V. But the circumstance that the NT forms a body of literature having its own distinct linguistic peculiarities, must not make us overlook the fact that it contains within itself considerable diversities of language as well as of style. The uniqueness of the volume, and the practice of using it as the one authoritative source and test of Christian truth, tend to make us isolate it unhistorically
from the literature that immediately preceded and followed it, and, on the other hand, to unify it unwarrantably. It is a library comprising the works of, perhaps, ten or more different authors The statement that ‘they all use the same lan- guage * requires at once the qualification ‘but they
o not all use it in the same way.’ The first three Gospels, for instance, with all their indications of a common basis, exhibit in their present form indubitable marks of the ἀπ ΠΙ ene of their several authors. The frequent use of τότε (ἀπὸ rire —some 90 times), ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν (some 33 times), iva (ὅπως) πληρωθῇ (τὸ ῥηθέν, ete., some 12 times), ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἐν (τοῖς) οὐρανοῖς or ὁ οὐράνιος (90 times), προσέρχεσθαι (51 times), συνάγειν (24 times), ἀναχωρεῖν (10 times), ete., mark distinctly the personality of Matthew. The use of εὐθύς (some two score times), of the pictorial participle, of diminutives and Latinisms, and, notwithstanding his terseness, a proneness to emphasize by the repetition of equivalent phrases (6.0. διαπαντὸς νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, 5°; ἔσωθεν ἐκ τῆς καρδίας, 75}; νῦν ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τούτῳ, 1059. σήμερον ταύτῃ τῇ νυκτί, 1430), etc., are some of the traits that characterize no less distinctly the second Evangelist. A comparison of the sec- tions common to Luke with the other two shows the distinctively literary cast of his phraseology. The identity of topic but throws the difference in language into greater relief. He distinguishes himself from the other Synoptists by his fondness for infinitives (ἐν τῷ with the inf. 37 times, τοῦ with the inf. 25 times), for καὶ ἐγένετο or ἐγένετο δέ (43 times), δὲ καί (29 times), καὶ αὐτός (28 times), σύν (25 times), πορεύομαι (50 times), ὑποστρέφειν (22 times), ἐνώπιον (20 times), ἔμπροσθεν (10 times). The strikingly Semitic complexion of his first chapter, and the variations between his language in the Gospel and in the Acts, are doubtless attrib- utable in large measure to his sources. The terms λόγος, σκοτία (σκότος), φῶς, ζωή (αἰώνιος), ἀλήθεια, δόξα, κρίσις, κόσμος, μαρτυρέω (-ρία), γινώσκω, πιστεύω, the phrases ἀμὴν ἀμήν, ἁμαρτίαν ἔχειν, γεννηθῆναι ἐκ (τοῦ) θεοῦ (or πνεύματος), εἶναι ἐκ (τοῦ κόσμου, ete.), ἡ ἐσχάτη ἡμέρα, ὁ υἱός, ὁ πατήρ, etc., are at once recognized as characteristic of John; and not less so are his short and simple sentences and their asyndetie collocation, his co-ordinateness and
arallelism of construction (note ἀπεκρίθη καὶ εἶπεν), bis verbal reiterations, his Hebraisms (χαρᾷ χαίρει 3, υἱοὶ φωτός 12%, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας 1713), his emphatic demonstratives, his combined particles (καίτοιγε, ὅμως μέντοι), his weakened ἵνα, and especially his recurrent οὖν, which often marks mere transition instead of logical sequence.
