacular word, which disappears, so far as literature

is concerned, till we find it again in the LXX. and JN".T.
These are specimens of a number of instances collected.

(6.) Another link which binds the language of the
LXX. to the early vernacular speech is the large number
of diminutives which are to be found in its vocabulary.
This is a distinct element in its composition, and the
interesting point about it is that a great proportion of
those diminutives are to be found in the Comic writers of
an early date, the very authors who would be expected
to shed light, in a special degree, on the colloquial
language of their time.
need scarcely be said that many of the diminutives
It
in theLXX. have lost their particular sense, and are
used as exact equivalents of the words from which they
have been formed. We give some instances
&pvuw. Eubul. (M. 3. 212, 268), Philippid. (M. 4.

476).
Telecl. (M. 2. 371), Aristoph. (M. 2. 982, 1165).
Alexid. (M. 3. 409), Men. (M. 4.
133), Eubul.
3. 26), Antiph. (M. 3.
141), Aristoph. (M. 2.
(M. 1186).
Philippid. (M. 4. 497).
Nicostr. (M. 2. 844).
Eleven instances in Meineke.
o-ai/8aAtov. Men. (M. 4. 317), Antiph. (M. 3. 153), Cratin.
(M. 2. 91), Cephis. (M. 2. 884), Theoph. (M. 2. 809).
<TTr)6vviov, Eubul. (ap. Athen. 2. 65 c.).
o-rpovOiov. Anaxand. (M..3. 164), Ephipp. (M. 3. 326).

THE SEPTUAGINT 43
(Chiefly Comic.) Four exx. in Meineke.

<f>6prLov. Eight instances in Meineke.
X<y.\Kiov. Ten instances in Meineke.
(7.) Marked characteristics of the vocabulary of the

LXX. are its formation of new verbs, with a special
tendency towards forms in -oco, -evco, -ao> -/(to, and its
modifications in the use of existing ones to suit its own

purpose.
EXAMPLES
(a) d
oo, eoAe0pv'a), eTriya/A/Jpev'w,
7TpOOTOTOKV(0.
w, dreKvow, eKptôw, cvSwa/xoo),
1
Transitive verbs receive an intransitive sense: e.#.
KaraTravti), /carto'xvw, KOpei/vv/At.

Intransitive verbs receive a transitive sense :
e.#. avrap-
KCO>, eâtpw, KaTao"7Tv8(o.
o = keep alive. woyove'a>
= vivifico.
(8.) One of the specially noteworthy features of the

language of the LXX. has still to be pointed out, and
that is the large admixture of foreign words which can
be traced in its vocabulary.

1. The chief element under this head is, of course, the
Hebrew. But as it has to be examined minutely in

immediate connection with the New Testament, it is
needless to anticipate here. For the sake of complete-
ness, however, we may summarise briefly.

1
These instances are taken from H. G. Thiersch, De Pentateuchi
Versione Alexandrina, p. 99.
A. Actual Hebrew words occur in the LXX. in various
guises
(a) Hebrew words in Greek letters :

e.g. Trao-xa, <ra/3awO,
(b) Words which have become Greek through the addition

Greek endings e.g. ye'evra, ySaros, /copos.
of regular :
(c) Words which have undergone certain modifications :
e.g. crdjSfiaTOv, (TLK\O<S, cri/cepa,
B. Words formed on the model of existing Hebrew

words or expressions
(a) Nouns :
as, e^/Ae/oux, oXo/cairrto/xa, TravTOKparoop, TrapaTri-
Kpacr/xo?, pavrtcr/xos, o-KX^poKapSt'a K.r.X.
(b) Adjectives :
as, dv$p<D7rapeovcos, aTreptr/x^ro?,
or/cX^poTpa^Xos, TttTretvo^pwv K.r.X.

(c) Fer^S as, dvaê/taTtô), aTroSeKarcvw, y8e^r;
:
^>Ope<0 K.T.A.
CV Greek words modified by the influence of Hebrew

conceptions
(a) Ordinary terms :

e.g. Wvos, ctSooAov, e/cAcXô-t'a, ypa/x.-
/xarev?, o-rparia K.r.X.
ô/x,oXoyea), TraiSevw, TraTcurtrw K.T.X.
(&) TJieological and religious terms: e.g. ayyeXos, StaôXos,

Kvpto?, TratSeta, o~cuT?;pta.
c/cXcyo/xat, Tropvcvw, ^xori'^w.
All these classes will be examined and illustrated
carefully further on in the Dissertation.

2. Words from other languages
(a) Egyptian :
/coi/8v, $t/3t9, v$os, ySapts, TrciTrvpos, <r/Stuv
K.T.X.
(ft) Cyrenaic :
/3ovw?. This asserted by Hdt. 4. 199 ;
Valckenaer on Hdt. 4. 351

(quoted by Lobeck,
Phryn. 356) "Vox Cyrenaicis usitata; a Dori-
THE SEPTUAGINT 45
ensibus in Sicilia vocem transsumsisse videtur

Aeschylus. A
Cyrenaicis accipere potuerunt Alex-
andrini; recentiores Graeci quivis colles et tumulos
POWOVS dixerunt." And Carr (on Luke 3. 5) well
remarks "It (i.e. /3owos) is an interesting trace of
:
the connection between the Jews and Gyrene, which,

next to Alexandria, contained the largest Jewish
population of any African city."
(c) Macedonian (?)
:
-n-apeôX^, pvfjL-rj.
(d) Persian :
ya'a = tiara ; pavSvYj = a
treasure ; /a'Sapis =
special part of Persian armour.
(e) Cilician :
0-10-07). Hesych. says that this was a parti-
cular kind of tonsure with the inhabitants of Phaselis,
a Cilician town.
This table of foreign words must be taken, in the case

of some of the terms, with reservation, as the old author-
ities may often have had the most slender of grounds for
referring an uncouth word to a particular foreign tongue.

CHAPTEE V
BRIEF SURVEY OF THE MAIN FACTS IN THE HISTORY OF
THE VOCABULARY OF GREEK LITERATURE, FROM THE
COMPLETION OF THE SEPTUAGINT (ABOUT 200-160
-
B.C.) DOWN TO C. 100 A.D.
KOUGHLY speaking, an interval of about two hundred
years separates the New Testament from the Septuagint.

In most languages a period of that duration would
mean great modifications and many new developments.
It is different with the two centuries we are considering.
Two types of speech have become stereotyped, and have

both been used in literature. The one, indeed, is only a
literary language ;
for this purpose it has been formed,
and its aim is to keep itself as free as possible from
accommodation to the popular standard. The other is
originally the common

speech of the people but, after ;
the mould of Hebrew thought, it, too,

passing through
has become, in a sense, literary, or at least it has become
the vehicle of a large and uniquely important collection
of books. That has given fixity to it, so that hence-
forward it may be used as a standard or norm.
" "
Strangely enough, this Hellenistic type of Greek
cannot be said to be found again until, for the second
time, a group of writers whose modes of thinking are
46
SURVEY OF THE MAIN FACTS 47
predominantly Hebrew, give it currency in a more

influential form than ever, through the collection of works
which make up the New Testament. There are breaks,

so to speak, in this long interval of silence. That cluster
of writings which form a kind of appendix to the Old
Testament and a prologue to the New, which, for want of

a better designation, are termed " Apocrypha," must, we
think, be regarded as belonging, in point of language, both
to the Hellenic type of the
"
Common " dialect, and in a
" "
much less degree to the Hellenistic of the LXX.
The greater part of them is, in all likelihood, the work
of Jewish writers ; yet these are imbued with Greek
influences,and especially with Greek conceptions, to an
extent which places them in a quite distinct sphere from
that in which the writers of the LXX. move. So that it
is perhaps advisable to glance at their characteristics, as
regards vocabulary, in the same line of development as
the authors of the
"
Common " dialect. brief survey of A
some of the distinguishing features of these authors, in
the particular province of " vocabulary," should place us
at a better point of view for estimating the language of
the New Testament, and the influences which moulded it.
As has been already noted, those writers after the days
of Alexander who were conscious of a real literary
impulse, created for themselves a special type of literary

speech. The "
Common " dialect, therefore, is not a mere
vague reflection of the mixed language prevailing all
round the shores of the Mediterranean. It is differenti-

ated from that by several distinct characteristics. For
one thing, the writers who employ it are cultivated men.
They have received a polite education. They write not
only for the purpose of giving information to the public

regarding certain important or interesting subjects, but
also with the sense of the worth of literature as itself
educative. Certainly they aim, above all things, at clear-
ness of statement and plainness of speech, but they never

exhibit that entire artlessness of language which marks
the Hellenistic writers. The latter are, one may say,
unconscious of their vocabulary. Lucidity is their one
aim. The writers of the Kowr) have not lost entirely
the sense for effect. So they choose their words, and
even seem to lay down definite principles for themselves
as to their mode of selection. They have studied, and
know the great masterpieces of earlier times. The
influence of these cannot be disregarded. They are
aware that literary prose has reached a definite level in
the past. Accordingly, the standard once attained will
have, in any case, an unconscious effect on their work.
But to counterbalance their culture and education, and
even their innate feeling for literature (for it may be
presumed that in this they surpass their contemporaries),
stands a long array of unfavourable conditions. They
cannot escape their environment.They are surrounded
by mixed populations, whose dialects comprise words

and phrases and forms borrowed from every variety of
Greek. The separate provinces in which they were born
and brought up have each its peculiar type of language.
Local colouring prevails all round. And common to all

of them is the original corrupted Attic which forms the
basis of the new cosmopolitan Greek. Besides, vigorous
national life, that which kept the earlier Attic pure
life
and forcible, and which afforded so keen a stimulus to

thought that only a refined and subtle tongue could

express the conceptions of the great thinkers, that life
has given place to a spurious, relaxed existence which
calls forth a corresponding artificial language. And so
the striking fact comes to light that these writers,
although they are acquainted with the wide and expres-

sive and pure vocabulary of the Golden Age, are really
unfit to use it. The great, fruitful ideas of the past,
nourished by the pride and glory of Athens, have made
room for meagre, thin conceptions which reflect them-
selves in the language. Therefore we find that the
writers of the KOLVTJ use only an excerpt from the Attic
vocabulary. This they supplement by recent formations,

sometimes due to the general tendencies underlying the
speech of the time, sometimes the result of special local
idiosyncrasies.
After all, however, their dialect, which in its main
features is common to them all, stands high above the
speech of popular intercourse. It is therefore artificial,

with a real effort after literary effect. We can only glance
at representatives of the /coivtj in respect of Vocabulary,
paying special regard to those who may be expected to

throw light of some kind on our subject.
PolyMus. Polybius, the earliest outstanding writer of
"
this dialect," is also a very typical one. His plain,
matter-of-fact style appears at first sight to be very much
on the level of the
popular language. But closer scrutiny
modifies our view. Certainly he does give us glimpses
of the colloquial speech, but his vocabulary is predomin-
antly literary.
It cannot be said that he shows many peculiarities.
50 SOUKCES OF NEW TESTAMENT GKEEK
No doubt we do come across words like o-vvrepfjioveco,
/caTair\ayris, e/c7ra0tfs, and others, which apparently are

only found in him ;
and also particular uses, as a-vvraîs =
narrative ; bfyOakpida) = be envious, etc. etc. ;
also favourite
words, like Trpay/jbarifcos (of which Schweighauser gives

at least forty instances in various senses) but speaking :
generally, his vocabulary seems very representative of

the Koivr), and keeps on a uniform level. Perhaps the
leading element in it is a striking kinship with Aristotle's
stock of words. One cause of this, in all probability, is
the philosophical cast of Polybius' own mind, which natur-
ally leads him to use a terminology already laid to his

hand, though he cannot fail to do so with a certain laxity
and inaccuracy. So he constantly employs terms like
0ed)prjfjia, cra)fjiaT06i$ij<;, irpoOecri,?, tcivryuicos, eTravopOcoais,
aTropTjfjLa, and the like, which have a more or less philo-
sophical colouring. Seeing that his tendency is some-

what prosaic, we should not expect, nor do we find, the
poetic element of the KOIVV) so strong in him. Still,
thoroughly poetical words come up here and there, such

as aTpetctjs, yecf)vp6a), evOaparfs, TrporpoTrdSrjv, etc. etc.,
which prove that this is a fixed characteristic of the
language of the period, and forms part of the general

stock of words.
Of later writers, Plutarch appears to be the one with
whom he has most points of contact. Yet this is less
important, because these points of contact occur, not in
any peculiar phase or type of diction, but rather in the
common basis of the dialect which they both use. They
seem to agree especially in carrying on the particular
tradition of Aristotle and his contemporaries.
SURVEY OF THE MAIN FACTS lO-l
But Polybius an author who does throw light on

is
the vocabularies both of Septuagint and New Testament.

It is interesting, however, to find that this is, as a rule,
where these agree. In other words, Polybius is, at such
times, employing the colloquial language of his day. In

a rough examination made of a part of Book I. of his
Histories, about 18 per cent, of his vocabulary was to be
found in the LXX. and New Testament. Polybius con-
stantly displays the want of flexible phraseology. And
this calls forth a number of new formations which are, in
general, common to him along with Diodorus, Strabo,

Philo, Plutarch, and Pausanias. Indeed, it is these addi-
tions to the Lexicon which give individual tone to the
several authors of the tcowtf. The products of this arti-
ficial gift of invention are usually verbal forms, which
strive, by means of accumulation of elements, to restore

to words the force they have lost. So in Polybius we
meet with forms like Trpoo-eTri^rjTea),
r
rrpocre'jTLêrpea) )
TrpoGeTTKfrOeyyo/jiai,, Trpoo-KaraTacrcra), Sieûcveo/Jiai, eiriSia-
<m<ea), eVtStaretW, etc. etc., in almost all of which one

of the prepositions adds nothing whatever to the concep-
tion. But as we touched on this point in connection
with the LXX., it is needless to dwell on it again. On
the whole, may be pronounced the most outstanding
it
characteristic of the later language.
Apocrypha. It may appear anomalous, at this stage

and in this historical succession, to introduce some brief
remarks on the vocabulary of the Apocrypha, but while

these are Jewish works, they are not so in the sense of
the LXX. and New Their true place seems
Testament.
to be between the writings of Philo and a book like the
Epistle to the Hebrews. That

to say, they are dis-
is
tinctly Alexandrian, but have, so far as vocabulary and
style are concerned, assimilated Greek influence to such

an extent that their language, with slight exceptions,
iscultivated Greek, which can be placed on the level of
the writers of the KOIVTJ. And, roughly speaking, they
may be dated between Polybius and Philo. The various
books cannot, indeed, be regarded as all occupying the
same position. Between 3 Maccabees, for example, and
2 Maccabees there is a vast difference, so far as concerns
pure expression and mastery of the language of culture.

On the other hand, there are many resemblances and
even common peculiarities which lead us to class them
together. All the books contain Hebraisms, but this
with far greater restrictions than the LXX. or New
Testament. Thus 2 Maccabees, while containing Hebrew
usages as aSe\<f>oi= fellow-countrymen, and a few more,

shows a great partiality for combinations like avros
avr60i, dyeiv dywva, Svo-cfropcos <f)epeiv, evêveiav . . .
Sva-fjLeveiav /e.r.X, which manifest both a certain mastery

of the language and a sense of literary effect superior to
Hellenistic writers. This book also has frequent coin-

cidences with Polybius. Instances are :
dva&yrf, retreat
(of an army) ; evaTrepeiSeo-dai, to bring down (anger or
vengeance) violently on some one ; KaraTreipd&w, make
an attempt on the enemy, etc. etc.
Several of these works, notably the Wisdom of Solo-
mon and 2 Maccabees, show their thoroughly Greek
character in their varied power of expression, and the
rich store of appropriate words they have at command,
a fact which comes out especially in the numerous-
parallelisms and antitheses which they delight to employ.

The "
Wisdom " contains technical expressions of Platonic
and Stoic philosophy, as v\r) afiopfas, Trvev/jia voepov,
:
Trpovoia K.T.\. Assonances and paronomasia are also

common in it, as :
Trpocrboo-ia . . .
Trpoa-Sofcia, ISi'as
iSioTrjTos, va)Scoar6 . . . SicoSevo-av . . .

Perhaps what
chiefly strikes one in their vocabularies is the immense
number peculiar words, often aira^ \ey6fji6va, which
of
are to be found there e.g. :
Ttva.
7ToXe/xorpo^)ti/, Trpocnrvpovv, StacrraXo-i?.

Tre^peveojiiei/os
= in high spirits ; Sceâyav
= behave ;
= depart.
eT
7ravcro</>os, Trayyecopyo?,
Ktt/CO/XO^ÔS,
We have given all these instances, partly to show the
alarming proportion in which the Greek vocabulary was

increasing even among cultivated writers, and all the
time in a diffuse and inelegant direction, and partly to
point out a tendency which was strongly at work in the
LXX., and which appears inseparable from Jewish use

of Greek, that of forming cumbrous and uncouth com-
pounds on the model of Hebrew expressions, rather than

conveying the thought more flexibly by broken up
-
phrases.
Philo. We
omit Diodorus and Strabo as sufficiently
represented by Polybius, and glance next at Philo, who,
in respect of vocabulary, is one of the most interesting
1
These lists are compiled from the large collections in the Intro-
ductions to Grimm's Handbilcher zu den Apocryphen.
of the writers of the

"
Common " dialect. He is all the
more important for our subject as being a true Jew, a
native of Alexandria, and a voluminous Greek writer.
But his language is entirely different in general character
from the so-called dialect of Alexandria. No doubt he
does employ some words which are considered peculiar
to that type of speech, such as dfji(pid%cr6ai, Ka^fjLveiv,
e/ATria-reveiv, and a few more

but these are exceptional,
;
and in any case we could not expect him to be unaffected

by the direct influences of his surroundings.
Philo's tendencies of thought brought him into the

closest connection with Greek philosophy, made him
indeed an enthusiast for Plato, and so we need not be
surprised to find that Plato became his master in the use

of language as well as his ideal of a philosopher. This
gave rise to the well-known saying 97 H\drwv <j>i\a>vi%et,

:
PI
3>i\tov TrXaTtovlfa. Siegfried has put together a list
of over three hundred rare words which are to be found
in both authors. These are by no means chiefly philo-
sophical terms, but belong to every phase of the language.

It is interesting to observe that Philo, though thoroughly
proud of his Jewish origin, yet in language felt himself

a Greek. Thus he says (i. 424, quoted by Siegfried) :
p,ev E/3paloi \eyovai <j)avovr[\ 005 Se rêls

deov.
While Plato is the author on whom he moulds his

vocabulary, Philo proves himself in the direct line of the
"
Common " tradition by Aristotelian expressions like
dtBios, dicpoOtopaj;, TOVIKOS Homeric words,
/c.r.X.; old
such as dêvqvo^, dveifiayv, %av$6v K.T.\., and poetical
terms, of which avayvos, dvaKvtcdco, and arpvros are

examples. Still more, his vocabulary is in striking

accord with that of Plutarch. It is needless to give
instances from a common stock which comes up to many
hundreds. Perhaps this may suggest that if we possessed
remains as extensive of the other writers of the tcoivrj as
those which are extant of Philo and Plutarch, we should

find that the basis of vocabulary common to all of them
was far wider and fuller than we are ready to suppose.

Philo exemplifies very fully the characteristic of many
words and expressions peculiar to himself, which has
been so often referred to already. These are in great
" "
measure due to the compounding tendency of the post-
Alexandrine Greek writers :
e.g. &vo-aiTio\6<yr)TO<i, e'faSm-
\oyoLarpela, TTpoeKTVTroco, rvcf>\o-
K.T.\.
The special glossary -for Philo is large and suggestive

for the later language. He has a wonderful command of
varied expression, and displays a strong tendency towards
the use of synonyms. Thus pairs of words constantly
appear in his writings :
e.g. d/cpaTi&iv, 7roTieti> ; ydvvaOai,,
^lavorjriKo^ ; evOrjvla, everrjpia ;
He is fond of antitheses, and this
probably accounts for much of his word-coining. So he

opposes the aicr%po7ra0ijs to the ala%poupy6s, Birjfjiepeveiv
to $iavv/cTp6V6iv, tStcorat to e/ATretpOTToXeyLtot, aveGis to
roVoxm. Finally, like his contemporaries who have a
mastery of the language, he delights in playing on words,

as between Koprj, girl ; tc6prj, pupil of the eyes, and
1
Kara/cop^, satiated.
1
The instances quoted are taken from the lists in Siegfried's
Philo, pp. 32-136.
Josephus. Following the succession chronologically,

the next important name we meet is that of Josephus,
who, like Philo, deserves special notice in connection
with our investigation, as being, on the one hand, a Jew
of Jerusalem, while, on the other, a man of thorough
Greek cultivation. It will not be necessary, however,
to say much on his vocabulary, as many of its character-
istics have come up already in connection with other

authors. His stock of words is very markedly that of the
"
Common " dialect. Perhaps, however, he is more per-
sistent than
any of the writers of the KOLVYJ in his use of
words which go back a long way in the history of Greek

literature. A considerable percentage of his vocabulary
is to be found in Herodotus, the Tragedians, and Xeno-
phon. But a prominent element in his language is its
striking agreement with that of Thucydides, whom he
evidently made a chief model. This is emphasised by
the fact that he follows Thucydides in the use of rare
words and rare significations of words. To give one or
two instances (all from a few chapters of the Jewish
Antiquities)
dvot/xwrrco, KaXwStov, uA(o<ris, TreptaXyew, TrpoAo-
in the phrase KaOcuptiv ets TO eSaôs = raze to the
ground = Karao-KciTrTetj/ ts eSa(os in Josephus. ey/cet/xat

= eVi/cAaw =" bend " in sense " turn
urge, entreat. of
to pity." aA^TTTos
= hard to catch, etc. etc.
Heappears to have less resemblance to Polybius in

vocabulary than to any of the other authors of that
whole period, while his affinity with Plutarch is most
strongly marked. Only, in this connection very often
SUKVEY OF THE MAIN FACTS 57
the agreement is found where Plutarch himself uses

words which belong to the older Ionic writers and the
poetry of the language and it is also worth noting that
;
there is a considerable vocabulary common to Aristotle,
Plutarch, and Josephus. Plato, too, supplies him with

" "
some rare words. There are few traces of Hellenistic
to be discovered in his writing.
What renders Philo and Josephus of special moment

for our inquiry is the fact that both of them make
habitual use of the Septuagint version, and prize it
greatly. Yet, though they are so thoroughly acquainted

with this stereotyped " Hellenistic," which had become a
standard for Jewish Greek, the power of real Greek
influence with them is so strong as entirely, one may
say, to repress any effect which the language of their
sacred books might have upon their own

vocabulary.
Plutarch. This brings us to the last of the writers
whom it is necessary to notice, the Boeotian Plutarch,
whose name has occurred repeatedly in the course of
our inquiry. Perhaps what specially characterises the
vocabulary of Plutarch, viewed generally, is a sort of
artificial picturesqueness, a more or less warm and vivid
colouring, which does not, however, give the impression

of spontaneity, but rather of a straining after artistic
effect. His store of words is an enormous one, and it
would be difficult to say with what authors he has
most in common. Plato, at anyrate, would be one of
these, and perhaps this may be to some extent accounted

for by the fascination of that rich, artistic glow which
his language exhibits. Plutarch, however, is a real and
typical representative of the Koivr], and manifests all the
"
characteristics which distinguish the dialect." Accord-
ingly he shows many affinities with Polybius, Diodorus,
Philo, and the later writers. We have collected a list
of fifty rare words which are common to Plutarch, Philo,
and the New Testament. But when we recollect that
the Lexicon for Plutarch is
exceedingly comprehensive
owing to the varied nature of his writings, it is natural
that he should display, in a specially marked degree,
characteristics which really belong to the whole range of
the literary language.
To give some particulars 1
(1) There are the usual traces of Ionic influence seen in,
e.g., the use of aTreiTraarOai (mid.)

= renounce, drpe-
fjLelv, e^rj/jLCpovv, <r/cop7rie<T$ai, <uya8iKtos, etc.
(2) An exceptionally large number of non-classical words,
including innumerable compounds :

e.g. di/reeTa-
(
= recount), K/?ap/?d/>(jO(ris, /xio-OTrov^pta, Trpocretcr-
TrpaTTto, 7rpo(re6K/x,d<o, owSfty/Aepevcm, îXaKoXaorros.
(3) Many poetical terms :

e.g. aOpavcrros, /Jtorev'eiv, o<o? r
/cAvSoJv, TroXvTroi/os, (TeA-dS, etc.
(4) Numerous words in non-classical senses: aXveiv =

loiter ; ao-TrovSos = implacable ; eTriet/cws = usually ;
/caTacrrp <!/ = turn upside down ; Trapayooyr?

=
imposture ; o-reâvovi/
= reward ; oxêA-eta
= booty.
Of course these last instances are not peculiar to

Plutarch. Perhaps no writer of the KOIWJ, except Philo,
is fitted to shed so much light on the language of the

New Testament, and this fact is connected with a certain
higher tone of diction in the New Testament writings
1
Many of the examples are taken from Hold en's most valuable
editions of several of Plutarch's Lives.
which constantly elevates them above mere colloquialism,

and so above the monotonous level of the Septuagint.
After this brief survey of the facts in the history of

the Greek literary vocabulary, from Polybius to Plutarch,
it may be well, in a sentence, to summarise our results.
It seems to us impossible to speak of a development,
in the strict sense, being found, either in a downward or
upward direction, in the language employed by the lead-

ing writers from the time of the LXX. to that of the
New Testament. What we do meet with is rather a
more or words which supports, so to
less stable basis of
speak, a constantly shifting surface. In other words,

the earlier literary tradition, modified by the mixture of
dialects and the weakened sense for language, has fixed,
though not within rigid limits, a type of language distinct

from the current popular speech, which becomes the
standard for literature. This vocabulary is diversified by
individual writers through personal predilections, local
peculiarities, and the particular bias given by their own
cast of thought.
CHAPTEE VI
THE VOCABULARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
OUR historical sketch now brought us to the

has
vocabulary of the New Testament writings. Here we

have to do with a sphere which is comparatively
restricted, and so assertions can be made of a far more
sweeping and positive kind than was possible in the case
of the LXX. All the facts presented by the New

Testament books are already within the range of investi-
gation. But numerous problems, for whose solution data
scarcely exist, come up as & priori questions in connection
with the vocabulary of the New Testament. No doubt
critics of all schools, or at least those free from violent
prejudices, agree in fixing the limits of the New Testa-
ment books between 50 and 110 A.D. This is so far
helpful. But very little fresh light is being gained as to

the conditions and circumstances of the actual writers of
the books. Even in the case of an author whose works

are so well authenticated as those of St. Paul, all we
know is that he used an amanuensis whose name is once
given. In all probability this person, and any others

who performed the same office, adhered strictly to
the dictation of the apostle, but we cannot tell what
special colouring may not have been thus introduced.

THE VOCABULARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 61
St.Peter also appears to have employed a secretary ;
and this must be connected with a variety of

language, and a certain classical tone found in his
writing.
The problem becomes still more complicated when we
examine the Synoptic Gospels. Certainly it is becoming
more and more one of the assured results of criticism
that these have as their basis one common source, but it
is hard to say whether this was Aramaic or Greek.
Again, it is certain that "Matthew'' and "Luke," as we have
them, were compiled from other documents in addition
"
to the common source," and that some of these docu-
ments were known only to St. Luke. We cannot say in
what language these additional sources were composed.
Once more, the Gospels, or at least the first two, as we
have them, may be redactions of the original documents,
"
and so room may be left for one or more " hands in
the process, though it must be said that the arguments
adduced on do not possess much force.
this point These
remarks show that we gain rather than lose by examin-
ing the New Testament vocabulary as a whole, and not
in individual writers. For in any case the books of the
New Testament, taken together as a single body of
display one particular type of writing, per-

literature,
haps more varied in individual instances than is ever

the case with the literary basis of the KOLVJ] writers,
yet marked off from all other Greek books by

tendencies and modifications which are specially their
own.
A careful calculation shows that the total number of
words in the New Testament, excluding all proper names
and their derivatives, is 4829. This contains the follow-
ing separate elements :
l
There are about 300 words from later Greek in the N.T.
36 Hebrew
24 Latin
2 Foreign languages
580 Biblical words, i.e. words only found in
the LXX. and N.T.
Altogether, therefore, there are about 950 post-Aris-

totelian words, which, subtracted from the total number,
4829, leaves (roughly speaking) about 3850 in the New

Testament which are found previous to the death of
Aristotle, or about 80 per cent, of the whole vocabulary.
These last figures are significant as showing an almost
unexpected purity in the language of the New Testa-

ment viewed as a whole. It must, however, be noted that
a large number of words, thoroughly current in good
classical writers, receive, when employed in the New
Testament, an entirely new sense.
As we have seen, there are, roughly speaking, about

950 post-Aristotelian words in the New Testament, i.e.
about 20 per cent, of the whole vocabulary.
About 314 of these occur in the LXX., i.e. 33 per cent.

