III. Syntax. — Here the peculiar elements that mix- ed themselves with the common spoken language in the N.-T. writings make their appearance. The He- brew element especially is noteworthy. The transla- tors of the Septuagint went on the principle of trans- lating as literal!}' as possible, and consequentl}' the form of the sentences is essentially Hebrew. Some of the writers of the N. T. were themselves Jews, or derived part of their information from Jews, and ac- cordingly the form of portions of their writings, par- ticularly in narrative, is influenced by Hebrew modes. At the same time, too much stress is not to be laid on this Hebrew influence, for the writers appear some- times to differ from the classical types, not because they were Jews, but because thej' were simple plain- speaking (r))v yXoJTTav ionoTivovTe(;, Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. iii, 24) men, who cared little about rounded sen- tences. The Hebrew element shows itself in particu- lar phrases and constructions, as in iroitii' tXiog jnTci Tii'oi; ; but the amount of this Hebrew element is not so great as it has often been supposed to be, and in some of the N.-T. writers it is scarcely noticeable at all. Generally speaking, the syntax, like the gram- mar, has a tendency towards modern Greek. It has, like it, frequent recourse to the use of prepositions, and we find such expressions even as ciivra tiQ ufiag (1 Thess. iv, 8). After the comparative Trapd is frequent- ly used instead of // in the N. T. ; in modern Greek it is alwaj's employed. On account of the rareness of the optative, and an avoidance of the infinitive b}' some of the writers, botli the N. T. and modern Greek abound in the use of h'a with the subjunctive, and sometimes even with the indicative, as in Revelations. The neuter plural is more regularly joined with a jdu- ral verb in N.-T. Greek ; it is alwaj-s joined with it in modern Greek. Manj' other peculiarities in which the 'syntax and inflections of the N. T. and those of mod-
ern Greek agree might be noted. For the use of the Greek article, see Article.
IV. Vocabulary. — The words used by the N.-T. writers show a still greater variety of elements.
1. Here we notice distinctlj', also, the tendency to- wards the modern language, as, for instance, in the use of xopr('(^aj, to feed men, in the frequent employment of diminutives, in attaching a weakened sense to words like [iaXKoj, which had originally the idea of vigor in them, and in a variety of adverbs and conjunctions rarely used bjf the classical writers. Some of these peculiar uses have been assigned to the supposed Alexandrian dialect; but in the discussions no attempt has been made to distinguish between what may have been pure Alexandrianisms, and what may have been common in Greek conversation, though not in Greek writings.
2. In the words we find a Latin element, as might be expected. The Latin words used in the N. T. a:e not very numerous, but they show plainly that the writers had no other desire than to call things by their common names. They do not translate them into Greek, as a scholar of those days or an imitator of At- tic writings would have done. We find a few Greek phrases in the N. T. which have evidently been trans- lated from Latin, such as avfifSovXiov XafStlv — consili- um capere.
3. There are also several Aramaic words used in the N. T., especially hy Christ. Most of these words and expressions are of a peculiar nature. They are almost all of them utterances employed on some solemn occa- sion. They Avere at one time appealed to as proof that Jesus regularly used the Aramaic in his addresses to the people ; Init they have recently been adduced, and with considerable force, to prove exactly the contrarj', that Jesus frequently used the Greek language in his public conversations as being more intelligible to all, but that, when powerfullj' moved or deeply touched, he emploj'ed Aramaic words, as being more expressive from their associations (Roberts, Discussions on the Gos- pels, pt. i, ch. iv). Besides this, the Hebrew or Ara- maic has exercised an influence on the nneanings of some Greek words, as, for instance, in the use of otpii- X7]i-ia for a sin. In several instances, however, where this Hebrew influence has been set down as existing, a more satisfactorj' explanation is given in another way. Thus SiKato(TV7>)] is taken by some to mean liberality in 2 Cor. ix, 9, 10, because they suppose that np'lIJ has this meaning in Psa. cxii, 9, where the Sept. translates CiKaioavvi]. In both cases it may be doubted whether ^iKaioavrt] ought to receive this meaning, and unques- tionably in the second Epistle to the Corinthians it is much simpler to suppose that Paul looks on lil)erality as an essential part of righteousness, and righteousness therefore as including liberality.
4. There is also another element in the vocabulary of a peculiar nature. This arises from the noveltj' of the teachings combined with their exalted morality. The new thoughts demanded new modes of expres- sion, and hence the writers did not hesitate to use words in senses rare, if not entirely unknown to the classical writers. This fact could not be fully illus- trated without exhibiting the results of investigation into various characteristic words, such as /(nor/'/pioj', SiKaiog, SiKaioovvri, CiKatoco, ttIotiq, Zt^>), idt'aTog, 6o- ?a, So'^d'Coj, opy)), etc. These results seem to us to form no inconsiderable addition to the proof of the di- vinity of Christianitj', for the grand moral ideas that were expressed bj' some of them are unique in the age in which they were uttered. Thus the word 4'w'/ is frequentl}' used to denote an entire and absolute con- secration of soul, body, and spirit to God, for it is this entire consecration which they look upon as the life- principle of man. Living, with them, if it be not liv- ing to God in Christ, is not living at all, but death ; and a deatli whicli works not merely in the soul, but also in the bodv. Plato and the Stoics had something