The distinctive vocabulary of the creative Paul is too salient and well known to be dwelt upon :— his abstracts : ἀγαθωσύνη, ἁγιωσύνη, ἁγνότης, ἁπλότης, δικαιοκρισία, δικαίωσις, δοκιμή, ἐνέργεια, ἑνότης, éEava- στασις, ἐπιπόθησις, εὐσχημοσύνη, ἱκανότης, ἱλαρότης, καινότης, κενοδοξία, μεθοδία, μωρολογία, ὀφθαλμοδουλία, πεποίθησις, πιθανολογία, πιότης, προσαγωγή, σκληρότης, υἱοθεσία ;—his compounds : ἀκατακάλυπτος, ἀλάλητος, ἀμεταμέλητος, ἀμετανόητος, ἀναπολόγητος, ἀνεκδιήγητος, ἀνεξερεύνητος, ἀνεξιχνίαστος, ἀνθρωπάρεσκος, ἀντανα- πληρόω, ἀπαρασκεύαστος, ἀποκαραδοκία, ἀπορφανίζω, ἀποτολμάω, ἐθελοθρησκία, ἐπαναμιμνήσκω, érepodidac- καλέω, ἑτεροζυγέω, εὐπροσωπέω, θηριομαχέω, ἰσόψυχος, ὀλιγόψυχος, καταβραβεύω, κατοπτρίζομαι, κενοδοξία, κοσμοκράτωρ, μετασχηματίζω, ὀρθοποδέω, παρεισέρχομαι προενάρχομαι, προσαναπληρόω, συνυπουργέω, συνυπὸ κρίνομαι, dwepevrvyxdyw;—his particles: ἀλλὰ μεν- οὔνγε, ἄρα οὖν, ἐάν τε γάρ, ἐκτὸς εἰ μή, οὐ μόνον δὲ ἀλλὰ καί, τὲ γὰρ. . . ὁμοίως δὲ καί, ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ, ὡσπερεί, ὡς ὅτι. Not less familiar are the characteristics of his style:—his long and sometimes involved sentences, his en ae appendages and amplifi- cations, the irrepressible crowding of his thoughts, his imperial disregard for niceties of constructior
42 LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TEST.
in his determination to ‘wreak his meaning on expression.’ :
ery different is the studied rhetorical period- icity of the writer to the Hebrews. The nature of his theme, indeed, leads him to use ard words and constructions found in the LXX; but the general air of his vocabulary, no less than of his style, is literary. Reminiscences of classic phrase- ology meet us in his ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν and ἔμαθεν ἀφ᾽ ὧν ἔπαθεν. His varied use of particles— δήπου, ἐάνπερ, καθώσπερ, καίπερ, καίτοι, μετέπειτα, τε (τε γάρ), and the affectedly indefinite ποὺ (25, 4*)—further attests his culture. So do the periphrastic phrases ἀρχὴν λαμβάνειν (i.g. ἄρχεσθαι), πεῖραν λαμβάνειν (yet cf. ὑπόμνησιν Δ. $ Ti 15, λήθην Δ. 2 P 1", ete.), and such terms as αἰσθητήριον, ἀπαύγασμα, ἔγγυος, ἔλεγχος, ἕξις, εἰς τὸ διηνεκές, πρόσφατος, τραχηλίζειν, χαρακτήρ. Still, he betrays conspicuously the later Gr. fond- ness for sonorous words (see p. 37 above); as, dyeveadbynros, aluarexxuola, ἀκατάλυτος, duerderos, ἀνασταυρόω, ἀντικαθίστημι, ἀπαράβατος, ἀφομοιοῦσθαι, δυσερμήνευτος, ἐπεισαγωγή, εὐπερίστατος, καταγωνί- ζεσθαι, μετριοπαθεῖν, μισθαποδοσία, ὁρκωμοσία, συνεπι- μαρτυρεῖν, ete., bear witness. One of the noteworthy grammatical peculiarities of the Epistle is its use of the perfect tense as nearly tantamount to the aorist (e.g. 117-%; note the co-ordination of the two in the former passage), in accordance with the laxity of the late and less cultivated writers (ef. e.g. Rev 57, 8° etc.).
In some respects the Ep. of James shares the characteristics of that to the Hebrews. In style, to be sure, it is very different : terse, abrupt, vivid, incisive, at times picturesque, not to say poetic. But its vocabulary exhibits a similar variety and amplitude; and in the skilful use of the Gr. language its author is inferior to no NT writer. Peculiar to him are the compounds ἀδιάκριτος, dxardoratos, dvé\eos, ἀπείραστος, ἀποκυέω, ἀφυστερέω, δαιμονιώδης, θανατηφόρος, κακοπαθία, κατιόομαι, νομοθέ- τῆς, πολύσπλαγχνος, σητόβρωτος, χρυσοδακτύλιος, the bookish terms ἀποσκίασμα, βρύω, ἔμφυτος, ἐνάλιος, κατήφεια, ὄψιμος, παραλλαγή, ῥυπαρία, τροπή, τροχός, τρυφάω, and the pictorial ἀνεμίζω, αὐχέω, δίψυχος, εὐπρέπεια, ὁλολύζω, ῥιπίζω, σήπω, φλογίζω, φρίσσω, χαλιναγωγέω. His Ep. contains some seventy words that are peculiar to him; while the Ep. to the Heb., nearly three times as long, exceeds that number by scarcely one hundred ; and 1 P, nearly identical in length with James, falls short by some ten in the number of its peculiar terms. Some of James’s words, ¢.g. πολύσπλαγχνος, χρυσοδακτύλιος, are thought to be of his own coinage.