2
104 Plutarch, i.e. 10
3
115 Polybius, i.e. 11
4
98 Philo, i.e. about 10
Taking these general results, we are not justified in
1
Post- Aristotelian secular Greek.
2
I.e. not elsewhere before Plutarch.
3 Not elsewhere before Polybius.
4
Not elsewhere before I^lato.
THE VOCABULAKY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 63
pronouncing the language of the New Testament to be a

" "
vulgar language. Yet one must not be misled by the
statistics. The list of pre-Aristotelian words includes
the prepositions, conjunctions, particles, and common

adverbs, which are, of course, to be found in every Greek
writer whose works are extant. The post- Aristotelian
words, on the other hand, are almost exclusively nouns,
verbs, and adjectives. Bnt this rough and cursory
glance at the constituent elements
o of the New Testament
vocabulary may suffice to show that one

is dealing here
with a language which can be termed, at least in the
broad sense, cultivated, and which comes unquestionably

nearer the literary dialect of the period than does the
language of the LXX.

Perhaps at this point, before we look at the vocabulary
of the New Testament in its various relations, it may be
well, as in the case of the LXX., to note down the results
6f an analysis of one of the New Testament books. St.
Paul's Second Epistle to the Corinthians has been taken
entirely at random, but as a good average specimen of

Hellenistic writing from the pen of one who
a thorough is
Jew in his conceptions and root-ideas, and at the same
time has had an exceptional amount of intercourse with

the Gentile world lying around the Mediterranean.
Ordinary words have been omitted.
13 Chapters. 2 Corinthians. No. of Words examined = l.

Of these 81 occur in the Septuagint.
51 Plutarch.
28 Polybius.
27 Diodorus.
27 Tragedians.
Of these 26 occur in Plato.

25
provisional. For the well-known authors they are prob-

ably fairly correct. But in the case of Philo, Diodorus,
and Josephus, whose language has not been so thoroughly

investigated, they must be regarded as approximately
true. For our purpose, however, which is quite general
in the present instance, they are valid.
(1.) One important general result is immediately obvi-
ous, which has been already hinted at. The New Testa-
ment vocabulary, as compared with the LXX., shows a far
more distinct classical strain. This is exemplified in the
table by the fact that in 2 Corinthians, 17 per cent, of
the vocabulary is found in Plato, while 5 per cent, repre-

sents that author's share in the language of Deuteronomy.
We are certain that less Hellenistic books of the New
Testament, such as 1 Peter, Hebrews, and James,
would show an even greater preponderance. This pure
element is constantly showing itself. In parts of Hebrews
and Acts one can sometimes forget for a moment that
the Greek is Hellenistic. But the classical element in
the New Testament vocabulary is usually made indistinct
by the thoroughly Hellenistic character of the grammar

and syntax. This is further helped by the Jewish cast
of thought which underlies the actual words. Accord-
ingly, in a book like the Epistle of St. James, where
the Greek is forcible, and often beautiful, there
always
remains a certain Hellenistic monotony, a lack of flexi-
bility, which mars the general impression.

In this connection there are many anomalies displayed
by the various writers, difficult of explanation. Thus St.
Matthew's Gospel, which has probably the most Hellen-
istic and Hebraistic tone of any New Testament book,
5
and the least pretence to style, has fewer actual Hebraisms

than the Gospel of St.Luke, and a far more even and
natural flow than St. Mark's work, which is often rugged
and inelegant. On the other hand, St. Luke, while capable
of perhaps the most truly classical cast of language, goes
beyond all the other New Testament writers in the use

of vernacular expressions. No doubt these points have,
underneath them, explanatory facts which have never
come to light. But the minutiae of individual variations
only serve to give greater weight to phenomena of general
agreement. Mistakes are often made by affixing the
stamp of universal validity to what are only the predi-

lections of Speaking generally, one may
individuals.
say that the desire after clearness and lucidity, which

excludes all other aims, combined with the circumstances
of the writers, their Jewish modes of thought, and the
decay of the classical
speech, made
impossible for it
classical Greek
be a predominating factor in the
to
language of the New Testament. Yet it can be said

with accuracy that its claims are far more powerfully
vindicated in the sphere of vocabulary than in any other.
Dry statistics render this unassailable. It is unnecessary,
after what has been done in the case of the Septuagint,
to attempt an analysis of the more ancient portion of the
New Testament vocabulary. The elements which com-

pose it are the same, though they are present in a greatly
intensified degree, and specially so as regards the more
classical portion of them.
(2.) One might reasonably expect that writers who,

while thoroughly Hellenistic their language, and
in
thoroughly Jewish in their manner of thinking, could at

times show a certain literary vigour and cultivation of
speech, one might expect that these writers must uncon-
sciously reveal many points of meeting with the more

purely literary works of their own age and the ages
preceding and following their own. It could not be
otherwise. Unless the language used is a mere popular
jargon, the uncouth dialect of the streets, presuming to

be literary, it will, though quite unconscious of direct
literary influences, employ words and expressions which

belong in common to all who have received education.
Accordingly we find numerous relations between the
" "
authors of the Common Dialect and the New Testament
writers. These relations are not found so much to hold
of special classes of words. They rather belong to the
language as a whole, though perhaps they are most pro-
minently seen in connection with new compounds and
words formed in various ways from elements which
already exist in the ancient tongue. The New Testament
vocabulary about equally related to the vocabularies of
is
Polybius, Diodorus, Philo, and Josephus. It must be
said, however, that the resemblance to Philo is more
important, as it is repeatedly found in the case of words

which appear nowhere else in literature. There are fully
twenty-five of these words, including terms so important as
, dp^dyyekos, Sn/rirô?, /carrjêa), êrpioiraOea),
ia, rerpdSiov, viroypafjifjio^, (j)(,\aB6\(f)ia, papierpa.

Light will be thrown on the general character of
the relation borne by the New Testament vocabulary to
that of the KOIVJ] writers by our giving a short table of
rarer words common to Philo, the New Testament, and
Plutarch :
1
, aKara(r^TO5, axvpoa), dXicvco, aXvtris,
TTI-
op/cew, ecroTrrpoi/, (
ea), /xeyaXetov, (/xc/A^t/xotpea)), /u,ra(rp(?;p:aTtâ),

pta>,
(otfcovpta), otvo^Xvyta, (6/xo</>pocn;i/r;).
TrapaKOvoo, (Trapa^poo-vvry), Trapetcrepô/xai,
Traprjy op la, Trctâpêw, TreptXa/ATrco, TrcpiTretpw,

TroXiVev/xa, Trpoerot/xd^co, Trpo^ccr/xta, TrpovTrap^co.
(paStovpyos).
(raXevco, (crKv^pcoTraô)), (ruyKaraâtVw, crvyKpVTrrco,
//.aprvpea), <rw^Xty8(o.
Perhaps Plutarch stands nearest of all to the New

Testament vocabulary, though this comes out especially
in the case of certain books. In 2 Corinthians, as has
been noted, 31 per cent, of the words occur in him as
well. In the more narrative parts of the New Testa-
ment the proportion would be certainly far smaller. A
good many of the coincidences in words are due, no doubt,
to the subject-matter of Plutarch's works, and to their
semi-philosophical colouring, which finds a parallel in
the theological portions of the New Testament. But it
1
The placing of a word within brackets means either that a
derivative of it or the word from which it is derived occurs in the
New Testament.
often happens that, besides the resemblances in vocabu-
lary, Plutarch's use of words already found in classical

authors sheds striking light on their significations in the
New Testament.
(3.) The remarks made up to this point have only
dealt with one side of the New Testament language,
" "
what may be termed the literary side. The point we
have wished to emphasise is that the vocabulary of this
collection of books cannot, with accuracy, be denominated
"
vulgar," seeing it possesses so many elements in
common with the rest of Greek literature, four-fifths of
itbeing pre- Aristotelian, and a considerable part of the
remaining fifth belonging to the literary dialect of the
time. These characteristics give it a distinct tone, which
marks it as the property of educated men. They elevate
it above the usual average of the Septuagint.
On the other hand, there remains a most important

element of the New Testament vocabulary to be taken
into account, that, in short, which, in addition to its
Hebraistic colouring, marks it off as distinct .both from

the classical language of the great masters and the
"
Common " dialect of its literary contemporaries. We
"
mean its Colloquialism." This also is an element
which might be looked language of the New
for in the
Testament. Its writers, almost without exception, were
Jews. Most scholars agree that the vernacular of

Palestine, strictly so called, was Aramaic. Greek was
current in the country, in some parts more extensively
than in others. It would naturally be the language of
trade. The very fact that Greek would, in the first

place, be acquired by the New Testament writers, entirely
severed from Greek education and the influences of Greek

must inevitably give to it, on their lips, a par-
culture,
ticular stamp,and this could only be the colloquial tone
which was familiar to them. After they had known the
language for some time, and had settled in some particular

district, for example, their vocabulary would or might
assume a well-marked colouring, but the original colloquial
basis would always remain. An additional reason for
this was that they intended their writings to be, in the
strictest sense, popular. That was their one aim. They
did not appeal to a cultivated circle or to a literary
audience. Their public consisted of freedmen, half-
educated Asiatics, slaves, poor women, and the like.

Thus the essential thing for them was to be intelligible.
No writing could be too simple for the readers whom
they addressed. But further, the great bulk of the
persons for whom they wrote were either Jews of the

Diaspora, or the mixed populations dwelling in the great
centres of the new kingdoms which arose at the death of
Alexander. This of itself determined their dialect.
But the same public with whom they had to reckon, or,
at least, one exactly similar, had, long before, come into
possession of a body of literature written by Jews like
themselves, and written in the Greek language. The

translation of the Old Testament into Greek was an
existing fact which proved the possibility of writing for
the common people in a speech which they could easily
understand. The language used then had been thoroughly
vernacular. But Jews had now a more complete mastery
of the Greek tongue. A kind of general culture had
diffused itself everywhere, and even men of a foreign
nation could riot be insensible to it. Besides, the New

Testament was not mere hack-work, was
so to speak. It
the free production of active minds thoroughly absorbed

in their subject. This gave them a sort of natural
eloquence, which had its effect on their language as well

as on their style and tone. Still, their diction was
thoroughly popular in character, essentially a spoken
language, and not that of books, but yet the language
spoken by men of education. This last fact makes
it impossible to draw a hard and fast line round the
New Testament vocabulary. Nowhere does an immov-
able barrier stand between it and the
"
Common "
dialect.
The distinguishing feature, then, about the New Testa-

ment language is that it has for its regulating factor that
type of colloquial Greek which originally prevailed in
Egypt, which received a fixed form, or at least a standard,
in the translation of the Old Testament, and which
henceforward served as a linguistic basis for all Greek-
speaking Jews. Some of the vernacular features which

appear in the New Testament vocabulary have been
treated in connection with the LXX., notably the constant
employment of diminutives, well exemplified by St. Mark,
who uses Ovyarpiov, lÔt/Siav, Kopacnov (several times),
icvvdpiov, TraiSiov (several times), cDrdptov. The instances

of vernacular words, already given from the LXX., occur
also in the New Testament.
But therea further line of inquiry of great import-
is
ance, which shows not only that the New Testament
language contains a very large colloquial element, but

that much of this element is no recent growth that it ;
has descended from an early period in the current
popular speech of daily intercourse. We devote a good

deal of space to it, as it has often been overlooked.
The Comic poets supply a valuable group of instances
of words which are, at least, exceedingly rare outside
their pages, and often found nowhere else, but which
appear in the New Testament. We have collected fairly
complete lists of these, which we give in full
RARE WORDS, APPARENTLY OF A MAINLY COLLOQUIAL CHAR-

ACTER, COMMON TO THE COMIC POETS (EXCLUDING ARISTO-
PHANES) AND THE NEW TESTAMENT
a.
dyyapeva). Menand. (
l
M. C. F. 4. 201).
alotirrrfpiov. Diph. (M. 4. 383), Machon (M. 4.
497).
Plato Com. Europ. 2.
Plat. (2. 697), Philem. (4. 41), Menan.

(4. 239).
Herm. (2. 393), Myrt. (2. 419).
= OTTO TOV vvv. Plat. Com. Soph. 10.
Phryn. (2. 582).
Eubul. (3. 212, 268), Philippid. (4. 476).
. Menan. (4. 268, 283), Antiph. (3. 66).
Antiph. (3. 95), Alexid. (3. 435).
Six instances in Meineke.
ftaMvTiov. Telecl. (2. 371).
ftairrifa. Aristophont. (3. 363), Eubul. (3. 238).

j3a<ravL(Tfj<6<s, Alexid. (3. 515).
ftoOvvos. Cratin. (2. 137).
ftvuvos. Philem. op. Phryn. 133.

/3pa/3iov. Menan. (4. 653).
= veil/. Telecl. (2. 376), etc. etc.
Diph. (4. 380), Anon. (4. 613).

1
The passages in Meineke's Fragmenta Comicorum Groecorum are
quoted.
y. yXwo-croKo/xov. Timocl. (3. 590), Apoll. Carys. (4. 444).

yoyyuoTxo's. Anax. (3. 174).
yvvaiKapiov. Diocl. (2. 840).
8. 8ai/^wo/*ai. Philem. (4. 62).
Si<nrpiofjLa.i.
Eubul. (3. 255).
(-/u'a). Men. (4. 272).
Epicharm. 3; Apoll. Carys. (4. 440).
!icao-ts. Men. (4. 268).
e/c/xacro-w. Cratin. (2. 165).
eKTevcos. Machon, ap. Atlien. 13. 579 E.
evT/ou</>aw. Men. (4. 231).
âvareXAw. Telecl. (2. 373).
eVaKpoao/xcu. Plat. (2. 618).

Nicoch. (2. 843).
Mcostr. Klin. 1.
Men. (4. 94).

Cratin. (2. 223), Alexid. (3. 525).
= SiSao-KaAos (as so often in St. Luke). Antiph.
ap. Antiatticista, 96. 12.
Athenion (4. 558).
Menand. op.
(ex etl/ )' Pliotius.
evapeo-rew. Lysipp. (2. 746).

VToV<us. Men. (4. 267).
Posidipp. (4. 524).
Men. (4. 267),
Eupolis (2. 498).
Men. (4. 314).
Eup. (2. 504).
,
6pianos. Cratin. (2. 36).
Xenarch. (3. 624), Men. (4. 198), Strati
(2. 788), etc. etc.
Ix6v$<-ov. Eight different writers in Meineke.

Alexid. (3. 525).
Sannyr. (2. 874).
Alexid. (3. 409), Eubul. (3. 265), etc., etc.
Archip. 727), etc. etc.

(2.
Menand. ap. Pliryn. 404.
(Plato.) Pherec. (2. 300), Alexid. (3. 516).
(Plato.) Alexid. (3. 516).

Eup. (2. 492).
Stratt. (2. 779).
Philippid. (4. 477).

Ko^tvos. Plat. (2. 629), Stratt. (2. 768), etc. etc.
Kpa.ppa.Tos. Crito (4. 537).

KpaL7rd\rj. Mcoch. (2. 846), Antiph. (3. 101), et^c.
KvAiw. Anon. (4. 618).

KV'/UVW. Antiph. (3. 78), Alexid. (3. 437), Sotad. (3. 585).
Philem. (4. 65).
ov. Mneteen instances in Meineke.
(I).
Pherec. (2. 260), Men. (4. 104).
Ai0ao>. Anaxand. (3. 169).
AtVpa. Posidipp. (4. 516), Diph. (4. 409).
fw.Kpoevp.La. Men. (4. 238).
Pher. (2. 282).
(culinary sense). Eup. (2. 452), etc.
/Lteytcrrai/es.
Menand. ap. Pliryn. 175.
pe6vo-o<5. Menand. (4. 88).
prjXtDTrj. Philem. (4. 9).
p,ov6<j>eaXp.os. Cratin. (2. 100).
KTrjpLcriJLos. Menand. (4. 314).

Alcae. (2. 831), Antiph. (3. 81), etc.
p,vcrT-rjpi,ov secret. Menander.

v. vrjOew. Perh. Cratin. (2. 75), v.l. r)6etv.
vw(9po5. Amips. (2. 707), Anaxip. (4. 460).

o. Antiph. (3. 8).
olvo^Xvyia.
avdpiov. Diph. (4. 417).
otnj. Sannyr. (2. 874), Xenarch. (3. 617).
oTnjrioi/. Mcoch. (2. 844).
opao-ts. Men. (4. 105).
Plat. (2. 654).
Fourteen instances in Meineke.
Men. ap. Pliryn. 393. Thugen. (4. 593).
Men. Sentent. 457.
TratSapiov. Eleven instances in Meineke.
7rav8ox(-8oK-)tov. Philippid. (4. 474).
Theoph. (3. 630), Crito (4. 537).
/is. Antiph. ap. Atlien. 9. 367 D.

os. (Horn., Theogn., Find.), Philetaer. (3. 293),
Diod. (3. 544).
.
Theoph. (2. 807), Anaxand. (3. 183).
. Alexid. (3. 437).
. Men. (4. 88).
Antiph. 'AypotK. 1. 4; Stratt. (2. 774),

Alexid. (3. 439).
. Eub. (3. 252).
.
Epicharm. ap. Atlien. 7. 7 ;
Men. (4. 101).
Eupol. (2. 427).
7rpoor/ce<aAaiov
= boat-cushion. Cratin. (2. 170), Herm.
(2. 404).
p. pa/2Siw. Pherec. (2. 273).
paTTtcr/xa. Antiph. (3. 126).
pact's. Epichar. (Bekk. Anecd. 113), Archip. ap. Poll.
10. 136.
jSwriCco. Antiph. (3. 117), Anon. 4. 615.
pvfjirj. Antiph. (3. 26), Philippid. (4. 471).

pimxpo's. Telecl. (2. 364), Pherec. (2. 290), Eupol.
(2. 557), etc.
pvTroo). Anaxand. (3. 177), Aristophont. (3. 362),
etc.
a-. cravSaA.iov. Cratin. (2. 91), Cephis. (2. 884), Theoph.
(2. 809), etc.

o-aTrpos
- filthy, aicrxpos. Pherec. ap. Theon., prob.
Philem. Incert. 47.
o-apydvrj. Timocl. (3. 600).
oVi Philem. (4. 66), Men.(4. 307).
is. Herm. (2. 408), Stratt. (2. 764), etc.
Archip. ap. Atli. 9. 68 ; Anaxip. (4. 460).
<TLTCVTO<S. Epigen. (3. 537).
crKr;vo7rotos. Anon. (4. 680).
cnrvpis. Six instances in Meineke.
.
Chiefly Comic. Four instances in Meineke.
i}.
Men. (4. 312).
.
Antiph. ap. Ath. 3. 127. Sophil. ap. Ath.
3. 100.
. Nicostr. (5. 84).
Anaxand (3. 164), Ephipp. (3. 326).

Amphid. (3. 318).
Anaxipp. (4. 459).
(Aristot.), Plato Com. (2. 686).
<rw0Aa<o. Alexid. 510).
(3.
. Men. Sentent. 24.
Anaxil. (3. 345), Eub. (3. 242).
Men. ap. Pliryn. 393.
Chiefly Comic. Four instances in Meineke.
/ (
o-w/Dcv/xa. Eub. (3. 228).
W
(
crwpevros. Alexid. (3. 416).
T. TcAawov. Posidipp. (4. 517).
Six instances in Meineke.
Eup. (2. 562). Vernacular word.
(Colloquial.) Sixteen instances in Meineke.
Alexid. (3. 395).
, <f>a.Lv6Xr)<s. Rhinthon ap. Poll.
<f>av6<;. Six instances in Meineke.
Alexid. (3. 526).
Men. 236).
(4.
Eight instances in Meineke.

<t>vpaiia. Mens. (3. 569).
Ten instances in Meineke.
Plato, Fragg. 10, p. 257.
Philem. (4. 47).
Five instances in Meineke.
(of men). Eight instances in Meineke.
Anaxand. [3. 202].)
to.
upvopau. Plat. (2. 659).
We have given these very fully because we lists
believe that nomore important evidence could be pre-

sented with regard to the colloquial character of the
New Testament vocabulary. In the Comic poets, if
anywhere, we should expect to find the current popular

speech strongly marked. And when words meet us all
through the Comic literature of Greece, from Cratinus at
its beginning to Posidippus at its close, which scarcely

appear anywhere else except in the New Testament, we
are justified in accepting this as proof positive of our
position. The facts exhibited show clearly the existence

of a language of popular intercourse from an early time,
which verges on the borders of the literary language, but
is excluded from composition except in the case of
Comedy. Yet many of thewords in question must have
borne the stamp of refinement, and belonged to the
diction of polite speech at a period long antecedent to
literary production. By processes which can no more

be discovered, these words have somehow lost caste, and
while by no means rejected altogether, we may believe,
from the conversation of the educated, have come to be
" " "
regarded as more or less vulgar and rough." In this
way the door of literature was barred to them. But
they continued all along to have full play in the language
of daily life, and accordingly, when Greek literary taste
began to decay, and the real literary dialect no longer

survived in spontaneous form, these words again asserted
themselves, and by. the time the New Testament was
written, they have regained their place in the language
of educated men, and are found occasionally even in the
"
writers of the Common Dialect."
But in addition to the writers we have quoted, who
range over a period of three hundred years, and whose
works are only extant in a very fragmentary form, a
most interesting and important contribution is made to
the history of colloquial Greek in connection with the
language of the New Testament by the vocabulary of

Aristophanes. In his case we have the advantage of
seeing the phenomena of the Greek popular vocabulary

at a definite stage in Greek history. So a landmark is
given by which the past of the colloquial language and
its future may be estimated. Besides, Aristophanes lived
in the Golden Age of the Attic dialect, when the sense
for language had reached its highest pitch. Accordingly,
" "
one mayexpect that the popular words admitted by
him are, at least, on the higher level of the " con-
versational" type of speech. This gives an additional
criterion for the New Testament vocabulary. The
following is a list of rare words which occur in
Aristophanes, and almost nowhere else except in the New

" "
Testament. They are all apparently colloquial :
a. a/?vo-(ros. Ran. 138.

oLKparov. Ach. 75, 1229; Eq. 85, 87.
afji7rXovpy6<s. Pax 190.
afji<f>oSov. Frag. 304.

Eq. 780.
Eq. 819.
13. fidros. Frag. 593.
Ten instances = loathe.
ov (NT. J3L/3\apL8Lov). Frag. (Mein. 2.
1207).
8. StaAeKTos. Frag. 552.
c. eKKoXvâw. Frag. (2. 975).
eW'co. Vesp. 792.
Ko-TpeV><o. Plut. 721 ; Nub. 88, 554.
e/x,/2a7TT<o. Frag. 205; Nub. 150.

onj).
Vesp. 1219.
Frag. (2. 980).
. Plut. 692; Nub. 987.
.
Frag. 615.
Plut. 1095.
->?. ^8iW;u,os. Frag. (2. 1178).

e. 0\ij3o>. Fig. sense in Vesp. 1289; Ran. 5. So

in N.T.
Ovpis. Vesp. 379; Therm. 797.

In vernac. sense of " " "
i. i/xvos. long," many ;
Pax 354.
K. *ap<os. Av. 643 ; Vesp. 249 ; Lys. 474.
fcci/Ho.
Av. 816.
Kcpna. Pint. 379; Av. 1108.
. KT. KAivapiov. Frag. 2. 1046.
wi/. Frag. (2. 947).
Pax 1200. A word of trade, said to be
Phoenician; N.T. KoAA-u/3icm}s.

cf.
icvAAo's. Eq. 1083; Av. 1379.

A. AaXm. Nub. 931; Ran. 1069. With a notion of
contempt.
\dpvyg. Ran. 575; Eq. 1363.
fji. /Aaor(cr)ao/xai. Six times in Aristoph.
= " critic nostrils." Ran. 893 ;
cf. N.T. /X.VK-
v. vov6co-ia. Ran. 1009.

VVTTW. Nub. 321; frag, in Homer; prob. came to be
colloquial.
o. oOovtov. Frag. (2. 989).
is (N.T. otvoTrorrys). Therm. 393.
(fiaQvs).Prob. vernac. expression; Vesp. 216.
TT.
Trayts. Av. 194, 527; Frag. 663.
VTTTw. Extremely freq. in Aristoph.
.
Metaph. in Aristoph. and Comic writers.
io).
Vesp. 202.
= superior. Ran. 76.
p. pa/3Sovxos. Pax 734.
cr. craKKos. Ach. 745 (a Megarian is speaking, hence
two K'S).
T. rptySoXos. Lys. 576.
rpvfiXiov. Ach. 278 ;
Av. 77.
TvpftdtofiM. Pax 1007; Vesp. 257.

v. vaXtvos. Ach. 74.
= go. Colloq. use; Ran. 174; Nub. 1298;
Vesp. 290.
V7rtD7riaw. Pax 541.

<f>. fagotti. Nub. 592.
Therm. 692; Lys. 19; Eq. 715.
Before leaving the Comic poets, it is worth our while

to note that, even among the earlier ones, strange com-
pounds and clumsy formations are found, which are
same phenomena in the late
exact prototypes of the
Greek of post- Alexandrine days.
Thus Crates employs words like e0e\oo-vî;os, dvafiico-
cracrdat, = 'jroiija-at dvaftiwa'ai,, etc.
Eupolis uses dfj,/3\v<TTovf)o-ai/, d<f>a$La, /3Se\vpevofj,cu,

veavio-Kew, etc.
In Phrynichus occur such forms as
i,,
etc.
w, KoXkoTrevco,
and the like, which occur in the old Comedy, look quite
like formations belonging to the age of the LXX.
" "
The old Anonymous Writer on Comedy expressly
says that the poets of the Middle Comedy employed rfjs
crvvr}6ovs XaXta?. By this time the inhabitants of
Athens had come into frequent contact with foreigners

and men who spoke impure Greek. This told on the
language of the people, and, of course, reflected itself in
the vocabulary of the Comic poets.
.
By the time the
New Comedy arose, the tendencies already in vogue had
increased in influence. The one aim the poets set before
them was that which we saw to be the chief thing also
with Hellenistic writers, viz. clearness and intelligibility.
And so Anonymus de Com. p. 32, says: fj pev vea
TO (ratyea-Tepov e%ei, ry vea Ke^prjfjLevrj 'ArOtSi,, rj &e
TO Seivbv Kal vtyr)\bv TOU \ejeiv. Barbarous

words and forms received far greater licence, and this
because u Comedy follows the common language of the
people."
One point which bears upon the relation of the New

Testament vocabulary spoken language remains to
to the
be glanced at. It is found that in the New Testament
(and to a considerable extent in the Comic writers)

words which in ordinary Greek bore a strong and almost
coarse sense, have become entirely enervated, so that
they are used in the most casual and trivial connections.

This fact is easily explained. The terms gradually
passed into the daily speech of the people, a process in
which, quite naturally, the rough edges were worn off,
and they became strictly commonplace words. Instances
are the following :
In the Class, language usu. = throw, hurl, cast.

Looser sense inHomer and Tragedians, where it is often
used metaphorically, but has a notion of " haste " or
" "
hurry associated with it. This use is almost always
the equivalent of our " lay to heart."
In N.T. often = " put " in its most colourless
sense.
E.g. Mark 7. 33 :
e/3ctAev TOVS $O.KTV\OVS cts TO, omx
avrov.
John 20. 27 :
John 5. 7 : Iva OTO.V rapa)(0fj TO vS<ap j3dX.r) /xe ets rrjv
(used of a sick man).
epevyw, epev'yo/xcu. In Class. Gk. (1) Disgorge, Horn.;

(2) Surge, Horn. Find. ; (3) In one or two places in
Homer = roar.
In N.T. Matt. 13. 35 (quotation fr.
LXX.) : <Wo>
6
ev TrapajSoXcus TO (rrofjia /xov, e/ocvôjuai KCKpupfJieva OLTTO
Karaj3o\r]<s KoV/xov
= utter.
Cf. Theocr. 13. 58: rpts //,/ "YAai/ avcrei/ oow ftaOvs
ypvye Aat/xos. This sense is found several times in the
LXX.
<r/cvAX(o. In Aesch. and Anthol. =flay, mangle.

In N.T. = annoy. E.g. Mark 5. 35 ri In cr/cvAAets :
rov BiSda-KaXov. So Matt. 10. 36: covoAjnej/ot = worn

out, worried. o-/cvA/*o? in LXX. (and Cicero's Letters) =
troubles.
Tp<oy<D. In Homer, used of animals = gnaw, munch,

crunch.
In Hdt., etc., of men, but only of eating vegetables,
fruit, etc. Through vernacular usage it came to mean
" eat " in
general.
In N.T. always used in this sense. In the fourth
Gospel employed to the complete exclusion of
it is
Cf. John 6. 54 6 rpwyoov fj,ov TTJV crdpKa.

:
Matt. 24. 38 rpwyovres KCU

:
In earlier Greek, uniformly

of animals = feed, fatten with fodder. In Comedy, used
of feasting ; and then, through colloquial Greek =
men
"eat," with no strong sense attached. This softened
use also in Comedy.
In N.T. used invariably = eat, or, satisfy with food.
All distinction between tcrOUiv and xopTaecr0ai has
by this time vanished. An interesting illustration of
this is Mark 7. 27, 28 : a<es TT/OWTOV xP Ta(r ^
l/aL T <* rcicva'
... TO, Kvvdpia VTro/caro) rfj<s rpaTre^T/s ecrdiovcrw OLTTO raiv
i^t^tcovTWV TratStcuv. Same use in LXX.

Words which have passed through the same process
are
K/oavyaav used as =
if/r)\acf>a.v
= investigate, etc.
They are all, apparently, colloquial usages, whose

process of formation has been accelerated by the tendency
to exaggerate which a language shows when it has
entered on a period of degeneration.
One most important element in the New Testament
vocabulary we merely mention here as it must come up
for elaborate treatment afterwards, viz. the large number
of terms belonging to the sphere of Christian Theology
which occur throughout these writings.
CHAPTEE VII
COMPARISON OF THE VOCABULARY OF THE SEPTUAGINT

WITH THAT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
WE have attempted in the foregoing pages to lay a more

or less solid basis for our investigation, to indicate
the directions in which must proceed and its limits,,
it
and to accumulate various lines of evidence which must

have a chief place in determining its issue. We have
tried to sketch the special conditions of the Greek
language in the age when the LXX. arose. rough A
analysis of the main elements in the vocabulary of the
LXX. has been given, and it has been endeavoured to
connect this discussion with a similar examination of
the New Testament language by means of a very brief
inquiry into the vocabulary of the Common Dialect. A
survey of the New Testament vocabulary has completed
the collection of materials necessary both for placing us
at the proper point of view for our discussion, and for
supplying us with guiding-lines throughout the whole of

the investigation.
What remains to be done in the second part of this
dissertation is to state generally the facts which come to
view on a minute comparison of the vocabulary of the

LXX. with that of the New Testament, to illustrate
^ 84
COMPARISON OF VOCABULARY OF LXX. AND N.T. 85
these, to draw the legitimate inferences from them, and

so arrive at some definite conclusion with respect to the
whole question under examination.
The most cursory reading of the Greek New Testa-
ment shows a constant habit on the part of the writers
of quoting from the Old Testament. The significant fact
in this connection is that the great majority of these
quotations are from the Greek version of the Sacred

Books. When it is remembered that the writers are
almost Jews, and that the Jewish reverence for the
all
actual letters of the Hebrew original of the Old Testa-

ment is unparalleled, the point attracts attention.
Unfortunately it is exceedingly difficult to discover the

actual usage of the Palestinian synagogues with respect
to the reading of the Old Testament in the first century
A.D. Some scholars assert that the synagogue readers
must have employed Targums in Aramaic, the vernacular
of Others as boldly declare that it was
the country.
the Greek version and no other which was read in the
public services. And this is used as an argument in

favour of the position, that Greek, equally with or more
than Aramaic, was the popular language of the country
in the time of Christ.
Without, however, discussing a question which seems

impossible of solution, one may with safety affirm that
the LXX. must have been well known at least to the
great mass of intelligent and educated Jews, for this is

a legitimate inference from the New Testament. There
we find that there are about three hundred quotations
from the Old Testament. At least ninety of these agree
verbally with the LXX. In the others, the variations

86 SOUKCES OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
from it are very trifling. More important still, in
thirty-seven of the ninety the LXX. differs from the-

Hebrew text. Accordingly, the writers of the New
Testament must have been thoroughly acquainted with
this version, seeing they preferred to use it, though
written in a foreign language, rather than to translate
from a text which they regarded as in the strictest sense
inspired. No doubt it must be borne in mind that the
readers for whom they wrote were chiefly " Gentiles," to
whom the Old Testament would only be known in its

Greek dress. Still their easy familiarity with it shows
how completely they had made it their own. This is
corroborated by constant reminiscences of it, and allusions

which are almost more important than quotations in
this connection, as coming up unconsciously. And so-
the question naturally arises : If these writers were so-
thoroughly versed in the Greek translation of the Old

Testament, as is certainly the fact, is it not likely that
when they came to write books in Greek themselves, their
language would be moulded and shaped by the language
of the LXX., especially as the latter had stereotyped a
particular form of Greek, and had so become a standard

for Hellenistic Jews ? Is it not likely that the influence
of the LXX. will appear, not only in words which express

Hebrew conceptions and feelings,but in the general vocabu-
lary which the Jewish writers of the New Testament employ ?

A
scholar so thorough and so original as the late Dr.
Hatch says, in his Essays in Biblical Greek (p. 3 4) :
"
The great majority of New Testament words are words
which, though for the most part common to biblical and
contemporary secular Greek, express in their biblical
use the conceptions of a Semitic race, and which must
consequently be examined by the light of the cognate

documents which form the LXX." And again (p. 11):
"
Biblical Greek is thus a language which stands by
itself. What we have to find out in studying it is what
meaning certain Greek words conveyed to a Semitic
mind." Our attempt in the pages that follow must be
to test these statements by means of the facts we have
to produce, and in the light of the conclusions arrived at
in the former part of the dissertation.
There are various ways in which the vocabulary of one

group of writings may be presumed to be a principal
factor in the formation of that which belongs to another
group. There must always be more or less of mere pre-
sumption about the matter, because the life-history of
words is often silent and curious. Let us call the earlier
group A, and the later B.

(1.) There is, first, what may be called external
evidence. We may
have a definite knowledge of the
fact that the writers of B were intimately acquainted
with group A, that, indeed, this was almost their only

literature. So a presumption is legitimate that the
language of A will influence in an indefinite degree the
language of B. But this is purely ft,

priori.
(2.) On examination, it may be found that an over-
whelmingly large proportion the vocabulary of B has

of
already occurred in A. This leads us to look for further
points of resemblance.
(3.) A careful scrutiny of the two vocabularies may
show that a large number of words found in B occur in
no other known writings except group A.
(4.) It may appear that many of the words common to

A and B are derived words, whose special character makes
it certain that they were formed by the writers of A.
(5.) We may
further discover that a large number of
current words, found in other authors, occur in and B A
in a sense quite peculiar to these two groups of writings.
(6.) A words may be found in B which are

set of
local peculiarities of the region where group A arose.
This rough classification probably embraces most of

the relations which could exist between two vocabularies.
Bearing them in mind, we must set down the facts which

emerge on a comparison of the vocabulary of the LXX.
with that of the New Testament.
We
have already seen that out of a total vocabulary
of over 4800 words in the New Testament (excluding
all proper names and their derivatives) there are about
950 which are post- Aristotelian of these, over 300 are
;
found also in the LXX. But one half of this number

occurs in other writings, which, in this case, mean those
"
of the Common Dialect," the Anthology, the Jewish
Apocrypha, Philo, and Inscriptions. On this element, it
isplain, no valid conclusions can be based, except that
special attention to the group common

must be directed
to the LXX., the NewTestament, and Philo. We shall
touch on this immediately. There are, then, about 150
words in all which are strictly peculiar to the LXX. and
New Testament. The following is a list which we have
compiled of them. It is, at least, approximately correct :
Nouns
aya6a)<Tvvrj, dyaAA.tao'iSj dytacr/>tos,
yrjfjia } di/raTroSo/xa,
yeevva,
&m7S.
eAey/Aos, cAeyis, e/ATraty/xos, e/x-TraiK-n/s, IvraX/xa,
, KCUXTOOI'J Kav^crt?, Kopos.
VIK05.
6A.OKA.r7/Ha, oTrTacrta, op/cw/i.oo'ia.
7rapa7rtKpao-/>tos, TrapotKtia, Trapopytoyxo's, Trarptap^s, Trcipaa--
<raj3ati)@, a-ayrjvr}, (raravas, OTOLTOV, crt'^cpa, o~Kav8aAoi/,

Sta.
v?rcii/T7/(rts,
Adjectives
dfcpoycDviato
Trapeo-Kos.
s, ActrovpytKos.
, yaoytAaAos.
7TptOVOTt05,
w, dyaAAtaw, dytaâ), at^/xaAa)Tvw,

t^w, aTroSeKarevco, d7ro/ce<âAtâ>, aTro-
co, Siayoyyv<o, SoXiooo, Swaju-oco.
e
ev/caivt^w, evTaîa^w, evwrtô/xatj ea(rrpa7rT(o,
vTrvc'^w, eTravaTravco, eT
7nyaju,/3pevw,
iû), KaraKavâo/x-at, KaraAcX^povo/xew, KaTavv(ro"(o,

/cpaTatoca.
a), opôro/xew, oTrravw, opOpi^w.

Tr
a), Trapa^Xow,
o-uveyetpco.
Adverbs
ts, evavrt, ei/wTriov, eâtVva, eTravptov.
Interjections
afJLTjv, aXXrjXovLa.
ovai.
We add as an appendix to this list those words which

are common to the LXX., New Testament, and Philo.
(This list is probably not so complete as the former.)
Nouns
dya7r>7, a/cpo/^voTca, aTravyacr/xa.
Siaa-Tropa, Siarayry, Si
KaraTreracr/xa, Karacrxeo"t?> Karapov^TT;?, KOKKIVO?.

COMPAEISON OF VOCABULAKY OF LXX. AND N.T. 91
Trai/TOKparoop,
, 7rpa)TOTO/aa.
Adjectives
eTri/carapaTO?, ev
iXaoT^pios.
TTpCDTOTOKOS.
e/A7repi7raT<D,
The lists just given show the nature of the relation
which can be proved by actual facts to exist between the

vocabularies of the LXX. and New Testament. We
have included the words common to these with Philo,
because (1) Philo was a Jewish writer. (2) He lived in
Alexandria, the home of the LXX. (3) All through his
works he shows a remarkable acquaintance with the
LXX., which is usually the text on which he comments.
Accordingly, when we find him using a set of terms of a
peculiar character, as a rule, tinged with an Old Testa-
ment colouring, there is, to say the least, a very strong
presumption that he derived them from the LXX.

But before leaving our dry columns of statistics, which
must form the basis of all that has yet to be done, one
list more needs to be presented. There is a considerable
number of words found in Greek writers of all periods,
more or which appear in the New Testament in an

less,
altogether peculiar and abnormal sense. A large number

of those are found in the LXX. either with an identical
or closely-connected signification. It seems advisable to

insert a list of these here, so as to avoid the necessity of
interrupting our subsequent discussion. It must be noted

that the great majority of them are found in the New
Testament in their ordinary sense as well.
WORDS COMMON TO THE LXX. AND N.T. WITH ".BIBLICAL"

MEANING ,
Nouns
ayyeXos, d8eX<os, di/TiXîs, dj/riXoyta, ajrofrradLov.
ypa/x/zarevs.
(6), Soa, Sw/xa, Scoped.
, etStoXov, flpr)vr)) CK/cX^cria, eKtrracris, eVicT/coTr?;, euXoyia.
0di/aros, 0eog, Ovydr-qp.
iXacr/xos, iXacrr^pioi/.
KapTros, Karct7rav(rts, Kepas, K?7puy/x,a, KA^povo/xos, KOtXta,

Ko'oyxos, KpiVts, Kptrijs.
/x,vorr>yptov.
vo/xos, vvfji(j)rj.
ovo/x-a, ovpai/os, oûpwyaa.

TratSci'a, Trats, 7rapa/3oXrj, TrapoiKOS, Treipatr/xos, Tropvcta,
prjfj.a, ptâ.
o-KavSaXov, o-
ap^, CTKrjvoTrrjyLa, crro/xa, (rrparta,
La, crcoTr/piov.
1
Based entirely on the excellent Lists in Thayer's edition of
Grimm- Wilke's CZaws ^Vov* Testamenti. T. & T. Clark.
COMPAKISON OF VOCABULARY OF LXX. AND N.T. 93
T6/C1/OV.
vto?,
Adjectives
Verbs
eo), dvcuêpco, dv0o/-ioXoyeo/x,ai, aTTOKaAvTrrco, a
etSa>, i/u', eTnw, e/cXeyo/xat, eô/xoXoycw,
Ka/coto, KaKaoyew, Ka/x,/AV<o,
K/3U/CU, KOTTtaO).
TrcuSeva), 7rara(r(r(o, Trctpa^w, Tropevw,
oûvayw,
Our results be briefly summarised thus

may
(1.) There are, roughly speaking, about 550 words
which may be termed " Biblical," e. found either in the
New Testament alone, or, besides, only in the LXX.
That is, about 12 per cent, of the total vocabulary of the
"
New Testament is Biblical."
(2.) About 30 per cent, of the total number of
"Biblical" words in the New Testament occur in the LXX.

(3.) About 32 per cent, of the words found in the
" "
New Testament alone with special Biblical meaning
occur in the LXX.
CHAPTER VIII
THE INFLUENCE OF THE SEPTUAGINT ON THE THEO-

LOGICAL AND RELIGIOUS TERMS OF THE NEW TESTA-
MENT VOCABULARY
WE have seen that the LXX. was thoroughly well-

known to the writers of the New Testament. But these
latterhad a peculiar task before them. The main object
of their writing was to set forth to Jews and Greeks
alike the conceptions of that new Faith which had won
their allegiance. These conceptions were, of course,
religious and
.theological. The problem was to express
them in a suitable terminology. But they had a model
to follow. Already the religious and theological ideas of
the Hebrew people had been clothed in a Greek dress.
This had involved many difficulties, but they had been
in great measure surmounted. So that there was a
technical theological vocabulary actually existing. But
Christian modes of thinking were a thorough advance on
those of the Hebrews. Often, therefore, entirely new
words had to come into use to express the new ideas, or
else old words had to undergo a large extension of
meaning. Still, the early Christian writers, being almost

all Jews, retained a Hebrew colouring throughout their
thought. There was a basis of Hebrew ideas beneath
94
INFLUENCE OF SEPTUAGINT ON N.T. TEEMS 95
the new Accordingly, even in the case

superstructure.
of purely Christian conceptions, it was thoroughly natural
for the New Testament writers to frame their language
on the analogy of the existing theological vocabulary which

they found in the Greek version of the Old Testament.
Considering these circumstances, then, we should expect
to find the vocabulary of the LXX. exercising a direct
influence on that of the New Testament in regard to
religious Strangely enough, we
and theological terms.
discover that this particular class of terms does not
include as a main element words either formed or
brought into literature for the first time by the LXX.

The most of them fall within that class of "Words
common to the LXX. and New Testament with '
Biblical
'
signification," of which a list has already been given. Of
course, a large number belong to the New Testament
alone.
Here there can be no discussion. Facts clearly show

how prominent a part the LXX. plays in moulding the
religious vocabulary of the New Testament. As this is
one most important phenomena in connection with

of the
the relation of the two vocabularies, it must be fully

illustrated. And it is perhaps well, in estimating the
influence of the LXX. on the language of the New
Testament, to begin with a class of words where that
influenceis too obvious to be mistaken. Our examples
are given simply in alphabetical order.
Nouns
d8 e A. <j[>
o5
I. In Class. Lit. in the ordinary sense.
II. In LXX. (1)= brother. (2)
= neighbour. Lev. 19. 17:
rov dScXôV crov rfj Siavoia <rov eXey/>ta)
TrXô-idV o-ov. (3)

= member of the same
nation, Ex. 2. 14 :
MwvoSJs e^Xflev Trpos TOVS d8eX<ovs
v TOVS viovs 'laparyX ;
Deut. 15. 3 : TOV dXXoVpioi/
ocra eai/ 17
o~oi Trap' avru>, TOV dSeXôv o*ov a<eo~iv
TOV ^PCOVS O~OV.
III. In KT.
(1) ordinary sense. (2)
= neighbour, Matt.
7. 3TO Kap<os TO ev TO) 6(j>Oa\jJL<2 TOV d8eX^>ov o~ov.
:
(3)
= member of the same nation, Rom. 9. 3 T/VXO/^V :
yap avdOefJia eli/at auTOS eyw aTro TOV Xpio~TOV vvrep TWV
dSeXôiv ju,ov,
TWV o-vyyevwv JJLOV
Kara o*ap/ca otTtvcs ewrtv
'lo-par/XetTat. (4)
= fellow-Christians, the whole band
of Christians being looked on as forming a single
family, 1 Cor. 1. 1 2o><r0ei^ 6 dSeX^ds; Acts 9. 30:
:
Se ot dSeX<ot Kanqyayov avrbv ets Kato-apt'av.

7rtyvoi/Ts
The transition is seen (1) member of the
easily
same family; (2) member of the same community
(national) ; (3) member of the same community
(spiritual).
I. In Class. Lit. (1) receiving in exchange; (2) hold,

support ; (3) claim ; (4) objection ; (5) apprehension
or perception.
II. In LXX., used to translate five Hebrew words meaning
respectively (a) arm, strength, aid;
(&) shield; (c)
defence, fortress ; (d) strength, refuge ; (e) help, aid.
It is plain that the idea common to these words is "aid."
All the passages occur in the Book of Psalms.
III. In N.T., 1 Cor. 12. 28: dvTtX^(X^)ts, "helps."
Mentioned among gifts bestowed on certain persons in
the Christian Church, and classed with âptV/xaTa
ta/x,aTcov, Kv/JcpviJo-as K.T.X. In Patristic Greek it is =
help. Cf. Acts 20. 35 : Set dvTiXa|U,/3dVeo-$ai TWI/ do-êv-
OWTCOV in a charge to the 7rpeo-/3vTepoi of Ephesus. The

verb has an approach to this sense in several places in
Thucyd., e.g. ii. 61. 3 : TOV KOIVOV T^
INFLUENCE OF SEPTUAGINT ON N.T. TERMS 97
I. In Class. Lit.^(l) slanderous, Comic poets, Andoc.

etc. ; Xen., Arist.
(2) slanderer, Find.,
II. In LXX. eighteen times out of twenty it translates
p>, "adversary," which, in these places, denotes "the
adversary" KO.T eô^v, viz. Satan. Sixteen of these
places are in Job and Zechariah.
III. In N.T. about thirty-five times in the above sense =
the devil. Used also in the ordinary sense, 2 Tim. 3. 3 :
ao-Topyoi, aonrovooi, 8ia/3oAoi. In the former sense,

Sia/3oAos always has the article.
I. In Class. Lit. (1) expectation; (2) sentiment; (3)

" "
opinion ; (4) estimation, good opinion ; (5) credit.
II. In LXX. 8da almost invariably translates one of
three Hebrew words, but in different proportions. One
of these, ^1133 = honour, glory, splendour, it translates
more than one hundred and fifty times. It is used next
often to translate rnsan = glory, splendour, which it
does about twenty times. Lastly, it is used nine times
as= "tin, which denotes "majesty." By far its most
common use is to translate the first word noted when
used of God, and so = the glory with which God appears,
an outward manifestation.
III. In JST.T. fully one hundred and fifty times. Very
" "
frequently applied to God in the sense of praise and
"honour." But a special sense, quite unheard of in
Greek literature, is that which has arisen under the
influence of the LXX., and which appears
in places like
Acts 22. 11 :
rys S6^<s TOV <<DTOS; 2 Cor. 3. 7 Sta -ryv :
Soav TOV TrpocrwTrov; 1 Cor. 15. 41 S6a f]\Lov, (reX-rjvrjs ;

:
Apoc. 21. 23 :
f) yap $6aTOV Ocov e<om<rev K.r.A. From
this come further senses of " magnificence,"
"
majesty,"
"exaltation"; the word, in short, assuming different
shades of meaning according to the subjects to which it
is applied.
7
201/os
I. In Class. Lit. (1) band of men; (2) nation; (3) special
caste, tribe.
II. In LXX. in an overwhelming number of cases to
translate Heb. which, in the first instance, is = a
^3,
people (in general), but which in the plural is specially

used of the other nations besides Israel, with an
additional notion of their being outcasts and ignorant
of the true religion. This always in LXX. = ra
Wvr] ;
Ps. 58. 9 :
tôvScvojtreis TTO.VTO. TO. Wvr) ;
Zech.
1. 15opyyv fjiyd\Trjv 6pyt'o/>uu CTTI TO. Wvri.
: Con-
stantly used as opposed to Aaos, which denotes Israel
itself.
III. Accordingly, by a natural transition, in N.T., in such

places as 2. 32Luke <ws cts a.7roKaXv\j/Lv iBvw KOL
:
S6av Xaov crov 'IcrpaTJA.. So = pagans, Eom. 3. 29 rj :
'lovSatW 6 0eos [iovov ; ovî KOL cOvwv ; yet apparently

always with a softened tone. So that it occurs = Gentile
Christians, Bom. 15. 27 : ei
yap rots Trvev/xartKots avruv
lKOW<t)vr)(rav TO, Wvrj, o^ccAovcrtv Kat iv rots o"apKt/cots
\LTOvpy?j(rai avrot?. By Aristides (160 A.D.), ra Wvr]

are opposed to the Greeks. .
Iprjvr)
"
= peace," as opp. to "war." But
I. In Class. Lit. usu.
modifications of this, as Plat. Sympos. 189 edv TL B :
ycXotov CITT^S eôv <roi Iv fiprjvr] Aeyeti/, just as would

naturally come about in language.
II. In LXX. it translates more than one hundred and fifty
times Heb. Di^K*, which has for its root-idea, physical
soundness of body, health, and so reaches its metaphori-

cal and ruling sense of security and tranquillity of state,
prosperity of mind and body, welfare. From this comes
to it in a secondary way the meaning of "peace" as
"
opp. to war," because in times of peace things are
secure and tranquil. It translates six times Heb. HD2
= security, as springing from confidence in some person
or circumstance.
III. In N.T. the Class, meaning is often found. But

other senses predominate, (a) Concord in private life,
e.g. Luke 12. 51 So/cetre on tipT/jvyv
Trapeyevo/xryv Sowai
:
. . . ; ov^t Aeya) vfuv aAA' r) Siay/,epio-/u,6V, etc. etc.
(&)Usage based on LXX. = happiness or prosperity.

About thirty times in phrase clprjvr) v/uv. (Perhaps this
has a tinge of additional signification in the apostolic
writings.) Acts 16. 36: Tropevecrfle eV dprfvri Matt.
10. 13 :
-fj tip-fjvri V/AWV Trpos iyx,as cTrwrrpcK/^Ta), .e.
"your
wish of prosperity." (c) Special Christian sense, which
is an extension of (&) = rest of soul in God through
Christ. John 16. 33 ravra XtXdXrjKa v/juv Iva. ev e/xot

:
clp-rjvrjv ex^Te. So appar. in places like Phil. 4. 7 :
fj eiptjvr) TOV Oeov ; Acts 10. 36: cvayyeXtêcrât ctp^vr/v

Sta 'ITJO-OV. Prob. this sense also in the salutations at
the and end
beginning of the Epistles. In late
Byzantine Greek it came to be a technical term in
phrases like Sowat rr)v elpyvrjv
= to say
KK\r](T La
-
I. In Class. Lit. = the legislative assembly.
II. In LXX.
used almost invariably to translate Heb.
bnfy
which denotes specially "the congregation of the
Israelites assembled." Josh. 8. 35 o OVK dvcyvo ets TO. :
wra Tracrryg T)}S KK\rja-ia.<: ',

2 Chron. 29. 31 : KOL
dvTyveyKCV^ eKKA.iyo'ta OvcrLa<s,

III. In N.T. the usage of the LXX. determines the sense
of the word, which is = the public gathering of Christians
viewed externally as met for a common purpose, or
organised with a common aim, or, viewed from an
inward standpoint as a spiritual corporation. Eom.
16. 5 Tr)v /car' oT/cov avrwi/
:
KK\r)criav ; Acts 5. 11:
xat eyevero <jf>o/?o9 /xeyas <' oXyv ryv tKK\rj<rtav ;
Gal.
1. 13 eoiwKov r^v KK\f]a'iav TOV Oeov.
:
Used in writers like Polybius of any public meeting,
e.g. Polyb. 23. 10. 10 6 K. rjîov TOVS TroAXovs avrw crvv-

:
ayayetv cts
I. In Class. Lit. (1) badness, as opp. to dpe-nj; (2)

cowardice; (3) vice, occas. = dishonour.
II. In LXX. Ka/aa, in an overwhelming majority of
instances translates Heb. njD.7
T T
which means (a)
X
moral '
evil ;
external evil, evil circumstances.
(b) In at least
half of these cases it is used in sense (b) = " trouble,"
"misfortune."
III. In KT., along with the ordinary senses, there is a use
based on the LXX. in Matt. 6. 34 dp/cc-rov rfj :
y^pa fj
KO.KIO. avTTjs. This sense, however, may have been

common in spoken Greek. Cf. Dionys. Hal. Antiq.
Rom. vi. 370 : iracrav KO.KLO.V /cat 8ia^>opav KOI avarpOTrrjv
.
Chrysos. vii. 279 C uses it
K\Y) p&V OfJiO 5

-
I. In Class. Lit. = heir, inheritor.
II. In LXX. it translates Heb. Eni 1
*,
which means (1) pos-
sessor, Judg. 18. 7: K\Tjp6vofAo<s IKTTI^&V 6r](ra.vpov ;

Jer. 8. 10 Swcrw KOL rovs aypovs avrwv rots KA//7povo/AOis.
:
(2) Heir, 2 Sam. 14. 7: KCU eapov/xi/ /cat

ye TOV K\rj-
povofjiov vfjidv, etc.

In N.T. " heir "
III. (a) often in ord. sense of ; (b) spiritual
sense, of those who have a right to spiritual privileges
through being sons of God, Rom. 8. 17 : et Sc reWa,

/cat K\r]p6vofJiOL' KXrjpovofJioi jj.\v Oeov K.r.X. in (1)
(c) As
under the LXX., without the idea of inheritance =
possessor, Heb. 6. 17: ftovXofjievos 6 Oebs evrtSctât

rots KXrypovo/xots r>}s eTrayycXt'as \ Heb. 11.7: r^s Kara
TTIOTIV StKatocrvv^s eyerero K\r)p6vofJLOs.
/cptVts
I. In Class. Lit. = (1)judgment, in various senses;
(2) trial ; (3) condemnation ; (4) quarrel ; (5) event or
issue.
II. In LXX. KpL(TL<s

is used in the vast majority of cases
to translate Heb. DS^'p, meaning (1) judgment, sentence ;
(2) that which is according to law, right. And so we
often find it joined with SIKCUOCTW?; (often), IXeos
(Ps. 100. 1), <iAij0a (Ps. 110. 6), eXeôo-wr/. God is

said ayairav /cpiViv. In one place it translates the Heb.
word for "righteousness."
III. In the N.T. there isa class of passages where this sense
must be adopted. These are in Matt, and Luke; e.g.
Luke 11. 42 7rapepxecr0e rryv Kpicrw KOL rrjv ayaTnyv
: KCLL
TOV Otov ;
23. 23
Matt. TO. ftapvTepa TOV vo/xov ryv
:
/cpio-iv Kat TO eXeos KOL TT)V TTLO-TLV. Here evidently the

word denotes a moral quality of God, namely, "justice."
iraiSeia
I. In Class. Lit.
(1) education; (2) its result
= mental
culture. Several minor meanings.
II. Out of forty-seven occurrences in the LXX., thirty-six
are a translation of Heb. 1D1D, which usually means
"correction," sometimes"admonition" or "discipline."
The Heb. verb from which the noun is derived means, as
" "
a rule, though sometimes admonish." The
chastise,"
word is specially used in the O.T. of chastisement on
God's side by sorrow and evil, often also of a father's
chastening of his son.
TTtuoWa translates no other word more than once or twice.
We find it in the LXX. parallel with I
III. In the N.T. it occurs in four places in Hebrews. One of

these a quotation from the LXX., Prov. 3. 11
is /AT)
:
6A.iyo>pei TTcuSeias Kvpiov. In all of these it means

" chastisement." It is found also in two other
passages,
Eph. 6. 4 :
e/crpetêre [ra re/era] ev TratSeia KCU i/ov0eo"ia
KV/HOV; 2 Tim. 3. 16: Tracra ypa^r; . . .

wêAi/xos Trpos
TTO.L-
8t8acTKaXiav, Trpos eAey/xov, Trpos tTravopOworw, rrpos
Setav K.r.X. In this last place it seems as if TratSeta
might be taken in the sense already quoted, seeing it is

joined with words so strong as eTravopâxris and eAey/>to?.
So very probably in Ephesians also, where it is joined with
vovOea-ia, a word which has often a more or less drastic
" TraiSeia
sense. Ellicott quotes Grotius ad loc. hie :
significare videtur institutionem per poenas;

autein est ea institutio quae fit verbis." hint of this A
sense in Polyb. 2. 9. 6, when he speaks of people as
TrcuScveo-tfai TT/OOS TO /xeXW, which Schweighauser trans-
" recevoir une
lates : bonne legon pour Tavenir."
In Philo still = education. In late Byzantine, such as
Theophanes Continuatus = chastisement.
TrdpoLKO s
I. In Class. Lit. = neighbouring,
dwelling near.
II. In LXX. used twenty-four times. Eleven times of
these it translates Heb. "12, meaning "sojourner," "person
living out of his own country." Ten times it translates

Heb. Dîn, denoting an "emigrant sojourning in a
strange country, where he is not naturalised." It is
joined in Gen. 23. 4 with Tra/aeTuo^/zos. It occurs several

times in combination with lv y-fj dXXorpLa.
III. In N.T. four times. (1) Acts 7. 6, quotation from the
LXX. TrdpoLKov Iv y-fj dXXorpLa, where = sojourner ; (2)
:
Acts 7. 29 TrapoiKos ev yf) MaSta/x; (3) Eph. 2. 19, joined

:
with gevoi-j (4) 1 Pet. 2. 11, joined with Trapem'Sôs.

This shows that the use is based on that of the LXX.
(3) and (4) are a Christian extension of the meaning as
found in the LXX. They are both metaphorical uses
of the word.
The word l
denoted, in several eastward regions, e.g.
Carpathos, Ilium Novum, etc. (C.I.G. 3595, etc.), the
same thing as the Attic /ucrouco?.
The Christian sense is clearly seen in Epist. ad Diognet.
V. 5 :
Trar/atSa? OLKOWW (sc. ot Xptcrrtavot) t8tas aAA.' cos
TrdpotKOL ; Polycarp, Ep. ad Philipp. Inscript. :
TioXvKap-
7TO5 . . .
TT]KK\r}<TLa TOV OtOV Trj TTapOLKOVCTY)
I. In Class. Lit. = " flesh " in the various ordinary senses

of the word.
II. In the LXX. <rdp, practically without exception, trans-
1
So Thayer in Grimm.
lates Heb. iB>a= "flesh." But besides the ordinary

sense, this word has
several special meanings. (1)
=
living creature (usu. man). So o-ap occurs in this sense,
e.g. Gen. 7. 21 : a7re$av Tracra crap KivovfMtvT] CTTI rf)<s
yfjs ',
Deut. 5. 26 : TI'S yap &ap 77x19 T/KOVO-C <f><ovvjv Ocov
a>VTos ;
Ps. 55. 4 : ov <f>o(3rjOr)<rofjia.i rt TTOI^CTCI /ACK <rap.
(2)
= physical
nature or relationship. curious mixed A
signification, e.g. Gen. 37. 26 6Vt dSeA<os ^/xwv /ca! :
<rap -^/jtcoi/
ecrrtV j Jtldg. 9. 2 :
<rap v/xcov ct/x,t eyw.
III. In an enormous widening and deepening of
N.T.
meaning, so that it has both the ordinary senses, a
variety of special theological meanings, and also one or
two which come through the LXX. Its special theo-
logical meanings start from the notion of a-dp as
opposed to TJTeu/Aa, man's earthly nature apart from

divine influence. Two senses are immediately connected
with the influence of the LXX. (1) About eleven
instances of <rdp in the sense of
"
living being." Very
generally in the combination Tracra <rap, e.g. Matt.
24. 22 : OVK av la-wOr) ira.<ra <rdp. Perhaps in the phrase,
John 1. 14: 6 Aoyos <rap eyeVero. So often (2) of
physical nature and relationship, e.g. Rom. 1.3: yevo-
/xei/os eK crTrep/xaros AavctS /cara crap/ccx ; Heb. 12. 9 ot :
r}s crap/cos ^//.wi/ Trarepes.

So Clem. Rom. 1. 32. 2 : e avrov . . .
'IT/O-OVS TO Kara
o-dpKd. Even Plut. ii. 159 B uses o-ap as = body, show-

ing the tendency in the word.
I. In Class. Lit. = saviour, deliverer, guardian.

II. In LXX.
used twenty times. In eighteen of these it is
employed of God.
III. In N.T. constantly, and always either of God or Christ,
especially in the sense of saving from sin.
Verbs
ava<j> epeu
I. In Class. Lit. = (1) bring or carry up ; (2) sustain; (3)
bring back ; (4) refer ;

and various other subordinate
senses.
II. In LXX. (1) ordinary senses, a very few times ; (2)
about ninety times in ritual sense = offer. Especially in
the phrase di/a<epetv 6Ao/cai>T<o//,aTa, 6AoKauTw<reis.
:
III. In KT. (1) bring up, three places ; (2) sustain, once,
Heb. 9. 28 ; (3)
-
(2) of LXX., e.g. Heb. 7. 27 vpfapov :
VTTp roiv iSttov d/xapTicoi/ 6v(rias a.va<l>f.ptiv ;

1 Pet. 2. 5 :
dVeveyKat Tri/ev/xartKas Overtax evTrpoo-SeKTovs ; and other

three places.
In Demos. 1030. 13 it is used = contribute :
avafytpew ets
TO KotvoV. This seems to prepare the way for the

prevailing sense in the LXX.
I. In Class. Lit. = disclose, reveal.

II. In LXX. (1) ordinary senses; (2) special sense of
God revealing hidden things to men, Dan. 2. 28 : dAA'
eo-Tt $eos lv ovpdVo) 6 aTTOKaXvirTW fMV(TTr)pia ;
1 Sam.
3. 21 :
a.TTf.KoXvfyOr] Kuptos Trpos ]a/x,ovyA j
Isa. 56. 1 : TO
III. In KT. (1) ordinary senses; (2) = (2) of LXX.,

Matt. 11. 25: aTreKoAvâs cum*, I/^TUOIS ; Eom. 1. 18:
a.7ro/caAv7rreTat yap opyr] $eov; Eph. 3. 5 vvv :
TOLS ajLOLS ttTTOO-ToAotS, etc.
I. In Class. Lit. (1) make or deem right ; (2) do a man

right or justice. So Hdt., Thuycd., Soph.
II. In LXX. it translates Heb. pnv in the Hiph'il mood.
This verb has two main, senses (1) Exhibit one to be

righteous, e.g. Ezek. 16. 51 eSi/ccuWas TO.S dSeA<as crov:
lv Tracrais Tats avo/uai9 o~ov ; Jer. 3. 11: cSiKattoo-e
rrjv ij/v^rjv avrov 'lo-paÂ a.7ro rrj<s

acrvvOerov 'lovSa. (2)
Pronounce righteous, e.g. Deut. 25. 1 : /cat Si/caiwo-ovo-t
TOV oY/catoi/ ;
Ex. 23. 7 : Kat ov StKattoo-eis TOI/ ao-efifj
evcKei/ Sojpcov; Isa. 50. 8 :

yyt'et 6 StKatworas /xe.
III. In KT. the chief meanings are (1)

= (1) under LXX.,
e.g. Luke 7. 35 fj
<ro<ta eSt/catw^r; O.TTO TWV TCKVWV
:
avrfjs.
(2)
= (2) under LXX., e.g. Luke 10. 29 6 8e : 0W
6t/cataicrat eavroV ; Rom. 2. 13: ot Trof/yrat TOV VOJAOV
St/caiw^TJo-oi/Tai. (3) A
special sense in the technical
phraseology of St. Paul, in which it God's declaring =
those persons righteous in His eyes who put faith in
Christ. This is simply a Christian expansion of (2),
e.g. Rom. 3. 30 : os St/catoxrct Treptro/i^v e/c
TricrTeoos, et
passim. So in Justin M. Fragg. p. 566 (Otto's edition) :
Seirrepov ayaOov TO oiKauaOrjvaL.

In Church-Greek St/catow came to be a technical term, used
of the decrees of Councils, e.g. Concil. Nicaen. Can. 17 :
/cat
17 dyta jAtydXr) crvvoSos.
I. In Class. Lit. (1) inspect; (2) visit; (3) consider.

II. In LXX. (1) Visit, e.g. Jud. 15. 1 /cat
eVco-Kcâro :
Sa/xi^wv rrjv ywouKa. (2) Far more f req. = care for, visit,
in the sense of provide for, e.g. Ex. 4. 31 :
7T(TKlf/aTO 6 $OS TOV<S VIOV<5 \ Ps. 8. 5 TL (TTLV a I
OTL eVto-KeTTTT; avrov. (3) Visit with punishment, e.g.

Jer. 9. 25 : /cat
eTrtoWi/fo/xat eTrt TrdVras Treptrer-
aKpo/3v(TTia<; avrwv ;
Ps. 88. 32 :
7rto"/ceiô//,ai
ra? dvo/xtas avran/. (4) Often = number the
people.
III. In KT. (!)
= (!) under LXX., yet with a shade of
(2) implied, e.g. Jas. 1. 27 : 7rtcr/ce7TTecr$at 6p<f>avov<s ;
Matt. 25. 36 :
ô-fleVô-a /cat
7recr/câo-ê /xe. (2)
= (2)
of LXX., e.<7. Luke 7. 16 eVeo-Ke'i/wo 6 0eos TOV AaoV; :
Luke 1. 78 Sta onrXdyxya eAeovs ^cov ^/xwv ev ot?

:
Often in Plutarch of "visiting" the sick.
I. In Class. Lit. =praise, speak well of, Tragg., Aristoph.

II. In LXX. (1) Ordinary sense = praise, e.g. Deut. 8. 10 :
/cat
evXoyTJa-et? Kvpiov TOV Otov crov ; 2 Chron. 30. 27 :
of.
tepets /cat cvXoyqo-av TOV Oeov. (2) Invoke
blessings on, e.g. Gen. 24. 60 :
eiTrav avrrj j
N\im. 23. 20 : tSov evAoyeiv
evXoyr/a-co. (3) Bestow blessings on (used of God), e.<?.
Josh. 17. 4 : A.ao5 iroXv s i/xi

KCU 6 $eos /xe evAoy^cre ;
Ps. 44. 3 Sia rovro evAoy^cre

: are 6 0e6s eis TOV atoova;
and so often.
III. In N.T. (1) Ordinary sense, e.g. Jas. 3. 9 : eV avrfj
evAoyov/xcv TOV Kvpiov. (2)

= (2) of LXX., e.g. Luke
6. 28 :
vAoyeiTe rov<s KttTapcotievovs v/xas ;
Heb. 7. 9 :
6 o-uâvr^<ra5 'AyS/aaa/x . . . Kai evAoyrycra? aurdi/. (3)

=
(3) of LXX., e.g. Acts 3. 26 :
evAoyovvra v/xas K.r.A.;
Eph. 1.3:6 evAoyrycras T7/xas eV Tracn? cvAoyi'a TrvtvfJLaTLKrj.

Strange use in Church-Greek = marry. Gregent. 585 A,
evAoycto-tfcu
= be married. Philo knows the word, but
prefers to use eiraivelv, and the like.
I. In Class. Lit. Not often in good authors, who prefer

Tretpaw. (1) Make proof of, Horn. ; (2) attempt, try,
later writers; (3) tempt, Apoll. Rliod. 3. 10.
II. In LXX. It translates Heb. HDD, which is = put to the
test, in a good sense or a bad. (1) Said of God as
bringing calamity on men to test the trustworthiness of

their faith, e.g. Gen. 22. 1 6 0eos eTreipaê TOV 'A/3paa/x ;
:
Deut. 13. 3 :
Kvpios 6 0eos v/xwv v/xas.
7mpaei (2) Used
of men in relation to God as testing God's character,
but in the bad sense, from the point of view of distrust,
and so causing Him to prove Himself either by showing
kindness or punishment, e.g. Ex. 17. 2 : ri AoiSopeto-fle
{AOL Kal TL 7retpaeTe Kvpiov Ps. 105. 15: CTrcipacrav TOV

\
$ov ev dvv'8/30) j
Isa. 7.12: ov pr) am^rco ov8e pr) 7retpao~o)
Kvpiov.
III. In KT. the Class, meanings occur several times.
But usu. those derived through the LXX. (!)
= (!) of
the LXX., e.g. 1 Cor. 10. 13: Tmrros Sc 6 0e6s os OVK
v/xas Tretpacr^j/at virep o SvvaKrOe
'
Heb. 11. 17:
(2)
= (2) under LXX., e.g. Acts 15. 10 : rC ireipa&ri TOV
$eoV ;
1 Cor. 10. 9: /xr/Sc Treipaôo/zcv TOJ/ Kvpiov
TIVCS avTOJi/ eTreipacrav (v.?. eêTrctpacrav).
In this second sense, cf.Hdt. vi. 86. 3 ^ Se HvOirj :
e</>^ TO
ireip'rjOfjvct.i
TOV @ov Kcu TO TTOt^crat To~ov 6Vvao~0ai, where
7mpao//,ai appears to he used in a very analogous sense.
Cf. Protevangel. Jacohi, 20 oval rrj aTrtcm'a fjLov on,
:
e^fTreipaa-a Oeov an/Ta; Straho, 16. 4. 24, uses 7Tipao~0at

in the sense of "being afflicted.
Plut. ii. 230 A
= examinari (Wyttenb.).
Tropevo/xa t
I. In Class. Lit. = " go," and many subordinate senses.
II. In LXX. (1) Ord. sense in a great many places. (2)
Vanish, e.g. Ps. 78. 39 :
IfjivrjcrOr)
on crdp cio-i, Trvev/xa
7ropev6fjivov /cat ov/c Tno~Tpe<f>ov. From this comes

further the sense of "die," as Gen. 15. 2, where the
common Heb. verb for " go " is used. (3) Live, follow
a manner of life. Very common. Deut. 19. 9 :
ev Trao-ats Tais oSots avrov \

Ps. 14. 2:
a/xw/xos.
III. In N.T. (1) Usual sense often. (2)
= (2) of the LXX.,
e.g. Luke 22. 22 6 vtos ^\v TOV avOpwTrov Kara TO
:
wpto-îeVov TTopcvcTai. This, modelled on Heb. use of the

verb Tj^n
= Greek olxca-Oai. (3)
= (3) of LXX., e.g.
Acts 9. 31 :
Tropevo/xevai TO> <j5>o/?u>
TOV Kvptov; 1 Pet.
4. 3 :
TrcTropctyxevous ev dcreXyet'at?.
A shade of similar meaning in Soph. 0. T. 883 : el oV TI?
r) Xoyw
I. In Class. Lit. Only in late writers, Theophr., Aristot.,

Diodor., Plut., Polyb. (1) Give or transmit light; (2)
light up (of the sun) ; (3) metaph.
= make known,
bring to light.
II. In LXX. It usually translates Heb. TNn (Hiph'il of
11K), meaning "enlighten" "illuminate"; or rnin (Hiph.
of
mj)
= teach. Not found in its literal sense. Always
= enlighten mentally (
= educate, teach) or spiritually,
e.g. Ps. 12. 4 : <U>TTOI/ TOVS o<0oA/xovs /xov ;

Ps.
118. 129 ^ SÂwcm TWV Aoycuv o-ov ^cortet (this
:
example shows the process in the word); Judg. 13. 8:

<um(raT<o ^/xas, TI Troi^cro/Aev r<3 TratSapio) ; 2 Kings
12. 2 : Trao'as ras ^/xepas as ecâmo'ei/ avrov.
III. In N.T. It has senses (2) and (3) under I. Also the
additional peculiar signification found in the LXX.
(1)
= (2) under I., e.g. Luke 11. 36: OTCU/ 6 X^vos T-fj
a<TTpa.7rfj <om?7 <re ; Apoc. 18. 1, etc. (2) = (3) under
I., e.g. 1 Cor. 4. 5 : 6 Kvpios os KO,! c^wrtVct ra
rov CTKOTOVS ;
2 Tim. 1. 10: </>am(ravTos 8e
a(j>6a.pcriav 8ta TOT) euayyeXtov. (3)

= usage of LXX.
pecul. to Bibl. Greek, Heb. 6. 4 : TOV? a7ra| ^corto--
êyras ; Eph. 3. 9 </>(onVai rt's 17 otKovo/xta TOV
:
[AvcrTrjpLov ;
Eph. 1. 18 7r<amoyxei/ot;s TOV? 6<^>âAjU,ovs

:
The second use quoted under the N.T. is found in Polyb.

30. 8. 1 :
ypajji/jLara eaXw/cora Kat 7r<am<r/>ieva ;
Lucian.
(7aZ. WOTl tem. 32 :
Tre^xjortcr/xevoov rwv Trpay/xarwv VTTO r^s
oArjOeias. So Pint. ii. 902 B <a>Tiov(ra TO. voov/xeva. :
Diog. Laert. 1. 57 uses the verb of bringing an unknown

writer before the public. Justin M. has the special
N.T. use, TrypJi. 122 : TW OVTI Se ets 17/xas eipr/rat rovs
Sia 'I^crov 7re<omoyieVov?. An interesting derivative
from this sense is its technical meaning in Church-
Greek = baptize, e.g. Justin M. Apol. 61 E : 6 <omo'-

Xoverat j
65 C :
evâs 7roir](rdfJLvoi virzp rov
With the exception of words formed in direct imitation

of Hebrew expressions by the writers of the LXX., and
found also in the New Testament, which will be considered
immediately, that class of terms which has just been
illustrated is the clearest instance of a direct influence
of the the vocabulary of the New Testament.
LXX. on
This at once points out close-drawn limits. For even
among the words annotated, there are at least some

whose presence in the New Testament may not be due
to the usage of the LXX. at all. Several of the
" "
Biblical meanings, though apparently moulded by the
Greek of the Old Testament, may have been common
enough in the spoken language as found in Egypt, Asia
Minor, and Syria. When it is borne in mind that there
are literally almost no remains of the later spoken
language except the LXX. and the New Testament, in
addition to the Comic writers, and when, as has been
indicated under the words themselves, distinct traces of
cognate senses occur in stray writers of the /coivtf, the
supposition gains colour. At any rate, it shows us that

we are not at liberty to make dogmatic assertions even
in that sphere of the New Testament vocabulary where
the influence of the LXX. appears most powerful, the
sphere of religious and theological terms. Besides, the
"
writers of the New Testament were themselves Hebrews
of the Hebrews," and so their language must always
have a Jewish tinge, whether this is due to a stereotyped
Judaeo- Greek formed by the LXX., or whether it is, as
seems to be the case, the natural colour given to the
spoken Greek of the day by its passage through the

Semitic mind.
One other fact must be noted. The special theo-
logical terms of the New Testament are at most

connected with, not derived from, the usage of the LXX.
The latter, as a rule, simply affords a starting-point for
the creation of the language of Christian theology.
CHAPTER IX
DISCUSSION OF VARIOUS CLASSES OF WORDS IN THE NEW
TESTAMENT, WHICH EITHER IN THEMSELVES OR BY
THEIR PARTICULAR USES SUGGEST A CONNECTION WITH
THE SEPTUAGINT
IT has been thought advisable to place the more strictly
religious and theological terms which have reached their

technical sense through the influence of the LXX., and
then of the New Testament, in a class by themselves.
In this section we must examine several other groups of
words occurring in the New Testament, which either in
themselves or by their particular uses there suggest, with
more or less probability, a definite connection with the
LXX.
We begin with those whose derivation from that source
is most probable.
1. Actual Hebrew words occurring in the New
Testament.
These are of various forms, some being mere trans-
literations, as cra{3ac00; others undergoing distinct changes,
either in the body of the word, as o-/Xo5, or merely in
regard to endings, as icopos. There are about thirteen
Hebraic words common to the LXX. and New Testament,
six of which occur also in Philo. Examples of them
no
CONNECTION BETWEEN N.T. WORDS AND LXX. Ill
have been given on p. 44. And certainly one is inclined,

at say that these must have come through
first sight, to
the LXX., especially as the majority of them are real

Biblical words connected with the written history of the
Israelites, e.g. pawa, Trdo-â, %6pov/3elv. But it is by no

means unlikely that, from the first days of Jewish settle-
ments in Greek-speaking countries, these words of ritual
and worship were in common circulation. At least, the
tendency shown by such formations is common, for in the
New Testament we find twenty Hebrew and Aramaic

words which do not occur in the LXX., e.g. fy^dviov,
fjidfjiowas, pa/cd, axravva.
2. A class far more interesting and of far greater
importance for the vocabulary of the New Testament is
that consisting of words expressing ideas and customs
specially Jewish, which were employed by the writers of
the LXX. as literal translations of the Hebrew terms, or

were formed by them on the analogy of these terms.
They occur, in considerable numbers, in the New Testa-
ment. Here, again, it appears certainly probable that
these words gained currency through the influence of the
LXX., and so passed into the vocabulary of the New

Testament. Most of them are not found elsewhere in
literature. We shall illustrate this class fully, as it is
of the first importance in connection with our special
subject. Typical instances will be given.
Nouns
A word unknown to the Greeks = aKpoTroa-Oia. Some

scholars favour the hypothesis that was pro-
TrocrOrj
nounced ftvcrrr) by Alexandrians. But Cremer seems
mark in holding that the word was certainly

nearer the
formed by the Jews, probably with the Heb. = D^S
(
= " shame ") in view.
I. In the LXX. always in the phys. sense = prseputium.
When the Hebrew word which it translates is figurative,
as often in O.T., the LXX. has a-KXrjpoKapBia.
II. In N.T. Phys. sense constantly,
(1) e.g. Acts 11. 3:
avSpa? a.Kpoj3v<TTiav eôvras. (2) In the abstract =
Gentiles, Eph. 2. 11, etc. (3) Metaphor, sense, e.g.
Col. 2. 13 :
T-fi a.Kpo/3v(TTLa TT}S (rapicos
CTTLCT KOTTTf -
I. In LXX. almost invariably translates derivatives of
Heb. verb *IS = (1) visit, investigate; (2) oversee.
(1) E.g. Jer. 8. 12 : eV Kaipw erricrKOTnys auraiv
Tretrowrai.
(2) E.g. Num. 4. 16 :

17 eTrurKOTn) 0X77$ rrjs orK^vjys.
Also used (3) of the numbering of Israel. E.g. Ex. 30.
12 A.a/3r/s rov a-vX\oyLcrp.ov eV rrj e-marKOTrfj avrwv.
:
II. In KT. (1) Visitation, e.g. I Pet. 2/12: cV fjpipa

.
(2) Overseership, 1 Tim. 3. 1 : el TLS
opeyerat K.r.X.
Cf. Luc. Dial. Deor. 20. 6 : ts CTTIO-KOTT^V TOV TratSos, in a
colloquial sense.
More common in the LXX. is eVco-Ke^ts, in senses (1) and
(3).
I. In LXX. = (1) The daily service of the priests in the

temple, e.g. Neh. 13. 30 KCU lo-rryo-ev tyrjfjLtpLas rot?
:
tepeCo-tv. (2) The separate groups of priests who per-

formed this service, e.g. 2 Chron. 5. 10 OVK Tjo-av :
II. In KT. = (2) Luke 1. 5: ZaXaptas e'
Joseph. De Vita sua 1, uses e'^/xepis as = (2)

Suidas :
e^^/xeptia- f] Trarpta. Aeyerai 8c Kai rj
Cf mod. Greek, e^êpto? = priest.

CONNECTION BETWEEN N.T. WORDS AND LXX. 113
I. In LXX. practically always

= Heb. rnS3, denoting the
lid or covering of the ark. A great number of instances
Exodus and Leviticus.
in
II. In N.T. used in Heb. 9. 5 in the above sense. In
Kom. 3. 25 it may be either (1) as above, (2) expiatory
sacrifice, or (3) offering, as afterwards in Dion Chrysost.
and the Byzantine writers.
Also in Philo, ii. 150. 2. Used as an adj. in Joseph. Antiq.
16. 7. 1 :
/xv>7//,a
= Ord. Gk.
I. In LXX. used often of the two veils or curtains in the
temple at Jerusalem.
II. In N.T. always of the innermost of the two curtains,
Matt. 27. 51 ;
Luke
Heb. 9. 3.
23. 45 ;
Also figura-
tively of the body of Christ, Heb. 10. 20.
Found also Joseph., Philo, Apocr., and
in Aristeas.
Apparently entirely confined to Jewish usage.
I. In LXX. almost always = what is evanescent, vain,

empty; so = falsehood,
emptiness, vanity. Especially
following the meaning of the Heb. &OK , which it trans-
J
lates = emptiness, in the sense of wickedness or impiety,

Numerous instances of this.
II. In N.T. 2 Pet. 2. 18, appar. = worthlessness. This
sense prob. suits Eph. 14. 17 ev /Aarato-n/Ti rov voos
:
avToiv. The other passage, Rom. 8. 20, seems to re-

"
quire some such meaning as fruitlessness," which is,
of course, closely connected with those above.
Occurs in no secular author except Pollux, 6. 134.
I. In LXX. translates usually Heb. rfy, meaning " whole

burnt-offering."
II. So also in N.T. Mark 12. 33 ;
Heb. 10. 6.
8
Phrynichus mentions in his Appendix, p. 51, the forms

fjuqpoKCLVTCLV, IcpoKavTeiv, oXoKavretv,
which last is only
written so in Xen. Anal. 7. 8. 4; Joseph. Antiq. 3. 9.
171. Sometimes 6AoKcum>w, Xen. Cyr. 8. 3. 24;

Joseph. Antiq. 1. 13. 40. Doubtful verb-form in Plut.
ii. 694 B. The noun occurs once in Philo. Joseph.
twice uses oAoicairrooo-is. A form 6AoKavTi<o is also
found.
I. In LXX. a great many times. Always = Lord of Hosts.

II. In N.T., nine times in Apocalypse, once in 2 Cor. in
"
sense of Almighty." Exceedingly common in all the
earliest Christian literature (cf. numerous examples in
Harnack's notes on I. Clemens ad Corinthios).
In the Greek Anthology, iv. 151.
A word presumably formed by the LXX. on the analogy

of Heb. expressions with Bfch ("head ") and "IB> (" prince"),
denoting leaders of tribes or families. About six times

in the LXX. Directly transferred to the N.T., e.g. Acts
2. 29 ;
Heb. 7. 4.
" in -apxos usu. exchange this ending for -apx^s
Compounds
in the KT. and late Greek. That -apxrjs was the usual
termination in the apostolic age seems a legitimate infer-
ence from the fact that the Romans, in translating these
words into Latin, used this or a similar form, e.g.
1 '
Alabarches,' Juv. i. 130; Tetrarches/ Hor. Sat. i. 3.
"
12 (Winer).
7T p O (T V \ Y!
-
I. In LXX. numerous instances in the sense of " prayer."
II. In N.T. (1) prayer, many instances ; (2) place of
prayer, Acts 16. 16 Tropevo/xevwi/ f)[j,wv cis rty Trpocrevx^.
:
This last use in Philo, ii. 523. 22, etc. ;

Juv. Sat. i. 3.
" "
296, proseucha ; Joseph. Vita, 54 ;
several Inscr. ;
Cleomedes, 71. 16.

TTpOCTT/AuTO S
-
I. In LXX. almost always translates Heb. "13 = foreigner,
alien. So also in Philo.
II. In N.T. three or four and always in the
times,
technical sense of one who hassome Gentile religion
left
for Judaism. Literally

= Lat. " advena" Winer l says
on the form: "The verbal Trpoo-rjAvros is immediately
connected with such forms as eTnyAvs, /aerr/Xvs, and is an
extended formation, of which we find no examples in
Greek authors."
pavr icr /A os
I. In LXX. in four places, e.g. in phrase
= water for sprinkling, so as to remove defilement.
Always = sprinkling.
II. In N.T. same sense. Used always with at/xa. A
technical term of ritual in the LXX. Not found in any
secular author. The nearest approach is pai/ncris in
Achmes, a late writer of the Christian era.
I. In LXX. Deut. 10. 16 : K<U TreptTe/xeurê rrjv o"K\r)po-
/capSiav avrwv
j
same connection.
Jer. 4. 4 in the
II. In N.T. three times in the same sense.
The adj. o-KAr/po/capSios occurs in several places in the LXX.
I. In LXX. Ps. 52. 6, where it has nothing to corre-

spond to it in the Hebrew text.
II. In N.T. Eph. 6. 6 ///>)
KO.T o<0aA/x,oSovAiav ws avOpia-
:
Trapeo-Kot. So Col. 3. 22.

Lobeck compares airrapeorKo?, Apoll. de Conjunct. 504, and
o^XoapcoTKos in Hesych.
The adj. occurs in Theophil. 3. 14.
The noun is found in Justin Martyr.
1
P. 120.
Xa e vr6 5. Xas + e<o = hewn out of stone, of hewn stone.

I. In LXX. Deut. 4. 49 :
ryv XagevTrjv. In apposition
to a proper name.
II. In N.T., Luke 23. 53 :
fii^/xa XaêvroV. Also in
apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus. Aquila has it several
times in the Pentateuch.
The verb Xacvw occurs twice in Exodus, and once in
Isaiah and Deuteronomy.
Aa&vo-ts, Schol. ad Theoc. 6. 18.
\agevrrjs, Manetho, 1. 77.
In LXX. "
I. (1) ord. sense of adulterous," e.g. Prov. 30.
20 roiavrrj 68os ywaiKos /xotâAtSo?, etc. ; (2) special
:
" unfaithful to
religious sense of God," derived from the
idea of the relation between the Hebrew people and
God as a marriage, e.g. Ezek. 23. 45 :
/xoixoXt'Ses eicri K<
atjua ev ^p<nv avrwf .
II. In N.T. sense (2), e.g. Matt. 12. 39 :

yevea Trovrjpa Kal
/xoixaXts <rr)iJLLOV ITTL^T^L ;
Jas. 4. 4 :
/xotâXiSes OVAC
otSare ort ^ <^>tXta TOV KOO"/>IOV c^^/oos TOV ^cov Ka^t'oTarat

(Westc.-Hort).
Late Greek degenerated to this manner of inflecting
common adjectives. by Pollux,Cf. crvyyevts, called
flap/3apov ; evyei/t's, Joseph. Antiq. 7. 3. 371;

ts, Inscr. Lesbos (end of third Macedonian
War) /caraywyts, (7/4. ii. 2 (c. 307 B.C.).

;
Aristoph. the Grammarian (quoted by Lobeck) reckons among

TO, acrvvÔrj, TO ftot^>) Kal /AOtîs 8t' o>v S^Xovrat
L<s is found in Plut. Placit. Phil. i. 7. 371.
I. In LXX. about six times. Always = Heb. phrase,

" hard of
P)"l'y n^p, meaning neck," i.e. obstinate. (Cf.
Cic. Verr. iii. 95 : tantis cervicibus est, quoted by
Gesenius.)
II. In N.T. Acts 7. 51 :
(TKXrjporpd^XoL KOL
s Kat roTs UXTLV.
ia is found in Test. Duodecim Patriarch.

6.
I. In LXX. = humble, Prov. 29. 23: TOVS 8e Tai
$6r) Kvptos.
(f>pova<s cpet'Sei
II. In N.T. 1 Pet. 3! 8 in same sense.
Used by Plut. ii. 336 E in the sense of " low-minded."
The verb occurs in Ps. 130. 3.
Verbs
I. In LXX. always translates the Hiph'il D^nn of Heb.

verb D"in, which has the sense of " devote to destruc-
tion." In this sense freq. in the LXX.
II. In N.T. rather in the sense of "curse," without the
semi-ritual shade of meaning which it has in the LXX.
Three times.
Derived from di/d0e//,a, the parallel form to the Class.
Thus Moeris :
avdOrjfJia dm/ccos, dvd0c;u,a \\r)-
Similar parallels are cvp^/xa in Aristoph., Plato,
and Xen., and evpe/xa in Philo, Dion. Halic., Strabo,
and Galen.
Theocr. 13. 2 :
ayvfjs avOefMa
I. In LXX. (l)
= pay tithes, e.g. Gen. 28. 22; Deut.
26. 12.
= exact tithes, 1 Sam. 8. 15.
(2)
II. In N.T. (1)
= (1) of LXX., Matt. 23. 23; Luke 18. 12.
(2)
= (2) of LXX., Heb. 7. 5.
In the Church historian Socrates, 753 A = decimate.
?e^3 17X000
I. In LXX. a great many times in sense of " profane."
II. In N.T. twice in precisely same sense.
Occurs in Julian. Imperator, 228 C; Heliodor. 2. 25.
A noun SeAwo-is is found in the LXX.
I. In LXX. (1)
= renew,
1 Sam. 11. 14: *ai e
fjiV e/cei
rrjv /3acriXetW. So 2 Chron. 15. 8; Ps. 50. 11.
(2)
= consecrate, 1 Kings 8. 64 KOL evcKatvurc TOV :
OLKOV TOV Kvpiov. So Deut. 20. 5 ; 2 Chron. 7. 5 ;

Prov. 22. 6.
II. In N.T. = (2) of LXX., Heb. 9. 18, 10. 20.

Found in Eustath. Opusc. 277-284 ; Byzant. writers.
eo//,oXoyeto,
I. In LXX. always middle. Direct imitation in usage
of Heb. "f) rvrin = give praise to, e.g. 2 Sam. 22. 56:
eo/xoAoy^cro/x,(u croc /cupie tv rots Wv(Tiv } etc. With

accus. in Ps. 88. 6 eo/xoA.oyô-ovrai ot ovpavol ra Oav-
:
fjid(Tid crov.
II. In N.T. usually middle = give praise, honour to; e.g.
Matt. 11. 25: eôâoAoyov/mt croi Trarep.
Sometimes with varying shade of meaning = acknowledge
joyfully,e.g. Apoc. 3. 5 eô/xoXoyô-o/xac TO ovo/â avTov,
:
though even here the use may be exactly parallel to the

last instance quoted under the LXX. In one or two
places = confess.
This belongs to the verb in Plut., who uses it
last sense
about seven times. He has also the noun eô/ôXoyô-ts
in the same sense, ii. 987 D, eô/xoXoyô-is JjTTrjs. The
verb also in Lucian.
I. In LXX. (1) Enter into marriage relations with, e.g.

Gen. 34. 9 :
eTrtya/z/Jjoevcracrât fjfJiiv Ta? Ovyartpas v/xan/
SdVe. (2) Become son-in-law to, e.g. 1 Sam. 18. 22 : Kat
a-v CTriydfJLJSpevo-ov T<3 /5acriXet. Perhaps = (1). (3) Fulfil
the duty of a husband's brother, Gen. 38. 8 :
II. In KT. in sense (3) of LXX., Matt. 22. 24.
Appar. in no secular writer. Reference is made to the

Schol. on Eurip. Orest. 574. Quite probably a collo-
quial word. Cf. ya/>t/3pds in Horn., Pind., Hdt., Tragg.
CONNECTION BETWEEN N.T. WOKDS AND LXX. 119
I. In LXX. = discharge the duties of a priest. Numerous

instances.
II. In N.T. same sense, Luke 1. 8 lv TCU iepareveiv avrov :
Found nowhere before the LXX. Afterwards fairly

common, e.g. Pausan. 4. 12. 6; Herodian, 5. 6; Joseph.
Antiq. 3. 8. 1. Inscr. Mantinea (100 B.C.) : tin tepeos
. .
Topyiinrov
.
leparevo-ai/Tos.
. . . form iepr)- Ionic
revtiv, found in several Inscrr. may be an instance
This
of the influence of Jewish Greek on the spoken
language. For such, no doubt, there must have been.

At the same time there is the other alternative, that the
word was in common use in the spoken language
before the LXX. was written.
I. In LXX. = persuade fully, Eccles. 8. 11:

KapSia TOV TTOt^crat TO Trovypov.
<f>optj6r)
II. In 1ST. T.(l) = fulfil, e.g. Luke 1. 1: Trepi TWV TTCTTX^-

(oi/ ev rjjMV Trpay/xarcov ',
2 Tim. 4. 5 :
TTJV
(TOV 7rXr]po(f)6p7}(Tor. (2)
= sense in LXX., e.g.
Rom. 14. 5 eKaoros ei/ T<O tSciu) vot TrX^poôpeiVôo.

:
" be deter-
This reaches, in later writings, the sense of
mined," e.g. Patriarch. 1113C: fTrXTrjpoôptjOrjv r^5
dvaipeVews avrov. Also in Byzantine writers = inform.
Hence, in mod. Gk. 7r\rjpo<j>opia
= information.
None words given above are found earlier than

of the
the LXX., and the few which do occur outside the Bible
are usually met with in the Church writers of the
Christian era. Yet some of the examples, such as efoô-
\oyea), eTriya/jL/Bpeva), and leparevco, while, at first sight, they

appear to be formed on the analogy of particular Hebrew
words, by their sporadic currency, suggest other explana-
tions of their existence. It is certainly possible that the
LXX., giving literary form, as it did, to the spoken

language of the time, may have

brought into a
also
gradually widening currency words and senses of words
previously unknown. The influence of Judaeo-Greek

conceptions on the Greek language of the period is an
interesting subject for investigation, if there were any-
thing like actual data on which to base it. Yet it would
be hazardous to push any such hypothesis when the
alternative one is so natural, viz. that words which
apparently are confined to the Bible were in use in

everyday life, and were adopted by the translators of
the Old Testament as the nearest equivalents of the
Hebrew text before them. But the majority of the
terms just examined show undoubted traces of Hebrew
influence, and they are only representatives of a large
class.
3. The group of words common to the LXX. and

New Testament which comes next in order, consists
neither of religious terms nor of terms connected
specially with Jewish ideas or usages. We find a large
class of words denoting ordinary conceptions of everyday

life which are found to have exceptional meanings in
the LXX. and New Testament. Isolated instances of

them appear in late authors.
The question for us is : How did they enter into the
vocabulary of the New Testament ? Was it through

the medium of the LXX., as many scholars believe, or
was it through the colloquial language of the time ?
The facts themselves are our only evidence. They are
illustrated by the following examples :
Nouns
airo&Toicriov
I. In Class. Lit. only in phrase a-rroo-Taa-iov 81*07 action =
brought against a freedman for forsaking his Trpoo-TdVr/s,
e.g. Demos. 790. 2.
II. In LXX. always translates Heb. rviJTna = " cutting-off

from marriage," i.e. divorce. Invariably in the phrase
ptifiXiov aTToorraa-Lov bill of divorce.
III. In N.T. twice in phrase filj3\iov dTroo-racrtW Once

aTroa-rao-tov alone, Matt. 5. 31.
The word occurs in Simocates, a Byzantine writer (A.D.
600) = aTrooTacris, revolt.
I. In Class. Lit. = house, hall, even family.

II. In LXX. almost uniformly translates Heb. 32, mean-
ing "roof of a house," e.g. 2 Sam. 16. 22: /cat tTrrjâv

rrjv (TK-rjvrjV TW 'A/3e<roraAa)/ji ITTL TO Sco/xa.
III. In N.T. invariably = flat roof, e.g. Matt. 24. 17 : 6 Se
CTTI TOT) 8w/xaTos fjirj Kara/Sara).
In mod. Gk. Sw/xa = terrace.
Jerome (Epist. ad Suniam) says 8o>//,a in orientalibus :
provinciis dicitur quod apud Latinos tectum.
I. In ordinary Greek used mainly of a condition of the

mind
of the nature of utter distraction caused by a
shock. So freq. in Hippocrates. Combined with
/ueTa/3oArj in Plut. ii. 393 D. Used by him of mental
shock, i. 276 A; of love-sickness, ii. 623 C.
Aretseus (A.D. 80), an imitator of Hippocrates, defines
CKO-TOUTIS as /xavia ^povtog aveu$ei/ irvperov.
II. In LXX. it has a curious variety of uses. It translates
several Hebrew words meaning respectively (1) slander,
e.g. Num. 13. 33: ^rJvcyKav CKO-TCIO-IVJ (2) agitation,
trouble, 2 Chron. 29. 8 : e/co-Tao-iv /cat o*vptcr/x,ov ; (3)
desire, wish, Ps. 30. 23 : etTra ev rfj e/co-Tao-ei ; (4)
122l SOURCES OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
most freq.
= terror, fear ;
translates two separate words,
e.g. Ezek. 26. 16: eKo-racret e/amjo-ovrat 1 Sam. 11. 7:
;
7rf]X@V K<TTa<ri9 Kvptov 7rt TGI/ Xaov 'lo^cÂ..

The root idea in the various expressions, taking them in
common, appears to be "disturbance of mind," from a
strong to the weakest sense. Curiously enough, the
expression eKo-racret Siavoias occurs in Deut. 28. 28,
parallel to Plutarch's IKO-TOUTIS TWI/ XoyicrfAwv.

III. In KT. (1) technical use
= "trance," e.g. Acts 10. 10 :
eyeVero ITT avrov eKo-raous (the state into which Peter

fell when he saw the vision regarding Cornelius).
Always in connection with "visions." (2) Bewilder-
ment, e.g. Mark 5. 42 :
eêVrô-av . . . eKo-rao-et (the
feelings of the onlookers at the raising of Jairus'
daughter) ; Acts 3. 10 cVAr/Vô-ai/ 0a/x/3ovs KOL e/cora-

:
o-ea)? (at the healing of the lame man by Peter).
The first group of passages has a semi-technical meaning,
the parent of the modern strict sense of "ecstasy."

The second group has a far weaker meaning than the
others, and evidently expresses simple astonishment, a
considerable modification of its use in non-Biblical
Greek authors.
Karaa-ToX 77
I. Fr. fcaraoTcAAo) = put in order, fit out, e.g. Eurip. Bacch.
933 :
TrXoKCLfjiov. But chiefly
= restrain, e.g. Epictet.
Diss. 3. 19. 5: rty ri0v/u'av; Plut. ii. 207 E: TOVS
veovs. The noun in non-Biblical writers usu. = quietness
in appearance, attire, e.g. Plut. Pericl. 5 :
Karaa-ToXrj rfjs
II. In LXX. Isa. 61. 3 KaTacrToXrjv So^rjs dim

:
d/oySias, where it translates Heb. ntpJMD, meaning veil or
garment.
III. In N.T. 1 Tim. 2. 9 ywat/cas ev Ka.TaoToA.T7 Koa/xta),
:
where the context and the epithet seem to demand the

meaning "dress," "attire." Plut. ii. 65 D has the
verb Karao-roAt^w = vestire.
Hesych. :
Karaa-ToXtjv TrepLfioXrjv. Undoubtedly a number
of instances are cited from Hippocrates, where it seems

to mean "modesty in appearance." Ellicott holds there
"
is no authority for the meaning dress," and calls it
"
deportment as exhibited externally, whether in look,
manner, or dress." But the evidence already cited
seems to us ample.
I. In = bride, young wife, or marriageable girl.

Class. Lit.
=
Then nymph.
II. In LXX. out of thirty-four passages, in thirty-three
it translates Heb. rfe, which means (1) bride ; (2)
daughter-in-law, in which sense alone it is found in
Gen. 11. 31, 38. 11; Lev. 18. 15, 20. 12; Euth 1. 6,
2. 20, 4. 15 ; 1 Kings 4. 20 ; 1 Chron. 2. 4.
III. In N.T. = daughter-in-law, Luke 12. 53: TrtvOcpa CTTI

ryv vvfj.<f)r)v KOI vv^rj CTTI rrjv TTtvOepdv. So in Matt.
Cf. Joseph. Antiq. 5. 9. 1 : OVK eKaprepovv Se Sia&vy-
avrfjs at
I. In Class. Lit. = fortress, Xen.

II. In LXX. (1) very of ten
= fortress ; (2) metaph. use
= that in which confidence is placed, e.g. Prov. 10. 29 :
oariov <f>6/3os Kvpcov ;

Prov. 21. 22: /axtfeiAev TO
c(f>
a> 7re7r6V0eo-av ol dcreySct?.
III. In N.T. last sense, 2 Cor. 10. 4 : Swara . . .
TT/OOS
Cf. Philo, de Abrah. 38 : TOV 7rtTetîo-//,ov TWI/
Sogwv KaOcupelv (Alford).
I. In Class. Lit. = face, front, mask, character, person.

II. In LXX. (1) ordinary senses of "face"; (2) metaph.
sense, Gen. 2. 6 : 7T(me TTO.V TO Trpoa-wTrov rfjs y^s;
Ps. 104. 30 : (xi/aKatvters TO TrpoarwTrov rfj<; yfjs.
III. In KT. (1)ordinary meanings; (2) special sense

outward appearance, " species externa ;
"
as above =
Luke 12. 56: TO TrpoVooTrw TT}S y^s KCU rov ovpoVov;

Jas. 1. 11 :
rj fVTrpcTreia rov Trpoo-wTrov avrov
pjpa
I. In Class. Lit.(1) word
=
(2) phrase.
II. In LXX. in overwhelming majority of cases = Hebrew
"D *!, meaning (1) word, but in these places (2) thing,
1
occurrence.
III. In KT. (1) Ordinary meaning in all its varieties;
(2) sense as in LXX. Luke 1. 37 : ov/c dSwarô-ci Trapa
TO) $<3 TraV p>}/xa; Acts 10. 37: TO yevo/xevov pry/Aa ;
5. 32 :
fjfjiCis coyxcv //-apTvpes TWV p-rjfJLaTMv TOVTOOV. In all
these places /^//.a

= occurrence. A suggestion of this
usage found in the semi-parallel use of Aoyos, e.g. Soph.

Aj. 1288 et o~ov :
y*
68' civ^p ovS' CTTI o-/xt/cpo>i/
Xdycov . . .
T' to-x" /xvô-rtv, where

Ao'yos seems quite colourless.
Also in Plato, e.g. in P/w'Z. 33 C eav Trpos Xoyov r}, :
where Xoyos = the matter in hand.
Verbs
dSvvaTeo)
I. In Class. Lit. in Plato and Aristot. = want strength, be
unable to do anything.
II. In LXX. = be impossible, e.g. Job 42. 2 : Trdvra Sweurou,
doWo/rei Sc crot ovSev ',
Zech. 8. 6 : t
aSwarrjo-eL CVOJTTIOV
TWV KaTaXotVcoi/ /^^ evojTTtov /JLOV dSwaTô-ct.
IIL Twice in N.T. Same sense, Matt. 17. 20 :
opet TOVTO)' fJiTa/3a ZvOev eKet /xeTaô-eTat KCU

/cat
dSwaT^Vet vplv ',

Luke 1. 37: OVK aSwarijo-ti Trapa
TOV 6f.ov irav pfjfjia
(v.l. Trapa T<3 ê<3). Cf. Polyb. 16.
33. 3 6Ve TI TOVTWI/ axpeta>0ei/ d8waTi;o-et.
: The word
is extraordinarily common in Philo, and yet apparently
always in the ordinary sense.
aTTO/cpiVto
I. In Class. Lit. (1) distinguish, separate; (2) middle =
answer. (A few other subordinate senses.)
II. In the LXX. in a vast majority of instances it translates
Heb. n^y, which is constantly used in the sense of

" "
beginning to speak," i.e.
taking up the conversation."
III. In N.T. (1) answer (usually with passive forms);
(2) over a dozen instances of the peculiar usage already
mentioned when the verb is used of a person beginning
to speak, and not answering any question, but at the
same time referring to something that has gone before,
e.g. Matt. 17. 4a7roKpt#ts Se 6 II expos eiTrev T<2 'Iô-ov
:
(with reference to the scene on the mountain of trans-

"
figuration). Bengel says Respondit non : modo qui
rogatus est sed cui causa loquendi est data."
KptVtt)
I. In Class. Lit. (1) pick out ; (2) decide ; (3) judge or
estimate ; (4) accuse ; (5) condemn.
II. In LXX. a number of passages in Judges, where
KptVctv TOV Xaov is used in the sense of "govern." Con-
stantly in this sense throughout the O.T., e.g. 2 Kings
15. 5 Kttt VIOS TOV j3(L<Tl\<i)<;
: 7Tl TO) OtKO)
KplV(Dl/ TOV XcLOV
TTJS y}s; Ps. 2. 10 : K<xt vvv /3ao-tAets O~VVCTC' TraiSevO^re

Travres ot /cptVovTes T-jyv y^v, etc. etc. It translates
the Heb. tDQK>, which has this sense constantly; cf.
"suffetes" (same word) for chief rulers of Carthage.
Cf. Sap. Salom. i. 1 :
aya-Trô-are St/catoo-w^v ot /cptvovTes
on which Grimm
The special term "
rr)v 7771/5 says :
KpivtLv, instead of the more general /cvpteveiv or ySao-tXcveiv,

according to the Hebrew usage, because in the East the
pronouncing of judgment was a chief function of the
ruler."
III. In N.T. the ordinary senses of "estimate," "judge,"
"decide," "condemn," as in Class. Greek. But in
several places it follows the sense noted under the LXX.,
e.g. Matt. 19. 28 : orav KaOicry 6 vios TOV dv@pa>7rov CTTI
Opovov So>7S avTOv, KaOto-co-Of KOL avTol lirl OWOCKO. Opovovs

Kpivovrcs TOVS SwSeKa <pv\as TOV 'lo'pa^X ; 1 Cor. 6. 3 :
OVK otSare ort ayyeXoi;? Kpivovfjicv ; cf. Artemid. ii. 12. 56:
/cpiWii/ yap TO ap^ctv eXeyov ot TraXatot ; Joseph. Antt. 5. 3. 1 :
\afj.j3dvL Trapa TOV TrXrjBov^ dp^rji/ wo-T Kpi.vf.iv TOV Xaov.

6 poeo)
I. In Class. Lit. cry aloud, Aesch., Soph.
(1) ; (2) utter
aloud, Aesch., Soph., Eur.
II. In LXX. used to translate Hebrew nH = be disquieted
in mind, Cant. 5. 4 : KCU 77
KotXi'a JJLOV eOpoijOfj CTT' avrov.
III. In N.T. same sense, Matt. 24. 6 opart :
Mark 13.7: OTO.I/ 8e aKOvo-^Te TroXe/xovs Kat ctKoas

fj,rj OpoeLcrOt
'
}
2 Thess. 2. 2 : eis TO /XT) rctêws
vpas a-rrb rov i/oos /x^8e OpocLvOai. Cf. an epigram quoted
by Jacobs avrrj TCKovcra TrapOevos TraXtv /xevct, Kat pr]
:
OporjO-fl's
ecrrt
yap TO TratStW 0eos, where, according to
Lobeck, /AT) 6por)6f}<s fJL
XtK/AttW
-
I. In Class. Lit. = winnow, Horn. Xen.
II. In LXX. (1) Winnow, three or four instances. (2)
Scatter, e.g. 1 Kings 14. 15 : Kat XtK/Aifo-ct avTovs aVo
Trepav TOV -7TOTa/xo9 j
Ezek. 29. 12: XIK/JLTJO-M avrovs 15
Tas ^copagj Job 27. 21 XtK/x^'cret avToi/ CK TOV TOTTOU

:
avrov (in this passage a different Heb. word = hurl out

of sight). (3) Dan. 2. 44 :
(Theodot.) : XeTTTwet Kat
XtK/x^Vet TraVas Tas /focrtXctas Kat OLVTY] avaarrrjcrzTaL ts

TOVS atwvas, where XtK/xaw translates a Chaldean word
= make an end of. The LXX. translates here
III. In KT. Matt. 21. 44: e<' ov 8' av TTCO^ [6

avTov (omitted by Tischendorf
XiK/Aô-ei ;
Westcott-Hort
and Lachmann bracket it) ; Luke 20. 18 : Tras 6 Treo-wv CTT'
TOV Xtôv (TVV0\acrOit](TTaL' e(f) ov 8' av Treo-r; XtK-

" It will drive him
avToV ; Sir John Cheke transl. :
like dust awai." The

sense of A.V., "grind to powder,"
is exaggerated. "Scattering" is the ruling notion, as
in the LXX. Carr (on Luke 20. 18) suggests that the
idea comes from a mode of winnowing common in
Egypt, in which a "tribulum" was drawn over the

corn by which the grain was separated and the straw
broken, after which the corn was again winnowed with
a fork. Thus the notion of breaking and crushing is
clearlyassociated with winnowing, and that in the

neighbourhood of Alexandria.
I. In Class. Lit.= play the fool, Aesch., Eur., Xen. In

Pass. = he stupefied, Aristot.
II. In LXX. = make foolish, e.g. Isa. 19. 11: ot <ro<oi
Y] fiovXrj avrwv ptopavOtjcrcTai ',

Jer. 10. 13:
7ra<s aV$/oa)7ros OTTO yv<o<rea)S ;
Isa. 44. 25 :
rrjv
@ov\r)v avT&v fiWfMivwr.

III. In N.T. (1)
= sense in LXX. Eom. 1. 22:
e?vat o-oc/>ot cfJuapdvOyo-av ;
1 Cor. 1 . 20 :
e//,a>pai/ev 6
rrjv <roc/>tav. (2) Make tasteless, insipid; Matt. 5. 13:

eav Be ... TO aXa fJL<apdv6fj, ev TLVL aprvO'qcrf.Ta.L ; For
interchange of meaning between folly and insipidity, the
commentators compare "sapere," "sapientia," "insi-
pidus." Sal, sales

= wit. Late Greek, aXes. "Insulsus"
= stupid. Cf . Dioscor. (quoted by Wetstein) :
pi'ai
I. In Class. Lit. = beat, or smite, Horn., Tragg., Oratt.,

Plato. In Demos. Aristocr. 645 eav XiOos rj gvXov rj
:
(riorjpos rj
TL TOLOVTOV e/X7Tcrov Trard^r] . . . avro S*
elSfj ... TO rov <f>6vov etpyatr/xevov, it means apparently

"kill."
II. In LXX. almost always translates Heb. H3H (Hiph'il
of roa not used) = " smite," but especially in the follow-
ing two senses (1) Kill, e.g. Ex. 2. 12 : /cat Traraâsroi/
AiyvTTTiov, %Kpv\f/ev avroVj Judg. 3. 31: /cat e7rdYaei/
TOVS a\\o<f>v\ov<> els eâKocrtovs dvopa<s. So constantly.
(2) Visit with evil (sickness, calamity, etc.), e.g. Deut.
28. 22 Traraât ere /cvpto? tv aTropLa /cat Trvperw ; Isa.
:
14. 6 :
Traraâs ZOvos TrX.rjyrj
avtara).
III. In KT. (1) Ordinary sense = smite. (2) Kill, Matt.

26. 31 :
Trara^w TOV Trot/xera Kat 8iacrKO/37Tto-^ô-ovTat TO,
Trpoâra (qn. fr. LXX.) ;

Acts 7. 24. (3)
= (2) under
the LXX. Apoc. 11. 6 :
eôvtrt'ai/
yrjv V Tracny TrA^yg ; Acts 12. 33: 7rapa^p^/x,a Se

avrov ayyeAos Kvpiov.
o-vvyo)
I. In Class. Lit. = "bring together," in every possible sense.
II. In LXX. in the sense of

"
entertain," but almost always
with ets OLKOV and the like, e.g. Judg. 19. 15 /cat OVK :
ZO-TLV avyp 6 <rvvaytoi> avrovs cts TOV OLKOV \

2 Sam. 11. 29 :
orvvrjyayev avrrjv eis TOV OLKOV avrovj Gen. 29. 22:

(ruvrjyaycv Se Aafiav 7ravra9 rov<s av8pa<s TOV TOTTOV Kal
eTrofyo-ev ydfjiov. Also the curious phrase in 2 Kings 5.3:
TOTC, a,7roo-vva avTOV O.TTO TTJ<S XeTTpas avrov
= receive a
leper into intercourse, i.e. when cured. a7ro<n;vaei

translates the same word as in the other instances.
III. In N.T. (1) ordinary sense common ; (2) entertain,
Matt. 25. 35 : cvos TJ/X^J/ KCU o-wryyayere //,, etc.
This word marks colloquial growth. The addition ets TOV

otKov (LXX.) gradually away. fell
Cf. Plut. Symp. ii. 10, p. 643 eo-rtarcop :

dvflpwTrov? OVT
Stiâii/Tas axravTcos ovre Tretvwvras ts ravro crwayaywv j
Plut. 1097 E: o-wayctv eo-rtWtv ; Strabo, 14, p. 948:

ii.
crvvdytLv crv/x,7ro(rta. Weiss refers to Xen. Cyr. 5. 3. 11

for the same signification. Perhaps the beginnings of
the usage are seen in expressions like <rwayeiv vo-crma
in Plato, etc. Possibly also crwayetv O.TTO o-v//,/3oAaii/
=
have picnic, Diphil. Zwyp.
a 2. 28.
One or two subordinate groups of words remain yet to

be noticed in this section.
4. A certain class of words occurs both in the LXX.
and the New Testament, which scholars have been accus-
"
tomed to call Alexandrian." These have no immediate
Hebrew influences, and they are certainly
connection with
almost unknown outside the sphere of Biblical Greek.
It might seem, therefore, a legitimate assumption that
their appearance in the New Testament is due to the
influence of the LXX. Still, there are stray evidences

from one quarter or another which make it highly prob-
able that they formed part of the popular speech of the
time, and which afford us

for ceasing an additional reason
" "
to speak of an dialect, a custom appar-
Alexandrian
ently due to the need of some convenient phrase for
covering a group of facts regarding which our data are
extremely meagre. The following are typical instances,
and serve to show how far we are entitled to make
inferences from the actual facts :
aXio-yrj JJLOL
This noun occurs in the N.T. Acts 15. 20: aTrcô-Qai TWV
a\Lcryr)fjLa.Twv TO>I> eiSwXwv (in speech of St. James). The
same idea is expressed in ver. by 29
Hesych. on the word says :
'AXio-yôVw TI}S
Xî/Aeco? Twy /Atopcov Ovcriutv.

The verb dXtcryew occurs only in the LXX. Dan. 1. 8
(Theodot.) OTTCOS fj,rj aXia-yrjOfj ev TO> SeiVvo) TOV yScuriXews;
:
Mai. 1. 7 aprovs ^Xicryry/xeôvs j ver. 12 TpaVcâ Kvptov

: :
rjXicryrjfjitvr)
rrt. In all these places it translates Heb.
Pual Ptcp. of taa = pollute.
So Hesych. dXio-yowTCs- /xoXvvoi/res, /ucuvovTes.
: A Schol.
on Mai. 1. 7, explains by /xe/x,oXvo-/x,ei/ovs.
I. In LXX. Job 29. 14 :

SiKacoo-uvryi/ Se evScSvKctv, rjfJi<f>ia-
a-dfJLrjv
8e KpifM i<ra 8t7rXoi8t ;
Job 40. 5 :
avaXa/?e 817 vij/o<f
$6av Se Kat rt/x^/v d/x<^)tacrat. (So X A.)

KOL Svvafjiw,
II. In KT. Luke 12. 28: d 8c rov x . . .
Pv *
Otos OVTWS afji^La^L. (So Lachm., Westc.-Hort.)
TO /xev a/A<iew e(TTt Kotva>9, TO 8e a//,<iau) AcoptKov, wo-Trcp TO
vTTOTrte^w Kat V7ro7riaa>, Cram. Anecdot. Oxon. ii. 338. 31
(quoted by Grimm). The verb occurs in Diod. 16. 11 ;
Plut. ii. 120 B; ^wtfwtf. iii. 12; Inscrr. Noun d/x</>t-

in Job 22. 6, 38. 9 ; d/x^tW/xa, Luc. Cyn. 17 ;
9
d7ra/x,<iaw, Plut. ii. 406 D ; Philo, several times. Cf.

TTOICL =
I. In LXX. Ps. 151. 7 :

aTre/ceâXto-a avrov (David and
Goliath).
II. In N.T. Matt. 14.10 KOL :
irc/u/ras a7re/<e(aAio-ev 'Iwai/i/^v
ev Trj <f>vX.a.Ky. So Mark 6. 16 ;
Luke 9. 10 (always in
the story of the Baptist).
Cf. Dion Cass. 71. 28 : wo-rc o,7roK<aAi<r$eVTos ov8e rrjv
K<t>a\r)v avrov ISclv vireficwcv Arrian, Artem. Oneiroc.

1. 35. Lobeck says it is never found in Attic, and
compares "decollare" in Plautus.
Plut. de Is. et Osir. uses a7roKe<aAicr/x,os. Strabo, 531, has
= Mockery. LXX. and N.T. Apparently no instances

in Attic of e/>c,7rcu<o in the sense of " mock " = Trpoo-n-aiô)
or Ka.Ta7raio). Once in this sense in Herodotus. As
Rutherford observes, it might be expected that this
sense would present itself on the analogy of Latin
" "
illucl.o" e/xTrcuKTiys, e/XTraty/xa, e/x7raty/xos, Alexandrina
"
setas protulit (Lobeck).
I. In LXX. exceedingly often (about thirty times) = give

ear to, Gen. 4. 23, etc. etc. Usually translates Heb.
|\tj$n,
derived from the Hebrew noun JTN= "ear."
II. In N.T. only Acts 2. 14. Sturz considers Vorst to have
proved that the word was in existence in the "vulgar"
speech before the LXX. Stier quotes a parallel Latin
form, "inaurire," from Lactantius. Often in later

writers, such as Gregory Nazianzen and Zonaras.
(or
I. In LXX. an innumerable number of times, to translate
about seven different Hebrew words = destroy, kill.
II. In N.T. only in Acts.

Schol. Aristoph. Plut. 443 :
eôXoflpeuTi/ctorcpov; Joseph.
Antiq. 8. 4. 280 : KOL irav eoXo0peuo-(o trov TO yci/os.
(But Niese reads eôXeW) Plut. i. 965 E. Often in
Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs. The noun côXe'0-
pevo-is in Josephus.
Form 6Xo(c)Qpevav. Philo, Leg. Alleg. ii. 9. 1 : ea rov
oXoOpevovra clo-eXQelv ; Etym. Mag. : oXXvetv o eo-riv
6\oOpvLv. So also Schol. Eurip. Hippol. 535 ; Antlwl.

Pal. i. 57 ;
Suidas : oXeovcei- oXotfpeuet ;
Krebs (quoted
by Sturz) : "vox est mere Alexandrina."
I. In LXX., e.g. 1 Kings 3. 15 : KOL
Judg. 16. 13 f.^vTTVi.crO'ri

: e/c TOV VTTVOV.
II. In N.T. John 11. 12 :
7ropevo/x,ai tva
Condemned by the Grammarians Phrynichus, Moeris,

Herodian, Thomas.
E.g. Phryn. 200 :
e^VTri/icr^^vat ov %pf] Xeyetv aXX' a</>v?r-
vto-î/at. Found in Plut.

r
ii. 979 C ;
M. Antonin. 6. 31 :
/cat ev7rncr$ts TraXtv Kat ^vw^Xow.evi/orya'as ort oVeipot (rot
Often in Church writers and the Testament of the

Twelve Patriarchs. I^VTTVOS in Joseph. Antiq. 11. 3. 2;
M. Antonin. 10. 13.
v8oKta
I. In LXX., e.g. Ps. 18. 15 : KOL ecrovrau cts cuSoKt'avra Xoyta
TOV o-To/xaros /xov ;
and elsewhere, especially in Psalms.
II. In N.T. repeatedly, e.g. Luke 10. 21 : OVTWS eyeVero
evSoKia /*7rpoo-0eV O-QV. Usually = goodwill. Rom. 10. 1 :
^S e/xiys KapStas
= eager desire. The verb
(often in LXX. and N.T.) is exceptionally
common in Polybius and Diodorus. It was evidently a
"common " word.
Upt5. I. In LXX. Kepeatedly in this sense in the

Pentateuch.
II. In N.T. 1 Pet. 2. 5, same sense. Sturz quotes it as

an instance of an Attic formation which finds place in
Alexandrian Greek, the abstract for the concrete. So
eov0eVr7/Aa for eôvflei/êt's in Ps. 21. 6. Parallel to
places like Plato, Timse. iii. 24 D

TraiSeiyAa
= 7ratSev0eis.
:
Several times in LXX. and KT. = majesty.

Plutarch quoted by Loheck as pointing out that Chrysippus
is
brought in many unwonted words into philosophy, as

âptevroT^s, KaAoT^s, /xcyaXorr;?, etc. A great mass of
words of this formation is said to be found in the
Scholiasts belonging to this time. The word occurs in
Athenx. 4. 6. 130. The adj. is found in Xen., Joseph.,
Polyb.
5. The last important subdivision of words which it
is possible to regard as having passed into the vocabulary

of the New Testament through the influence of the
LXX. is that which may be briefly designated as New
Compound Words. A large number

appear of these
only in the LXX. and New Testament. But it has been

already noted more than once that this is one of the
most characteristic phenomena of the later language.
So that we need not be astonished at finding a special
" "
group of Compounds peculiar to the Biblical writers*
It is only surprising that this is not wider in ra'nge than
it is, seeing that the Biblical writings are the only

monuments of the spoken language, strictly so called,
which we possess.
The following are instances of this class :
Nouns
o,7ravyaor/*,a, cy/caiVta, e/XTraiKTT/s, tjJTT^/za, Karavv^ts, KO.TOL-
/caveats, /AeyaAaxruv^, êroi/cecria, 6pK(o/x,ocria r
og, ireiroi6r)<Tis, TrpcoroTOKia, VTraKOij, vTroX^viov,
Adjectives
, aKpoy<ovi<uos, dXXoyei/^s,
, /xoyt'AaXos, Vo<vros,
Verbs
a$O
Stayoyy^co, eK^rew, K/J,VKTT)PL<J), cKTrctpa^co, e
eKpioa), e/XTrepiTrarew, ev8t8vcrKa), evSoâ^w,

evTa</>iaa), eâo-rpaTrro), eôvScvew, eTravaTravto, C
Kara/cavâo/Aat, KaTaKXrypovo/xew, KaTavvo-frw,

Kparaiow, opôroyaea), Trapa^Xow, o-uvcyctpw,
CHAPTEE X
DISCUSSION OF THE GENERAL QUESTION OF THE INFLUENCE
OF THE LXX. ON THE VOCABULARY OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT, BASED ON THE EESULTS REACHED
AFTER the inquiries concluded in last section, it ought

to be possible to give some more or less definite answer
to the question : What is the influence of the Septuagint
on the vocabulary of the New Testament ?
A few statistics must be recalled.

1. An overwhelming majority of the words which
make up the vocabulary of the New Testament is pre-
Aristotelian. In fact, 80 per cent, of the whole number
dates from before 322 B.C.
(a) A great part of these consists of words which

denote concrete ideas.
a. Many of them naturally bear the same meaning
in the New Testament as they do throughout the whole
course of Greek literature.
13. A certain number, however, show peculiar significa-
tions in the New Testament which are paralleled by
similar uses in the LXX. But from constant traces of
cognate meanings in contemporary writers, and those, in
particular, as they approach the common vernacular, we
are only entitled to say that the special meanings are
134
INFLUENCE OF LXX. ON VOCABULARY OF N.T. 135
due to and derived from the ordinary spoken language

of the time.
This portion of the New Testament language also

(b)
includes a large number of words which are designations
of abstract ideas.
a. Of many, just as in the former class,

these, a great
either have the same significations in the New Testament
as in other Greek books of all periods, or show the
influence of the colloquial language of the day by various
modifications of their original usage, and diverging shades
of meaning belonging to a late date in the history of the
Greek tongue.
There is another group of terms, however, which
13.
fallsunder this heading, and which has been already

"
designated as religious and theological." The words
which express them are, in great measure, ordinary
Greek words, but many of these, at least, have been
adapted to this use by the translators of the Old

Testament. Accordingly, these words have had a special
colour imparted to them by the Hebrew content with
which they have been filled, although it must be said
that they, in particular, have been chosen because they

offered easy points of junction for the new meanings
which they were destined to have. And so they form
a sort of theological terminology which has naturally
become a model for the New Testament writers. Yet it
must be borne in mind that while we have in the New
Testament over three hundred words altogether which
"
have a special " Biblical meaning, only about one
hundred of these occur with a similar sense in the LXX.,
i.e. about 35 per cent, of the whole.
2. The remaining portion of the New Testament

vocabulary consists of about nine hundred and fifty words
which are not found in any author previous to the death
of Aristotle. Of these, about five hundred and fifty,
"
roughly speaking, are Biblical," i.e. found either in the
New Testament alone, only in the LXX.
or, besides, To
go a step farther, nearly four hundred of the last-men-
tioned group are absolutely peculiar to the New Testa-
ment, leaving about one hundred and sixty common to the

New Testament and LXX., and found in no other place.
We have already given a pretty full analysis of these one
hundred and sixty words, showing that a number of them
are probably formations by the writers of the LXX. on
the model of Hebrew terms, or, at least, distinct adapta-
tions of Greek forms to express Semitic conceptions ;
while the rest are either late words, in whose case it is
merely an accident of history that they are only found

in Biblical writers, or special phenomena of the popular
dialect with perhaps a certain amount of local
colouring.
The influence of the Septuagint on the New Testa-
ment vocabulary has often been, and is still, absurdly
exaggerated. It no wonder that misconceptions in
is
regard to this matter prevail, when a scholar like the late

l "
Dr. Hatch goes the length of saying : The great
majority of New Testament words are words which,
though for the most part common to Biblical and to
contemporary secular Greek, express in their Biblical use

the conceptions of a Semitic race, and which must
consequently be examined by the light of the cognate

Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 34. The italics are ours.
1
documents which form the LXX." This is simply not

the case. Assuredly, the documents which form the
LXX. shed valuable light on the language of the New
Testament. But why Because
they are the only
?
other records we possess of the current popular speech
prevailing at the time. Dr. Hatch compares the use of

Greek by the Jews to that of English by a Hindoo
Mussulman. Surely this is an extraordinarily misleading
comparison, especially as regards the Jews of New
Testament times. It would be nearer the mark if he
had told us that the Hindoo's great-grandfather had
settled in England, and that his descendants, with the
exception of some stray visits to their ancestral country,

resided in the British Islands, and had become naturalised
English citizens.
l
Again he says (and this in reference to vocabulary) :
"
Biblical Greek is a language which stands by itself."
For parts of the LXX., no doubt, this is true. But that
is because it is a slavishly literal translation, and it was
necessary either to force ordinary Greek words to bear
a sense which was not natural to them, or else coin new
words on the analogy of Hebrew. For the New
Testament it is not true, except as regards that one group
of theological terms which are naturally modelled on the
similar terminology of the LXX., but which, after all, far
overpass their Old Testament bounds, and also the small
group of words expressing rites and customs and special
conceptions of the Jews which had passed over bodily
from the LXX.
Dr. Hatch lays down a Canon for the study of the
1
Essays, p. 11.
LXX., with special reference to its use in determining

the meaning of New Testament words. 1 " word which A
is used or with few and intelligible exceptions,
uniformly,
as the translation of the same Hebrew word, must be
held to have in Biblical Greek the same meaning as that
Hebrew word." This, of course, is meant to apply
strictly to the New Testament vocabulary. We admit

this absolutely in the group of New Testament words
which are the direct outgrowth of Hebrew theology, as
Sofa, Sid(3o\o<}, elprjvij, ireipdfa, and the like. We also
admit it with restrictions in the case of terms
denoting
Jewish usages, which were presumably formed by the
writers of the LXX., but which, by New Testament
times, seem to have become more lax in their use, and

in a few cases to have passed into the ordinary
vocabulary of the period. Hence, accordingly, they
underwent various modifications in their meaning. But
in reference to the vocabulary of Biblical Greek, as a
whole, it appears to us quite untenable for many
reasons.
To begin with, it is admitted on all hands that the
translators of the LXX. were exceedingly unskilful
workmen. Some of them show far greater stupidity
than others. Suppose, then, a case which constantly
occurs, that of a word only found, though very often
found, in a book which betrays great inaccuracy. The

same Greek word always used to translate one Hebrew
is
word. It is used in a very exceptional sense, quite

alien to its ordinary meaning. And the reason is that
the translator has no proper grasp of Greek, or else, from
1
Essays, p. 35.
an imperfect knowledge of Hebrew, he mixes up two

significations, and so uses a word inaccurately. This
same Greek word occurs in the New Testament. Are
we to make its use in the LXX. our criterion of its
meaning there ? We may have abundance of con-
temporary evidence for its usage ;

we may know the
special characteristics of the writer in whom it is found.
Surely these are safer tests to apply than that which

Dr. Hatch lays down.
Another consideration, in this regard, is important.
We have a great mass of evidence to show that the
translators of the LXX. had a tendency to use a Greek
word which was the equivalent for the ordinary signifi-
1
cation of a Hebrew word, in its secondary senses as well.
But this is no criterion of usage. It is often the result
of mere individual predilection, and yet it may fall exactly

under Dr. Hatch's Canon. Surely it would be very unsafe
to allow this to regulate our determination of the New
Testament vocabulary.
the question of time.
But, further, there is Several
hundreds of years have elapsed between the two collec-
tions of writings. In proportion as the Jews have
mingled with other nations, and often come to regard

Greek as their native tongue, words which originally
had a close connection with Semitic conceptions must
necessarily have tended to approach nearer to con-

temporary Greek usage, and may appear even to
E.g. oQtfavftoe.
= (1) debt ; (2) sin.
#<Aog- =(1) lip (2) language.
;
=(1) interrogate (2) request.

;
=:(l) righteousness; (2) alms. Of. Winer (Eng.

trans.), p. 33 sq.
have become part of the literary vocabulary of the

time.
Besides, as we have tried to show in discussing the
vocabulary of the New Testament, the writers of the

books belonging to it manifest a far truer grasp of the
Greek language, and even a certain literary tone, in the
words they use. So that, except in the case of technical
and theological terms, they move on a higher level than
the translators of the LXX.
One further consideration must be specified, and that
a very important one. The LXX. is essentially a trans-
lation, and that from a language whose genius is alien to
that of Greek. Also, it is extraordinarily literal. This
being so, are we at liberty to make its phenomena

absolute standards of usage ? The very peculiarities in
its use of words, and the meanings it gives to them, are
due to nothing else than the sheer literalness of the

translation. It is hard to see how this can, except in
cases which are quite obvious, stamp a word for all time
coming with a particular sense. Indeed, many of these
particular senses are thoroughly isolated, and could not,

on any consideration, lead us to expect their repetition
in the language of the New Testament, which is the
spontaneous expression of vivid conceptions, born in the

minds of men, most of whom have a thorough acquaint-
ance with the colloquial language of their day, and can
exercise themselves in it freely.
The fact is, when we consider the place the LXX.
must have occupied among the Jewish people both in
Palestine and the adjacent countries, as testified by the
New Testament itself, we may well be astonished to find
that its influence has been, comparatively speaking, so

small. If we
for instance, the 103rd Psalm,
take,
which must have been thoroughly well known to all
Jews, we find within its narrow compass words such
as See77roft>, Swdareta, egavOew, eviXareva), fjia/cpo-
Ovfjbos, fjLatcpvvco, fjLTjviw, TroXfeXeo?, all of them terms

which might easily have found a place in the
New Testament vocabulary, but which do not occur
there.
Professor Abbott gives some striking instances of the
marked differences which exist between the two vocabu-
1
laries. Thus the verb which occurs twenty-
/3ao-rafft>,
seven times in the New Testament, is only found once

in the LXX. The group ftapew, /3e/3ato?, /3/oaSu9, fipa-
Svva), ppaSvTrjs, all appearing in the New Testament, are
not in the LXX.
Differences in the significations of words are well
exemplified by the noun ayaTrr), which in the LXX. is
used of love as between the sexes, and which, on the
contrary, appears in the New Testament of that high
spiritual love which finds its chief object in God, in other
words, love without passion. The term which expresses

this conception in the LXX. is ayaTrô-i?, never found
in the New Testament. So also viropovrj in the LXX.=
expectation, in the New Testament = patient endurance.
a$eo-fc? in LXX. == dismissal, in New Testament = remis-
sion of sins, a conception expressed in the LXX. by
Again, Abbott points out that often in reference to

1
Essays on the Original Texts of the Old and New Testaments,
p. 70 sq.
142 - SOURCES OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
ideas where we should expect the LXX. to influence the
New Testament, there are great divergences

" Confess" = eayopev'<o in LXX.
E.g.
,,
= eo//,oAoyeo//,ai ill N.T.,
which " praise" in LXX.
=
" Divorce " = ea7rocrreAAeii/ in LXX.
= aTToXvew in N.T. etc. etc.
This list might be indefinitely extended.

Let us apply now, by way of summary, the various
possibilities of relationship between any two vocabularies,

which were laid down on pp. 87, 88, to the case of
the LXX. and New Testament.
(1.) The first holds strictly in the present instance.

There is no doubt whatever that the LXX. isthoroughly
well known to the writers of the New Testament, and it
is unnecessary to dwell upon this after what has been
already said.
(2.) The second may be also considered to be verified.
It is the fact that an overwhelmingly large proportion of

the vocabulary of the New Testament has already
occurred in the LXX. But this is subject to most

important restrictions. By far the greater part of the
common stock of words is found in Greek writers of all
periods. And the group which comes easily next, numer-
ically, consists partly

of late words and forms in general,
partly of colloquial words which have found little or no
place in literature, except in the Biblical writings.

(3.) The third possibility cannot be said to be true in
the case before us. Considering the intimate acquaintance
with the LXX. which the New Testament writers reveal,
it is surprising to find how small a number of the words
appearing in the New Testament occur in no other known

writings except the LXX.
It is extremely probable that the list of special
" "
Biblical words which does exist will be diminished from
year to year by fresh discoveries of inscriptions and
" "
finds of new manuscripts which (like the Mimes of
Herondas) be of a kind fitted to shed light on the

may
popular language. The works of many of the later
writers, too, have not, as yet, been examined with suffi-
cient care and accuracy, so that in the case, for example,
of Josephus and many more, it is impossible to estimate
their vocabularies with anything like precision. In any
case, it is not going too far to say that those advances
which may be made in knowledge of the current collo-
quial language, are certain to make the list we are
examining, small though it be, considerably less. strik- A

ing instance of this process may be seen by comparing
"
Professor Thayer's careful list of words peculiar to the
LXX. and New Testament," drawn up in 1888, with the
present state of our knowledge.
(4.) Our fourth hypothesis is true in a modified sense.
A considerable number of the words common to the
LXX. and New Testament are derived words, formed by
the writers of the LXX. To the extent covered by these
words, there is an influence of the one vocabulary

on the other. But the whole number
exceedingly is
small in relation to the entire vocabulary of the New

Testament. Moreover, we may well believe that these
words would have become part of the vocabulary of the
New Testament writers, although they had never read a
page of the LXX. The words were absolutely necessary
for Jews. That is to say, there were certain important

Hebrew conceptions connected with national customs
or worship or tradition which had to be expressed in
Greek. Some of these may have been translated into
the foreign language before there was a trace of the
LXX. But the great majority of them was, no doubt,

due to this version. Immediately, however, they would
pass into the current Greek used by Jews, and by this
means often into the general vocabulary of the Eastern
peoples.
(5.) The fifth supposition is also true, in the case
before us, in a modified sense. We have already seen
that the creation of theological terms by the New Testa-
ment writers certainly followed the analogy of the Greek
words used by the translators of the LXX. to set forth
the conceptions of Hebrew theology. In this sphere

there can be no question in regard to the influence of the
LXX. on the New Testament. In some cases, as our
instances have shown, there appears to be a deliberate
stereotyping of usage which henceforward becomes part

and parcel of the Jewish-Greek vocabulary. Yet even
here it is more generally the basis which remains. The
superstructure reared by the Christian writers shows
marked divergences. The main modification to be noted
in this connection is the same as that which was found
necessary in our last hypothesis. Outside the strict
sphere of theological terminology there is a fairly large

group of words, as has been shown, common to the LXX.
and New Testament, with other authors, which, at first
sight, appear to have significations entirely peculiar
to these two groups of writings. These words designate
a variety of ideas, some referring to matters of physical

or everyday life, others denoting moral qualities and the
like. But the more carefully these special senses are
examined, the more uniformly will it be found either that
they are peculiar colloquial significations which may
have existed for long in the popular language, or that
they themselves, and words with senses cognate to them,
occur here and there in isolated contemporary writers or ;
else that in many cases the special meanings are so
closely connected with the ordinary sense, as to depend

chiefly on the context in which the word may be found.
(6.) It is difficult to say whether this last possibility
can be regarded as actually verified in connection with

our inquiry or not. It is hard to decide whether there
are local peculiarities to be found in the New Testament

vocabulary. Certainly traces do exist of words which
the oldest tradition connects with Alexandria. And we
know it was a centre of themixed language of later
times. We can safely regard some of the unique features
"
of the language of the LXX. as Alexandrian." In the
New Testament, such influences are harder to trace. If
" "
there are Alexandrian words in the
Testament, New
they are so sporadic in their appearance that we should
attribute them to the general current of the Greek
language as it manifests itself in New Testament times,
rather than to the direct influence of the LXX. Perhaps
we may look for such peculiarities with greater prob-
ability among the forms than among the words which
compose the New Testament vocabulary.
10
CHAPTEE XI
COLLOQUIAL GREEK, THE LANGUAGE OF THE LXX. AND
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
No one who reads the LXX. and New Testament with
open eyes can fail to be at once struck with the fact that
there is some general characteristic about their language
which marks it off distinctly from that of the rest of
Greek books. And it is just this common and striking

element which is apt to give the impression that the New
Testament owes its particular type of
speech directly to
the LXX. Perhaps it may be said that if the LXX. had
never been written, the New Testament writings would
have shown a greater harshness of style and clumsiness
of expression than is actually found there. But as
regards the respective vocabularies, they are both

children of the same parent, namely, the colloquial
Greek of the time. This is the secret of their striking
resemblance.
Unfortunately our knowledge of the colloquial language

from other sources is fragmentary in the extreme. But
the evidence which is extant goes solidly to prove the
essentially vernacular character of Biblical Greek. How

much lies concealed from us is well exemplified by stray
Greek words which occur in Latin authors, as, e.g.,
in
146
COLLOQUIAL GREEK, THE LANGUAGE OF LXX. AND N.T. 147
Cicero's Letters?- where a considerable list of words is
found, including terms like aderrjo-^, epirepTrepevofjiai,
ovevX/io?, crvfryT?7<Tt9, and others, whose use by Cicero

proves their common occurrence in the language of
everyday life, though they are found in no Greek book.
So also, from time to time, the Inscriptions show us words
of which the very meaning is proof that their use was
not exceptional.
We
have already given brief discussions of elements in
the vocabularies both of the LXX. and New Testament
"
which bear on their Colloquialism." This was illustrated
notably by lists of vernacular words common to both ;
their fondness for diminutives their frequent use of

;
words, originally strong, in a weakened sense and, above ;
all, their remarkable points of contact both with the
vocabulary of Aristophanes and the Fragments of the

Comic poets. We
may recall the statistics
Of words foundAristophanes and exceedingly
in
seldom in any other Greek author

55 occur in the vocabulary of the New Testament ;
and 31 of these in the vocabulary of the LXX.

Of words found in the Fragments of the Comic poets,
and almost nowhere else in Greek literature
151 occur in the vocabulary of the New Testament ;
and about 98 of these in the vocabulary of the LXX.

Of course, in the case of Aristophanes, some of these
words may occur where he is intentionally imitating the
vernacular, but it need hardly be said that this only
makes them more valuable for our comparison. In con-
1
Cf T. K. Abbott, Essays on
. the Original Texts of the Old and New
Testaments, 1891, p. 87.
148 SOUKCES OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
uection with these lists it must also be noted that if an

exhaustive examination were made of the vocabulary of
the LXX. it would certainly reveal a far greater resem-
blance than our own scrutiny has been able to bring out,
seeing that our comparisons have only taken in words
found in the New Testament.
" "
It is not hard to see how this special colloquial
colouring is so prominent in the Biblical language.

from the days there existed in Greek
earliest -
Plainly,
speaking regions a mode of speech separated both from
the literary language and that used by cultivated men,
which belonged to the common people. Grammarians
observe that the existence of syncopated forms in Homer,
such as Sw for SW/JLO,, aXfa for aXfarov, similar pheno-
mena in Hesiod, such as fipl for ftpiapov, and the like,
and various other appearances in writers like Alcman and

Epicharmus, point to an ancient popular language, not
confined to any particular locality. Many forms and
expressions in Aristophanes, which he puts into the

mouths of particular characters,
go to confirm the idea.
This special vernacular type of speech would, of course,

exist all through the history of the Greek literature and
language. And prevalence and growth

certainly its
must have been enormously aided by Alexander's con-

quests. All the forces dominant at that particular
period in the Greek of the Macedonian conquerors tended

to give permanence, and even prestige, to the speech
of the people. Seeing that now, even the literary

language of books had become unregulated
and lax r
the barrier between the refined spoken language and
that of the mass of the people, which must at all
COLLOQUIAL GREEK, THE LANGUAGE OF LXX. AND N.T. 149
times be fluctuating, would tend more and more to
disappear.
How, then, would this condition of things bear upon a
foreign nation, introduced, as it were, to a new tongue ?
Our own observation may serve to guide us in this

matter. Everyone knows that a German, for example,
who may have to live in an English-speaking country for
professional or business purposes, even should he be a
man of superior education, delights above all else to
acquire a certain mastery of the more colloquial part of the

English language. And in conversation, almost contrary
to what one might expect, he goes out of his way to use
" " "
the most popular," not to say vulgar expressions.
Is it going too far to attribute this trait of human nature
to the Jews who first came into contact with Greek ?
But only one element in the process.

this is Jews
then, as now, were eager traders, if
they were anything.
And the language of commercial intercourse must be,
from the nature of the case, a plain, unrefined, hackneyed
mode of speech, ready to open its doors to words which
" "
are often mere slang expressions, a strictly common-
place language, intelligible in all business circles. Un-
questionably this was the type of Greek which first met
the Jews in Alexandria and in all the trading centres of
the East. But from the first they were extraordinarily
conservative as regards education, and the wealthier
among them especially so. In this way, those of them
who might be expected to reach a higher culture in
literature, and thus come into contact with Greek in its
refined and pure form, would be, in most cases, the very
class whom the traditions of their fathers and their
150 . SOUECES OF NEW TESTAMENT GEEEK
pride of national feeling would exclude from all such

influences. Therefore it is not astonishing that the
books of the LXX. display so marked a resemblance to
the language of the street. This is made all the more
peculiar to a reader by its blending with the cumbrous
terms of Hebrew ritual and theology.
As time went on, the colloquial language would neces-
sarily be modified in various directions. As has been
already noted, it must have come to be the language of
educated people. For anything like a return to the
refined Attic dialect of the Golden Age of Athens could
at this period be regarded only as an affectation, too
artificial to escape detection. Yet these facts did, as we
know, exert an important influence on the colloquial
language itself. Its employment by men of education
reacted upon it. We
do not mean to say that Greek as
spoken by the populace became purer, but there came
into existence a special type of the vernacular, that
used by cultivated people. This was distinguished by
"
forms less grotesque than those of the more " vulgar
type. Shades and refinements of distinction were more
carefully attended to. Semi-literary words belonging to
" "
the Common dialect, and put into circulation by the
authors who employed it, are found more frequently.
Now, it need hardly be said that men of Jewish birth

were affected by this development. And there were
special reasons that it should be so. As they gradually
became naturalised in the countries of their adoption,
and were unconsciously influenced by their surroundings,
many of their prejudices completely vanished. They

began to participate with enthusiasm in the higher
COLLOQUIAL GKEEK, THE LANGUAGE OF LXX. AND N.T. 151
education of their time. Soon great numbers of them

became thoroughly Hellenised. Not only so. Long
residence in Greek - speaking countries gave them a
thorough mastery of the language. Each successive

generation, born amidst Greek influences, acquired more
power, more intelligence, and more taste in speaking
Greek. Greek became a common language in Palestine
itself and the more gifted and acute the particular Jew
;
might be, the more likely was it that he should strive to

speak the popular colloquial language in a refined manner.
Amost interesting example of the process we have
been discussing is shown by a comparison of the lan-
guage of the LXX., in general, with that of the New
Testament. The results of such a comparison could not
be better expressed than in the words of Mr. Geldart :
"
The Greek of the New
Testament, however popular,
familiar, and simple, is by no means so vulgar, so nearly
a vernacular, as that of the LXX. We miss, with few
exceptions, and those chiefly to be found in the Apoca-
lypse, forms like eI8a, etc., which must have existed
in
the New Testament age, because they are preserved in

modern Greek to the present. It was familiar and
not vernacular it adopted the homely
popular, but ;
expressions, but did not, as a whole, let itself down to the

grammatical level of the common people, like a modern
Greek newspaper, which is familiar enough to be readily
intelligible, but not enough so to be vulgar

neither alto-;
gether the spoken language of the common people, nor

l
yet by a long way the book language of the learned."
1
Modern Greek Language in its Relation to Ancient Greek, App. I.
p. 180.
CHAPTEE XII
CORROBORATION OF THE COLLOQUIAL CHARACTER OF THE

LANGUAGE OF THE LXX. AND NEW TESTAMENT BY
THE PHENOMENA OF MODERN GREEK
THE position we have sought to maintain in the pre-

" "
ceding section as regards the Colloquialism of the
vocabularies both of the LXX. and the New Testament

receives striking corroboration in a very important direc-
tion. Modern Greek, as spoken to-day, is, of course, in
its main elements nothing else than the descendant of

the old vernacular speech. And so it is in organic con-
nection with the popular language as it prevailed in the
days when the LXX. and the New Testament were

written. No doubt it has undergone numerous modi-
fications both in grammar and vocabulary, yet in its
same language as that which
essential character it is the
the Jews learned amidst the bustling life of Alexandria.

In spite of the many centuries which separate them,
there is nothing like the same difference between the
Greek of to-day and that spoken of in the times of the
LXX. and New Testament, as between the latter and
the language of Demosthenes. Accordingly, we might
expect that more or less light would be thrown on the
relation of the vocabularies of the LXX. and New
152
CORROBORATION OF LXX. AND N.T. BY MODERN GREEK 153
Testament to the colloquial language by the phenomena

of modern Greek. NOT are we disappointed. The fol-
lowing short lists, compiled almost at random, are a
sample of the important evidence which the modern

language brings to bear on our subject.
Nouns
dv Op a Kid Accent shows it to be a vernacular form.

Occurs in N.T. Found in mod. Gk.
dpxyyos. In mod. Gk. = leader, in the ordinary sense.

Similar use in LXX. and N.T. Earely in Class. Lit.
ftao-iXia-a-a. LXX. and N.T. Inscr. of Sigeum, B.C. 270.

Late form for /?a<rtXcta. Mod. Gk.
ft poxy- Late word. N.T. and LXX. Mod. Gk = rain.
yev/Aa. In mod. Gk. = dinner; cf.
yevo/xat in N.T. = eat,
take food, ycvpa in Class. Lit. = taste.
Sw//,a. In mod. Gk. = terrace. Cf. its use in LXX. and
N.T. = flat roof of house.
epeOia-fjios. In mod. Gk. = excitement, in a good sense.

Cf. verb e/oe0iw, used in a good sense in the N.T., while
bad from Homer down. In ordinary Greek, e/oc&oyxos
in a
usually a medical term in Hippocrates.

is
fjyovfjLtvos. Mod. Gk. = superior of a monastery. In

LXX. and N.T. = leader.
tfe'Ar/o-is. Mod. Gk. = will. So LXX. and N.T. Pollux
calls it a " vulgarism."
Ovo-iaa-TTJpiov Mod. Gk. = altar.
So LXX. and N.T.
(TO.) t//arta
= the clothes. (Very seldom in Class. Lit.)
Common in mod. Gk., the LXX., and N.T.
KaLp6 Mod. Gk. = weather. Cf its constant use in the
<s. .
LXX. and N.T. = season, in our sense, especially in phrases

like Kaipol Kap7ro(j>6poi, etc. Our word "season" has a
similar connotation of weather.
KaOrjyrjTris. Mod. Gk. = professor. In N.T. = master,

teacher. Once in this sense in Dion. Hal., and apparently
also in Plutarch.
Mod. Gk. = lodging. So in LXX. and KT.,

where has also the sense of " guest-chamber." Some-
it
thing like this meaning in Polybius and Diodorus.

vo-wv. Mod. Gk. =heat. In this sense repeatedly in
LXX. and K.T. Apparently also once in Lucian. Dioscor.
1. 21. 149, has it as a medical term = heat in the stomach.
fiuTiov. Mod. Gk. = box. Cf. KI/?WTOS in LXX. and
K.T. = the ark. Both words in Aristophanes.
pao-tov. Mod. Gk. = girl. So LXX., and KT. "cum :
nulla evrtXio-fjiov significatione." This use also in Arrian.

Mod. Gk. = bed. So precisely Kpd/3f!a.To<s in
KT. Also found in the Comic poets Crito and Ehinthon.
Lat. "grdbatus" in Martial.
Mod. Gk. = monastery.
In K.T. = dwelling-place.
= station.
Pausanias uses it
voSoêtov. Mod. Gk. = hotel. Cf. verb evoSoxew in

LXX. and KT. = entertain hospitably. Verb also in
Dion. Cass.
rao-ta. Mod. Gk. = vision. So in KT. and LXX.
Appar. also in Anthology.
Mod. Gk. = boy. So in LXX. and KT. Scarcely
in this colourless sense in Class. Lit.
oo-Ko/A/xa. Mod. Gk. = obstacle, hindrance. So N.T.

and LXX.
oo-âytov. Mod. Gk. that which is eaten with bread.
So = French "fricot." KT. =fish (as being eaten with
bread). Cf. Inscr. of lulis, 130 B.C. :
Trpocrâyuoc xpeo-0at
(/c)aTa (r)a (ir)drpLa..
(of a house). So in N.T. Cf. mod. Gk.
Mod. Gk. custom-house. So precisely in

KT. : TcXwi/tov. Also in the Comic poet Posidippus.
ovpyos. Mod. Gk. = minister (of government). In
LXX. = adjutor, qui operam navat ; minister, administer
(Schleusner). Used there of one who, while a servant, is
a free man.
Mod. Gk. nest. Cf. <<oA.eos in KT. = burrow,
lurking-hole of animals.
COEROBOKATION OF LXX. AND N.T. BY MODERN GREEK 155
Verbs, etc. etc.
o.TTOKpLvofjia.1. In the passive in mod. Gk. = answer. So

LXX. and N.T.
/3 a o- r a <o. Mod. Gk. = <ep<o (in colourless sense). So often
in KT.
pptX L' Mod Gk =
- - . So repeatedly in LXX. and KT.
y/x,ico. Mod. Gk. =fill (non-technical sense). So LXX.
and KT.
yv/xaTiw. Mod. Gk. =dine. Cf. ycvo/xae in N.T. = eat.
eyyio>. Mod. Gk. = approach. This sense frequent in
LXX. and KT. Also in Polybius.
evwTTtov. Mod. Gk. =in the presence of. So LXX. and
KT.
7rtorK7TTo/xat. Mod. Gk. = visit. Same sense in LXX.
and N.T. A few times in Class. Lit. (and almost always
= visit the sick).
eTTto-rpe^w. Mod. Gk. = return. So in LXX. and KT.
Hippoc. uses it of the recurrence of an illness.
v<pa6i/o/x,cu. Mod. Gk. uses it of festive enjoyment. So
in LXX. and KT.
0ew/)ea>. Mod. Gk. #a>pco = see (simply), êwpew used in
same sense in LXX. and N.T.
precisely
/coi/xw/Aat. Mod. Gk. = sleep. Constantly in LXX.
(especially) and N.T. = cvSw, KaOevSw.
K o /3 o CD.
fji
Mod. Gk. = button. Cf ey/co/xôo/xat = fasten on .
one's self, in KT. The latter also in Epicharmus and

Apollodorus Carystius (Com.).
o/xtXeco. Mod. Gk. = converse with. So in LXX. and KT.
Also in Josephus and Xenophon.
TT a 1 8 c v a>. Mod. Gk. = chastise. So frequently in LXX. and
N.T.
7ria(D. = seize, apprehend. 7rtao> has the
Mod. Gk. Trtavw
same sense in LXX. and KT.
crv^rea). Mod. Gk. = discuss, dispute. So regularly in
KT.
Mod. Gk. =eat (simply). Same use in KT.
v Tray w. Mod. Gk. = et/xi. So constantly in N.T. Similar

use in the Comic poets.
<f>0dvw. Mod. Gk. = arrive, come. Very common in this
exact meaning in the LXX. and N.T. Also found with
the same sense in Philo and Plutarch.
Xo/>Taw, ;(o/3Tao/x,ai. Mod. Gk. = feed. Constantly in
this sense in LXX. and N.T. Same meaning often found
in the Comic writers.
il/r]Xa<f>d<a. Mod. Gk. = \f/aveiv. Same sense frequent in
LXX. and N.T. Apparently in Xenophon = pat, or stroke
(horses).
CHAPTEK XIII
EXAMINATION OF PECULIAR FORMS WHICH GO TO PROVE
" "
THE COLLOQUIAL CHARACTER OF THE LANGUAGE OF
THE LXX. AND NEW TESTAMENT
THERE remains, still, a class of facts to be glanced at

which is of the first importance in shedding light on the
" "
essentially colloquial character of the LXX. and New
Testament. We refer to a large group of peculiar forms
which make their appearance in these writings, in inscrip-
tions, in late writers, and often in modern Greek.

The range which they are found
of literature within
" "
makes it
plain that they are of a popular character.
There are considerable differences as to the writings
which contain them. Many which are present in in-
scriptions, the LXX., and Christian apocryphal literature
are not met with in the New Testament. This is exactly

what we should have expected from the general superi-
ority of New Testament diction. Still, sufficient instances
occur to show how thoroughly the New Testament is a

" "
popular book.
Distinctions must be made between the various types
which, for convenience' sake, are included in the same
group. Some are mere variations from the ordinary
spelling. At first sight it might seem as if objections

157
could be raised against placing reliance on the ortho-
graphy of our earliest MSS., so far as regards the New

Testament. But, as Dr. Hort well shows (N.T. ii. 355),
the probabilities are unfavourable to the hypothesis of
the introduction of such forms by the transcribers of the
"
New Testament : In the fourth and following centuries,
and even during a great part of the third, a natural result
of the social position of Christians would be a tendency

of scribes to root out supposed vulgarisms, as is known
to have been the case in the revisions of the Old Latin
as regards grammatical forms as well as vocabulary."
The rest of the forms under consideration are, for the
most part, anomalous tense-endings and, in a few cases,
special modifications in verb- and noun-formations.
(1.) (TTrjKco. Constantly in N.T. and LXX. = w

Cf. ere/ceo, in mod. Gk. in same sense. A form
is also cited by Ducange. So in the mod. language,
Apparently, it is almost a rule in modern Greek that

while verbs in -pi are used in the more refined literary
style, in ordinary conversation the same verbs appear in

-a). o-TjJKco is common in the writers of the Middle Ages.
Also a form crrtjvco.
There are, besides, forms in the N.T. such as afaopev

(Luke), rjfyev (Mark), atyovrai, (John), avvtovcriv (Matt.),
crvvlwv (Eom.), which presuppose the colloquial verbs
a<tG> and avviw.
(2.) TTtecrflu, (^dyecrai,. These 2nd pers. sing, forms
of irregular futures in -ofjuat occur together in Luke
17. 8 :
/JL6TO, ravra (f>dy6(7ai,
/cal Triecrai &v.
CHARACTER OF LANGUAGE OF LXX. AND N.T. 159
The same and similar forms repeatedly in the LXX.,

e.g. Ruth 2. 14: (payeaai TWV aprcov, Ezek. 4. 1.1 :
vScop
ev jjierpo) iriea-ai. But, besides, the 2nd pers. sing, of the
present indicative pass, (or mid.) is found in the same

formation both in N.T. and LXX., e.g. Eom. 11. 18 : /cara-
Kavâcrai, etc.; 1 Kings 14. 6 :

a7ro%evova-ai.
" "
In the common Greek of to-day, precisely the same
endings are found in the 2nd pers. sing, present indie.
pass., in ordinary verbs as -ecrat, in contracted verbs
-ela-cu, -aaai ; e.g. (fcalvecrai, Trareia-ai,, Kavâcrai.

These forms are evidently the originals of the usual
contracted 2nd pers. sing., and must have been handed
down unchanged in the popular language from a remote
antiquity.
(3.) Abnormal imperfect terminations in verbs ending
in -fit. Thus from SlScofit SieSlSero (N.T. Acts), :
irapeSlSero (N.T. 1 Cor.), eSiBero (LXX. Ex. 5. 13).

Perhaps the same tendency is seen in the frequently-
"
found " vulgar form BiSovo-iv for L$oacnv, on which
"
Lobeck says :
transmigravit hsec forma ex lade in
vulgarem, quam dicere solemus, linguam omnium dialect-

orum commune diversorium."
(4.) Tjfjujv. Eepeatedly in N.T. as impf. of et/u, e.g.
Matt. 25. 35 :
fez>05 tfp'rjv KOI (rvvrjrydyeTe fjue. It is
striking to find this the regular form of the impf. of mod.

Gk. elfjbai,
= elfjul.
A
very important group of forms in connection
(5.)
"
with the present inquiry is that consisting of " strong
"
Aorists with "
weak terminations. A few of these
have a sort of recognition in Class. Lit., as et-Tra,
jjveyfca, and e-Treo-a, but the usage receives enormous

extension in the LXX. and N.T., e.g.

2 Kings 10. 14:
Esth. 5.4: eXOdra) ;
2 Kings 17. 20: evpav, etc. etc.;
Acts 16. 40: e&)\0av.
elSav, dvei\av, e\0ar6, dvevpav, evpafiev, etc. etc., are
all well attested. This termination is also found with
the imperf. in the LXX. and N.T., e.g. Mark 8.7: d-âv.
" "
This is one of the most marked of the colloquial
forms which crept into the late literature of Greece.
Isolated instances occur in Philo, Plutarch, Pausanias
and Lucian. Menander has evpd^v. The usage spread
and became common in the Eoman and Byzantine periods.
Thus from the Koman period we find in Inscriptions
instances like ecrâ (C.I.A. iii 1363.5), evpa^v (900. 6),
7]\7râ (Kaibel, Epigram. Grcec. 167. 5). Byzantine

writers like Malalas have e/c/3d\cu ( = eV/3a\e/), aveiXav,
etc.
By 300 A.D. this formation has become frequent in

the imperf., as the Inscrr. show, e.g. tffapa (for efapov)
and the like.
In the colloquial Greek of to-day both the imperf. (of
the uncontracted verb) and strong Aorist end in -a, e.g.
favyco, impf. efavya, Aor. ecfrvya. The first and third

persons plural have also the -a vowel.
(6.) Common to the LXX. and N.T. is the curious
termination -oaav in Aorists and imperfects, e.g. in N.T.
eij(oa-av,
John 15. 22; irapeKdjBocrav, 2 Thess. 3. 6;
eSoXiovcrav, Kom. 3. 13. In LXX. eicpivoa-av, Ex. 18.
26; etpdyoaav, Josh. 5. 11, etc. etc.

The old Grammarians give various origins for this
form, some designating it Chalcidian, others Boeotian,

others again Aeolic. It is found in the Comic poet
Posidippus, who has elxoaav. Also in Scymnus Chius

(quoted by Mullach), ecrôo-av. The history of the form
is traceable in a fragmentary way. a7rrj\6oa-av occurs
in an Inscr. of Thisbse, 170 B.C. (Dittenb. Syll 226.
40), 7rape\a/3ocrav in one of Delos, 180 B.C. (Dittenb.
Syll. 367. 112). In the Byzantine writers it is of
frequent occurrence, e.g. e&oa-av, Mceph. Greg. 6. 5.
113; TraprjKdoa-av, Meet. Chon. 153, etc. etc. The

form survives in mod. Gk. in the 3 plur. impf. of con-
tracted verbs, e.g.
eVaroOcrav from Trareco, e&o\iovcrav
from These very forms occur in the LXX.,
SoXtoo).
e.g. Ex. 33. 8: tcarevoovo-av = /carevoovv Gen. 6. 4: ',
fyhrvmav = eyevvcov. With these terminations in

-ocrav may be compared the Aor. and impf. forms,
a<f)l\ea-av, \afjL/3dve<Tav, in Greek Papyri in the British
Museum.
(7.) -av for -a OT- in the 3 plur. of perfects.
Sextus Empir. (adv. Gramm. 213) says: Xeft? y Trap*
*A\e%avpevcnv zKrjXvOav KOI aTTeXrfkvOav.

But there is abundant evidence that this was a
" "
popular form of much wider range. It is frequent
in the LXX., e.g. Deut. 11. 7: ecbpaicav; Isa. 5. 29:
TrapecrTTjicav, etc. So also in the N.T. :
eyvw/cav (John),
el(7\r)\v0av (James), airec-raX/cav (Acts), ecopaicav (Col.) r
etc. etc.
Lycophron has irefypucav eopyav occurs in the Batryo-

;
machia, and ire^vtcav in Democritus.

The Inscriptions afford important evidence of the wide
area over which the usage extends. Thus in an Inscr.
of Smyrna, 235 B.C. (Dittenb. Syll. 171), we have irapei-

In one of Lakonia, c. 70 B.C., there occur
,
tMTfflicayt and TreTrolijicav (Dittenb. SylL
255).
"
Another form, which is almost certainly
(8.) popular,"
occurs in the present and Aorists optative.
The original ending -crav appears in the 3 plur. active
of these tenses. Phavorinus holds the form to be Aeolic,
but extant evidence does not seem to support the hypo-
thesis. It appears rather to be related to the group
examined in (6).
Instances do not occur in the N.T., but they are
common in the LXX., e.g. Deut. 1. 44: Troirjo-cucrav ;
Ps. 103. 35 : eK\eiTrot,o'av ;

Job 18. 9 : e\0ourav. In an
Inscription of Delphi, Trapeôia-av is found.
(9.) What may

be apparently regarded as a form of
" "
vulgar speech is the appearance of a pseudo-future
subjunct. in the LXX. and N.T., e.g. a fut. indie, used
for the Aor. subjunct., and written with the vowels of the
subjunct. Cf. Luke 7. 4 :

afô? eanv cS
Trapegy TOVTO ;
1 Cor. 13. 3 : iva . . .

/cavQijcrcofjLai ;
cf. in LXX. Gen.
2. 17 :
<j)d<yijcr0e.
But in all these cases the readings
are so varying, that it is unsafe to build any conclusion
on them.
(10.) An isolated instance of a "popular" form is
/cdOov, as imperat. of KaQâi. It is found in the LXX.

as, e.g., Ps. 110. 1 : icdQov e/c Se&wv fiov. Also in the
N.T., e.g. Acts 2. 34; Mark 12. 36. This form, con-
tracted from Kadecro, is the present imperative of /cdOrj/juai,
in modern Greek. It is also found in the Fragments of
the Comic writers.
(11.) It is hardly necessary to do more than note

" "
two characteristics of the popular spelling which occur
constantly in the N.T. and LXX. The one is the inter-
change of i and ei, ei being used to designate the long

sound of i, e.g. a-eipois,
2 Pet. 2. 4, etc. cf. the forms ;
and yewcba-Kw, which have excellent attestation.

<yelvofjLai
So in Inscrr., e.g. e/jueo-eiTevcrav, C.LA. 488. 17 (30 B.C.).

On the other hand, there is the tendency to shorten
is found for et. Thus \irovp<yeiv
long sounds, so that i,
isthe best attested reading in the N.T. So also 70ot?

in 1 Cor. and other instances passim. A similar
2. 4,
result is given by the Inscrr., which show that in Eoman

times \iTovpyelv was the common spelling; cf. also
7rt6apxovi>Te<;,
C.LA. 471. 17 (100 B.C.).
But this tendency is best exhibited by the large class

of substantives which shorten -eia to -/a, as apeova'a,
(12.) An interesting instance of a "vulgar" form is

" "
that in which a v is added to the accus. sing, of nouns
of the third declension. There is no certain instance in
the N.T., but it is very common in the LXX., e.g. Ex.
10. 4: a/cpiSav; Kuth 4. 12 :
yvval/cav; 1 Kings 22. 11 :
iepeav.
The Inscrr. also exhibit this peculiarity, e.g. Thessalian
Inscr. of second cent. : rov avbpav.
It occurs, too, in those of the later empire, e.g. Trarpi-
Sav (C.LA. iii. 1379. 10), âpnav (Kaibel, Epigram.
G-rwc. 167. 6). The form survives in the "common"
language of to-day.
" "
(13.) Itonly remains to point out some popular
spellings in the Biblical writers.
a. Harsh concurrences permitted, e.g. \rj^roâi (Winer
compares Ionic Aa//Ajro/iwu), (rvvirvlyeiv, e
I. Addition of superfluous letters, e.g. e/e^fle?, G
c. Omission of letters, e.g. Svcreprjs, epvaaro /e.r.X
These or similar forms occur with the best attestation

in the LXX. and N.T., and are also exhibited by many
Inscrr.
It is needless to give, in closing, an elaborate summary

of the results to which our investigation has led us, as
this has been already done. But the main conclusions
can be put in a few sentences.
The LXX. is the first entire group of writings com-
posed in the colloquial language of everyday life. See-
ing that it is a literal translation of Hebrew books, and

that has been carried out by men of Jewish birth, it
it
is deeply impregnated with Semitic characteristics. Yet

these do not prevent it from exhibiting clearly the con-
dition and tendencies of the popular Greek of its time,
On the one hand, it has many elements in common with
the writers of the Koivrj StaXe/cro? ;
on the other, it is
often a transcript of the vernacular. But the predom-

inant features in its vocabulary are
(a) The creation of a theological terminology rendered
necessary by the original of which it is a translation;

and
The expression in Greek form of
(5) special Jewish
conceptions and customs due to the same cause.
There can be no question that its vocabulary has

influenced that of the New Testament. The earliest
Christian writers, in proclaiming the new faith, had to

express in words deep theological ideas, unheard of in the
old world. It was natural that, in making this attempt,
they should take for their model a vocabulary already

formed. These writers, moreover, were Jews. Their
whole view of things was penetrated with Hebrew modes
of thought. Accordingly, they could not fail to make
copious use of a type of language already adapted to
their special requirements.
But the influence of the LXX. on the vocabulary of
the New Testament must not be exaggerated. Caution
is necessary in determining that which is to be regarded
as usage in Biblical Greek, seeing that the LXX. is a
translation done by unskilful hands, and that ignorance
of Greek or ignorance of Hebrew is often responsible
for phenomena of vocabulary which are peculiar to
the Biblical language. When we consider the excep-

tional importance of the Greek Bible to the New Testa-
ment writers, the astonishing fact is that its influence on
their vocabulary is not incomparably greater than it is
found to be.
That which really sets the LXX. and New Testament,

as Greek books, in a class by themselves, is the collo-
quial language in which both are written. Though the
vocabulary of the New Testament moves on a higher
" "
plane, it is essentially popular in character, and both
groups of writings acquire, from the linguistic point of

view, a unique importance, as the only literary monu-
ments extant of the vernacular Greek of the post-
Alexandrine period.
But, besides, this popular spoken language, as exhibited
by the LXX. and New Testament, is of exceptional
value for another reason, inasmuch as it connects the
" "
oral tradition of the past with the ordinary vernacular
of to-day, and reveals with startling clearness that

wonderful organic unity which makes the language of
Greece, through all its complex developments, a living,
undivided whole.
LIST OF AUTHORITIES
CHIEFLY REFERRED TO OR CONSULTED
ABBOTT, T. K., Essays on the Original Texts of the Old and

New Testaments. Longmans, 1891.
BERNHARDY, Grundriss der Griechischen Litteratur. Band I.
BLEEK, Der Hebraer-Brief. Berlin, 1828-1840.
BRUDER, Concordance to the New Testament. 2 vols. Leipzig :
Bredt, 1880.
CARR, Notes on St. Luke. "St. Matthew" in "Cambridge
Greek Testament for Colleges."
CLASSICAL REVIEW, vols. i.-iv. Various Articles.
CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM ATTICARUM. Ed. by Kirchhoff, Koehler,
Dittenberger. Berlin.
CREMER, Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek.

English edition, T. & T. Clark, 1886.
DITTENBERGER, W., Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum. Leipzig,

1883.
DUNBAR, Concordance to the Comedies and Fragments of
Aristophanes. Oxford, 1882.
EWALD, History of Israel, vol. v.
EXPOSITOR, 1875-1891. Various Articles.
FIELD, F., The Hexapla of Origen. 2 vols. Oxford, 1875.
GEBHARDT, 0., The New Testament in Greek. Tischendorfs
Recension, ed. by Von Gebhardt. Leipzig :
Tauchnitz,
1886.
GELBART, E. M., The Modern Greek Language in its Relation
to Ancient Greek. Oxford, 1870.
167
168 AUTHORITIES CHIEFLY REFERRED TO OR CONSULTED
GESENIUS, Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon.

GREEN, T. S., Grammar of the New Testament. Bagster,
1862.
GREGORY, C. K., Prolegomena to the New Testament in Greek,
by C. Tischendorf. 8th edition. Leipzig: Hinrichs,
1884-1894.
GRAETZ, Geschichte der Juden. Band III.
GRIMM, W., Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.

English edition, by J. Thayer. T. & T. Clark, 1888.
GRIMM, C. L. Das Buch der Weisheit. Erklaert von C. L.
Grimm. Leipzig Hirzel, 1860. Das 2, 3, 4, Buch der
:
Maccabaer. 1857.
GUILLEMARD, W. H., Hebraisms in the Greek New Testament.
1879.
HATCH, K, Essays in Biblical Greek. Oxford, 1889.
HATCH and REDPATH, Concordance to the Septuagint, Parts I.,
II. Oxford, 1892-1893.

HODY, De Bibliorum Textibus Originalibus. Oxford, 1705.
HOLDEN, Editions of Plutarch's "Lives." Camb. Univ. Press.
HOLTZMANN, H. J., Die Synoptiker. Leipzig Engelmann, :
1863.
KOCK, T., Comicorum Atticorum Fragmenta. 3 vols. Leipzig :
Teubner, 1880-1888.
LOBECK, C. A., Phrynichi Eclogse. Leipzig, 1820.
MEISTERHANS, K., Grammatik der Attischen Inschriften.
Berlin: Weidmann, 1888.
MEINEKE, Eragmenta Comicorum Grsecorum. Berlin, 1841.
MULLACH, E. W. A., Grammatik der Griechischen Vulgar-
sprache. Berlin: Diimmler, 1856.
PATON, Inscriptions of Cos. Oxford, 1891.
PSICHARI, J., fitudes Neo-grecques. Paris, 1892.
RUTHERFORD, W. G., The New Phrynichus. Macmillan, 1881.
SALMON, G., Introduction to the New Testament. Murray,
1889.
SCHLEUSNER, J. F., Lexicon to the Septuagint. London, 1829.
SCHWEIGHAUSER, Lexicon Polybianum.
SIEGFRIED, C., Untersuchungen liber die Gracitat Philo's
Jena: Dufft, 1875.
AUTHORITIES CHIEFLY REFERRED TO OR CONSULTED 169
SIMCOX,W. H., The Language of the New Testament. 1889.

The Writers of the New Testament. 1890. Hodder &
Stoughton.
SOPHOCLES, E. A., Greek Lexicon of the Koman and Byzantine
Periods. Boston, 1870.
STURZ, F. G., De Dialecto Macedonica et Alexandrina Libri.
1808.
SWETE, H. B., The Old Testament in Greek according to the
Septuagint. 3 vols. Camb. 1887-1894.

THIERSCH, H. G., De Pentateuchi Versione Alexandrina.
Erlangen, 1841.
TISCHENDORF, Vetus Testamentum Grsece.
TROMMIUS, A., Concordance to the Septuagint. 2 vols. 1718.
VINCENT and DICKSON, Handbook to Modern Greek (with
Appendix by Jebb). Macmillan, 1887.
WEISS, Introduction to the New Testament. Eng. trans.
Hodder & Stoughton, 1887-1888.
WESTCOTT, B. F., Introduction to the Gospels. The New
Testament in Greek. 2 vols. (Westcott and Hort.)
" "
WELLHAUSEN, art. Septuagint in Encyclopaedia Britannica.
WINER, Grammar of New Testament Greek. Trans, by Moulton.
T. & T. Clark, 1882.
WYTTENBACH, Index Verborum in Plutarcho.

ZEZSCHWITZ, Profangracitat und Biblischer Sprachgeist. Leip-
zig: Hinrichs, 1859.
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS DISCUSSED
y, 95. j, 104. iepareijeiv, 119.

j, 124. 56â, 97. lepdrev/jia, 131.
i, 111. 5cD/xa, 121, 153. {XaanjyMOP, 113.
dXtVyTj/ia, 129. tyadrta, 153.
;, 129. ffw, 155.
fa, 117. , 118. ?, 153.
dva<f>pu, 103. ', 162.
dvdpaKid, 153. f, 98. Kat/a6s, 153.
?, 115. i, 99. KOLKld, 100.
r, 121. ArardXu/ia, 154.
>, 117. ?, 130. i, 113.
*, 104. ', 155. >, 122.
fa, 130. :, 130. ,
154.
t, 155. , 130. /ceipta, 40.
dTTOKplvto), 124. , 118. -, 154.

', 121. /fw, 131. y, 100.
?, 153. , 118. 155.
^TTlffK^TTTOfJUll, 105, 155. ', 40.
;, 81. ij, 112. , 155.

j3ao-iXi(r<ra, 153. S 155. Kopda-iov, 154.
;, 155. r, 153. KpepparL, 154.
>, 117. evdoida, 131. K/B^W, 125.
s, 44. , 105. *:p^<ris, 100.
>, 39, 155. i, 155.
}, 153. ,, 112. Xaevr6s, 116.
,
126.
w, 155. , 153. fa, 40.
, 153. , 159.
, 155. ?, 113.
, 39. ,
153. JTTJS, 132.
, 39. , 155. >, 116.
, 126. /, 154.
SidjSoXos, 97. , 153. fj.wpa.lvw, 127.
171
172 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS DISCUSSED
,
123. TTtCt^W, 155. ,
128.
i, 158. (TWTT7P, 103.
, 154. ,
119.
i, 107. ,
154.
oddvtov, 40. , 114. ,
41.
, 113. S, 115. , 82, 155.
, 155. , 154.
,
40. ', 154. u, 156.
6irTa<rla, 154. ', 123. virovpyds, 154.
, 123.
s, 115. ,
158.
101. , 154. ,
156.
>, 155. 124. ,
41.
, 154. 15. ,
154.
j, 40. w, 107.
TravTOKpdrup, 114. 102.
wape/A/SoXr), 15. 116. ,
42.
TrdpotKos, 102. ,
82. , 82, 156.
, 127. ,
158.
s, 114. ,
41.
w, 106. ,
155.
MORRISOX AND GIBB, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH

T. and T. Clark's Publications.
Just published, in large 12mo, pp. xxii-215, price 5s. 6d. net,
SYNTAX OF THE MOODS AND TENSES IN

NEW TESTAMENT GREEK.
BY EENEST D. BUKTON,
PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT LITERATURE AND INTERPRETATION,
CHICAGO UNIVERSITY.
1\ /TESSRS. CLAEK have pleasure in drawing attention to

-LV-L this
important work. It is specially recommended for
use in Colleges and Theological Schools, and for private study

of the Greek New Testament.
The First Edition has been in use for several years in Theological
Seminaries and Colleges in the United States but hitherto it ;
has not been on sale in this country. Its importance has, however,
been recognised by British and Continental Scholars, and arrange-
ments have now been made with the Author for the issue of the
New Edition on this side of the Atlantic.
The New Edition has been so thoroughly rewritten and enlarged

new work.
as to be substantially a
'
A valuable book. ... I venture to express the hope that arrange-
ments may be made to facilitate its circulation in this country.' Prof.
W. SANDAY, D.D., Oxford.
'This book has been expected for some time in our country, but
till the new edition with its corrections
Professor Burton held it back
and additions was ready. A few English scholars have had a copy,
and have been working with it, to their own great satisfaction and ;
it is from them that the word has gone forth about its freshness and
scholarship.
'Well, it has been issued at a most attractive form, and not a
last, in
word that Professor Sanday any other has spoken about it will seem
or
strained or over-enthusiastic. Professor Burton is one of the men whom
Dr. Harper has gathered round him at Chicago, and this book will bear
witness to the scholarly instinct and accuracy of the work that the
youngest of the Universities is doing. . . . He will be a dull student
whom this book fails to fascinate and instruct.' The Expository Times.
EDITED BY
PROFESSORS S. D. F. SALMOND, D.D., AND C. A. BRIGGS, D.D.
No. I. of the Series. Fifth Edition. Post 8vo, price 12s. ,
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE LITERATURE

OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
BY PROFESSOR S. R. DRIVER, D.D., OXFORD.
'
The service which Canon Driver's book will render in the present
confusion of mind on this great subject, can scarcely be overestimated.'
The Times.
By far the best account of the great critical problems connected with the
'
Old Testament that has yet been written. ... It is a perfect marvel
of compression and lucidity combined. A monument of learning and well-
balanced judgment.' The Guardian.
No. II. of the Series. Third Edition. Post 8vo, 10s. 6d.,
CHRISTIAN ETHICS.
BY NEWMAN SMYTH, D.D.,
AUTHOR OF
'OLD FAITHS IN NEW LIGHT,' 'THE REALITY OF FAITH,' ETC. ETC.
*
There not a dead, dull, conventional line in the volume. It is the
is
work of a wise, well-informed, independent, and thoroughly competent writer.
It removes a reproach from our indigenous theology, fills a glaring blank in
our literature, and is sure to become the text-book in Christian Ethics.'
Professor MARCUS DODS, D.D., in The Bookman.
'It is so beautifully clear, devoid of dulness, and has so many " bursts
of eloquence," that it will take the reader who considers Christian Ethics for
the first time under his tuition literally by storm.' Methodist Times.
No. III. of the Series. Now ready, Second Edition, post 8vo, 10s. 6d.,
APOLOGETICS;
OR, CHRISTIANITY DEFENSIVELY STATED.
BY PROFESSOR A. B. BRUCE, D.D.,
AUTHOR OF
'THE TRAINING OF THE TWELVE,' 'THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST,'
'THE KINGDOM OF GOD,' ETC.
'In this noble work of Dr. Bruce, the reader feels on every page that he
is in contact with a mind and spirit in which all the conditions for a genuine
apologetic are fulfilled. ... At the end of Dr. Bruce's work the reader
is uplifted with a great and steady confidence in the truth of the
gospel the ;
evangel has been pleading its cause with him, and he has felt its power.'
British Weekly.
' '
Detailed Prospectuses of the International Theological Library free
on application.
EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

In Seven Parts, price each; or, complete in half-roxburghe

4s. (net)
binding, price 80s. net.
(PARTS I. to VI. now ready.)
A NEW SYff/AC LEXICON.

BY DR. C. BROCKELMANN, BRESLAU.
With a Preface by PROFESSOR T. NOLDEKE.

'
The appearance of a new Syriac Lexicon, designed to meet the wants of
students, is an event of considerable importance for the progress of Semitic
studies at home and abroad. The work, of which the first part has just been
issued, will be welcomed on all hands as fulfilling what has long been the
most conspicuous lacuna in Semitic bibliography. . The publishers have
. .
earned, and will certainly receive, the thanks of every Semitic student for
thus coming forward to remove what had almost become a scandal to
international scholarship, the lack of a student's dictionary of a language so
important to the philologist, the historian, and the theologian.' A. R. S.
KENNEDY, D.D. (Professor of Oriental Languages in the University of
Aberdeen), in The Expository Times.
In demy 8vo, Twelfth Edition, price 7s. 6d.,
AN INTRODUCTORY HEBREW GRAMMAR;

With Progressive Exercises in Reading and Writing.
BY A. B. DAVIDSON, M.A., LL.D.,
PROFESSOR OF HEBREW, ETC., IN THE NEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH.
'
The best Hebrew Grammar is that of Professor A. B. Davidson.' The
British Weekly.
'
A text-book which has gone into its tenth edition needs no recom-
mendation here. . Certain changes, in the introduction of new examples,
. .
and the enlargement of some parts where brevity tended to obscurity, will
add to the already great merits and widely acknowledged usefulness of the
book.' The Critical Review.
BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

Just published, in demy 8vo, price 7s. 6d.,
A SYNTAX OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE.

'
A book like this, which comes from the hand of our first Hebraist, is its
own best commendation. It will be eagerly welcomed by all students and
teachers of Hebrew.' Critical Review.
EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

T. and T. Claris Publications.
CREMER'S LEXICON.
In demy 4to, Third Edition, with Supplement, price 38s.,
BIBLICO-THEOLOQICAL LEXICON
OF
NEW TESTAMENT GREEK,

BY
HERMANN CREMER, D.D.
translate!! anti "Errangett from tfje latest German fEtoitton
BY
WILLIAM URWICK, M.A.
The Supplement, which is included in the above, may be had separately,
price 14s.
'
It is not too much to say that the Supplement will greatly enhance the
value of the original work while of this we imagine it needless to add many
;
words of commendation. It holds a deservedly high position in the estimation

of all students of the Sacred tongues.' Literary Churchman.
'We particularly call attention to this valuable work.' Clergyman's
Magazine.
'
Dr. Cremer's work is highly and deservedly esteemed in Germany. It
gives with care and thoroughness a complete history, as far as it goes, of each
word and phrase that it deals with. . . . Dr. Cremer's explanations are most
lucidly set out.' Guardian.
In Two Volumes, crown 8vo, price 16s.,
THE APOSTOLIC
AND
POST-APOSTOLIC TIMES.
THEIR DIVERSITY AND UNITY IN LIFE AND DOCTRINE.
BY GOTTHARD VICTOR LECHLER, D.D.
dranslatctj from tlje Cfjirto Litton, tfjorougfjig &ebisttt anU 3&e=S2Srttten,
BY A. J. K. DAVIDSON.
'
In the work before us, Lechler works out this conception with great
skill, and with ample historical and critical knowledge. He has had the
advantage of all the discussions of these forty years, and he has made good
use of them. The book is up to date so thoroughly is this the case, that
;
he has been able to make room for the results which have been won for the
early history of Christianity by the discovery of the "Didache," and of the
discussions to which it has given occasion. Nor is it too much to say that
Dr. Lechler has neglected nothing fitted to throw light on his great theme.
The work is of the highest value.' Spectator.
*
It contains a vast amount of historical information, and is replete with
judicious remarks. . .
By bringing under the notice of English readers a
.
work so favourably thought of in Germany, the translator has conferred a

benefit on theology.' Athenceum.
The most important contribution yet made to biblical theology.' EXPOSITOR.
Just published, in Two Volumes, 8vo, 21s.,
THE TEACHING OF JESUS.

BY HANS HINRTCH WENDT, D.D.,
ORD. PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY, HEIDELBERG.
TRANSLATED BY REV. JOHN WILSON, M.A., MONTREUX.
Copyright, by arrangement ivith the Author.
'Dr. Wendt's work is of the utmost importance for the study of the
Gospels, both with regard to the origin of them and to their doctrinal
contents. It is a work of distinguished learning, of great originality, and of
profound thought. The second part (now translated into English), which
sets forth the contents of the doctrine of Jesus, is the most important
contribution yet made to biblical theology, and the method and results of
Dr. Wendt deserve the closest attention. ... No greater contribution to
the study of biblical theology has been made in our time. A brilliant and
satisfactory exposition of the teaching of Christ.' Prof. J. IVERACH, D.D.,
in The Expositor.
Dr. Wendt has produced a remarkably fresh and suggestive work,
'
deserving to be ranked among the most important contributions to biblical

theology. There is hardly a page which is not suggestive and, apart
. . .
;
from the general value of its conclusions, there are numerous specimens of
ingenious exegesis thrown out with more or less confidence as to particular
passages.' Prof. W. P. DICKSON, D.D., in The Critical Review.
In One large 8vo Volume, Ninth English Edition, price 15s.,
A TREATISE ON
THE, GRAMMAR OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK,
REGARDED AS THE BASIS OF NEW TESTAMENT EXEGESIS.
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN OF DR. G. B. WINER.
With large additions and full Indices. Third Edition.
Edited by Rev. W. F. MOULTON, D.D., one of the New Testament Translation Revisers.
'
We
need not say it is the Grammar of the New Testament. It is not
only superior to all others, but so superior as to be by common consent the
one work of reference on the subject. No other could be mentioned with
it.' Literary Churchman.
12
Just published, in demy 8vo, price 12s. 6d. net,
INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT.

LTHE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL.
BY PROFESSOR F. GODET, D.D., NEUCHATEL.
Anything that comes from Dr. Godet is sure to receive a cordial welcome in
'
Great Britain, and our familiarity with his eloquent and luminous commen-
taries prepares us to appreciate very highly a work in which the venerable
Swiss thus gathers up the harvest of a life-time.' Prof. ADENEY in The Critical
Review.
'
In every particular it is fully abreast of the times. For the purposes of the
hard-working preacher there is no book on St. Paul's Epistles quite equal to
, this. For the student, it must always lie in a place that his hand can reach.
It is delightful reading.' Methodist Times.
BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

In crown 8vo, Third, and Cheaper, Edition, price 4s.,
DEFENCE OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH.

TRANSLATED BY THE
HON. AND EEV. CANON LYTTELTON, M.A.,
RECTOR OF HAGLEY.
'
There is trenchant argument and resistless logic in these lectures ; but
withal, there is cultured imagination and felicitous eloquence, which carry home
the appeals to the heart as well as the head.' Sivord and Trowel.
Just published, in post 8vo, price 7s. 6d.,
ST. PAUL'S CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY.

BY ALEXANDER BALMAIN BRUCE, D.D.,
PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT EXEGESIS IN THE FREE CHURCH COLLEGE, GLASGOW ;
AUTHOR OF '
APOLOGETICS OR, CHRISTIANITY DEFENSIVELY STATED,'
;
'THE KINGDOM OF GOD,' 'THE TRAINING OF THE TWELVE,'

'THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST,' ETC.
SUMMARY AND CONTENTS: I. The Sources. II. St. Paul's Eeligious
History. III. The Epistle to the Galatians. IV. Corinthians. V. Bomans
Its Aim. VI. The Train of Thought. VII. The Doctrine of Sin. VIII. The
KighteousnessofGod. IX. The Death of Christ. X. Adoption. XI. Without
and Within. XII. The Moral Energy of Faith. XIII. The Holy Spirit.
XIV. The Flesh as a Hindrance to Holiness. XV. The Likeness of Sinful
Flesh. XVI. The Law. XVII. The Election of Israel. XVIII. Christ.
XIX. The Christian Life. XX. The Church. XXI. The Last Things.
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE. The Teaching of St. Paul compared with the Teach-
ing of our Lord in the Synoptical Gospels.
'
Dr. Bruce's skill as an expositor, his scholarship, his candour, what we may
call his mental detachment, are well known ; and all these qualities lend
interest to this new study of a very old theme. Those who are most familiar
with St. Paul's writings will be among the first to recognise the interest and
value of this work.' Methodist Recorder.
Just published, in Two Vols. demy 8vo, price 18s. net,
NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY;

OR,
HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE TEACHING OF JESUS AND

OF PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANITY ACCORDING TO
THE NEW TESTAMENT SOURCES.
BY DR. WILLIBALD BEYSCHLAG,

PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT HALLE.
'A fresh, independent, critical exposition of the teachings of the New-

Testament well worthy of study.' Scotsman.
'Dr. Beyschlag has achieved so large a measure of success as to have
furnished one of the best guides to an understanding of the New Testament.
.... These pages teem with suggestions In the belief that it will
stimulate thought and prove of much service to ministers and all students of
the sacred text it expounds, we heartily commend it to our readers.' Methodist
Recorder.
(
In many respects a masterly treatise, and in this admirable translation, for
which Mr. Buchanan deserves all praise, is sure to be widely read in this
country.' Glasgow Herald.
Just published, in Two large Vols. 8vo, Second Edition, price 18s. net,
OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY.

THE RELIGION OF REVELATION IN ITS PRE-CHRISTIAN
STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT.
BY PROF. HERMANN SCHULTZ, D.D., GOTTINGEN.
AUTHORISED ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
BY PROF. J. A. PATERSON, D.D.
'
Professor Paterson has executed the translation with as much skill as care.
.... Readers may rely on his having given the meaning of the original with
the utmost accuracy.' From the Author's Preface to the Translation.
'
The book will be read with pleasure, and, it need not be said, with profit,
not only by professional students, but by all intelligent persons who have an
interest in the Old Testament. Though externally popular and of singular
. . .
literary finish, the author's work within is a laborious and able study of the
whole subject.' Professor A. B. DAVIDSON, D.D.
'A standard work on this subject may be said to be indispensable to every
theologian and minister. The book to get, beyond all doubt, is this one by
Schultz, which Messrs. Clark have just given to us in English. It is one of the
most interesting and readable books we have had in our hands for a long time.'
Professor A. B. BRUCE, D.D.
GRIMM'S LEXICON.
The best New Testament Greek Lexicon.
'
... It is a treasury of the results
of exact scholarship.' BISHOP WESTCOTT.
In demy 4to, THIRD EDITION, price 36s.,
A GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT,
BEING
GRIMM'S 'WILKE'S CLAVIS NOVI TESTAMENT!.'

Eranslatetr, 3&ebise&, antr (Enlarged
BY
JOSEPH HENRY THAYER, D.D.,
BUSSEY PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT CRITICISM AND INTERPRETATION
IN THE DIVINITY SCHOOL OF HARVARD UNIVERSITY.
EXTRACT FROM PREFACE.

4
rnOWARDS the close of the year 1862, the " Arnoldische
Buchhandlung
"
JL in Leipzig published the First Part of a Greek-Latin Lexicon of the
New Testament, prepared upon the basis of the " Clavis Novi Testamenti
Philologica" of 0. G. Wilke (second edition, 2 vols. 1851), by Professor C. L.
WILIBALD GRIMM of Jena. In his Prospectus, Professor Grimm announced
it as his purpose not
only (in accordance with the improvements in classical
lexicography embodied in the Paris edition of Stephen's Thesaurus, and in the
fifth edition of Passow's
Dictionary edited by Eost and his coadjutors) to
exhibit the historical growth of a word's significations, and
accordingly' in
selecting his vouchers for New Testament usage to show at what time and
in what class of writers a given word became current, but also
duly to notice
the usage of the Septuagint and of the Old Testament
Apocrypha, and
especially to produce a Lexicon which should correspond to the present con-
dition of textual criticism, of exegesis, and of biblical
theology. He devoted
more than seven years to his task. The successive Parts of his work re-
ceived, as they appeared, the outspoken commendation of scholars diverging
as widely in their views as Hupfeld and Hengstenberg ; and since its com-
pletion in 1868 it has been generally acknowledged to be by far the best
Lexicon of the New Testament extant.'
of the greatest importance. ... It seems to me a

'
I regard it as a work
work showing the most patient diligence, and the most carefully arranged
collection of useful and helpful references.' THE BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER
AND BRISTOL.
The use of
4
Professor Grimm's book for years has convinced me that it is
not only unquestionably the best among existing New Testament Lexicons,
but that, apart from all comparisons, it is a work of the highest intrinsic
merit, and one which is admirably adapted to initiate a learner into an ac-
quaintance with the language of the New Testament. It ought to be regarded
as one of the first and most necessary requisites for the study of the New
Testament, and consequently for the study of theology in general.' Professor
EMIL SCHURER.
DEPT
General Library

Sources of New Testament Greek or The Influence of The Septuagint On The Vocabulary of The New Testament (PDFDrive)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sources of New Testament Greek or The Influence of The Septuagint On The Vocabulary of The New Testament (PDFDrive)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sources of New Testament Greek or The Influence of The Septuagint On The Vocabulary of The New Testament (PDFDrive)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the book about based on the preface?

What is the book about based on the preface?

What are some of the main topics covered in the book as mentioned in the table of contents?

What are some of the main topics covered in the book as mentioned in the table of contents?

THE LIBRARY

SYNTAX OF THE MOODS AND TENSES

NEW TESTAMENT GREEK

'Professor Burton's treatise is one of great merit one

T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.

NEW TESTAMENT GREEK

THE INFLUENCE OF THE SEPTUAGINT

REV. H. A. A. KENNEDY, M.A., D.Sc.

IN the preface to his Essays in Biblical Greek, the late

out to students of sacred literature some of the rich

fields which have not yet been adequately explored, and

an attempt to deal with some of the matters which

formed the subject of Dr. Hatch's investigation, and,

indeed, owes its origin to the results at which that most

independent and keen -minded scholar arrived as regards

ance of Hatch's conclusions, the farther the inquiry was

pushed, the more decidedly was he compelled to doubt

connection between the language of the LXX. and that

of the New Testament on a totally different basis.

The discussion is purely a tentative one. Further

presented. But it seems to the writer that the lines for

investigation laid down in this dissertation are at least

trustworthy, and lead to the true standpoint for the

study of Biblical Greek as a whole.

is given. But the writer must express special obliga-

Vulgarsprache, and Thayer's edition of Grimm's Lexicon

Appendix to the latter work have formed, to a large

extent, the basis of this investigation.

NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE SUBJECT

CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE IN

The Attic ofXenophon and its formative elements The new

poetical words (2) Ionic words

phon and the writers of the xotvv words

..... ; (4) colloquial (5)

diminutives in common with the Comic writers ; (6) new

The "Common" and "Hellenistic" dialects as parallel growths

Problems affecting the investigation of the vocabulary Numerical

affinities with Aristophanes Parallels between the Greek of

COMPARISON OF THE VOCABULARY OF THE LXX. WITH THAT OF

The LXX. familiar to the New Testament writers Dr. Hatch's

THE INFLUENCE OF THE LXX. ON THE THEOLOGICAL AND RELI-

Formation of a theological terminology Discussion of words

Actual Hebrew words Words expressing Jewish customs and

Subdivision the New Testament vocabulary

CORROBORATION OF THE COLLOQUIAL CHARACTER OF THE

...... continuity of the spoken language

LIST OF AUTHORITIES 167

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS .... 171

THE study Language, like all other provinces of

investigation, has been influenced to a high degree by

the sphere of investigation is ever being widened.

Light thrown on important problems from directions

the most various. Fine Art, Antiquities strictly so

But perhaps nothing has tended so powerfully to

the present century has seen in the field of Comparative