Doubtful in result

① as relative pron. who, which, what, that (Hom.+). On its use s. B-D-F §293–97; 377–80; Rydbeck 98–118; W-S. §24; Rob. 711–26, and for ancient Gk. in gener. Kühner-G. II 399ff; Schwyzer II 639–41.

ⓐ As a general rule, the relative pron. agrees in gender and number w. the noun or pron. to which it refers (i.e. its antecedent); its case is determined by the verb, noun, or prep. that governs it: ὁ ἀστήρ, ὸ̔ν εἶδον Mt 2:9. ὁ Ἰησοῦς, ὅν ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖν Ac 17:3. Ἰουδαῖον, ᾧ (sc. ἦν) ὄνομα Βαριησοῦς 13:6. ὁ Ἰουδαῖος …, οὗ ὁ ἔπαινος Ro 2:29. Ἰσραηλίτης, ἐν ᾧ δόλος οὐκ ἔστιν J 1:47. οὗτος, περὶ οὗ ἀκούω τοιαῦτα Lk 9:9 and very oft.

ⓑ A demonstrative pron. is freq. concealed within the relative pron.:

α. in such a way that both pronouns stand in the same case: ὅς the one who ὅς οὐ λαμβάνει Mt 10:38; sim. Mk 4:9; 9:40 (the three w. implied condition). οὗ of the one whose J 18:26. ᾧ to the one to whom Ro 6:16. ὅν the one whom (or someth. sim.) Mk 15:12; J 1:45. οἷς to those for whom Mt 20:23. οὕς those whom Mk 3:13; J 5:21. ὅ that which, what Mt 10:27.—A prep. governing the relative belongs in certain pass. to the (omitted) demonstr. pron. alone: παρʼ ὅ Ro 12:3; Gal 1:8; ὑπὲρ ὅ (ἅ) 1 Cor 10:13; 2 Cor 12:6; Phlm 21; πρὸς ἅ 2 Cor 5:10; εἰς ὅν J 6:29. In others it must be added to both pronouns: ἐν ᾧ in that in which 2 Cor 11:12; 1 Pt 2:12; 3:16 (these passages in 1 Pt may be classed under 1kγ also). ἐν οἷς Phil 4:11. ὑπὲρ οὑ because of that for which 1 Cor 10:30. ἀφʼ ὧν from the persons from whom 2 Cor 2:3.—The much disputed pass. ἑταῖρε, ἐφʼ ὸ̔ πάρει Mt 26:50 would belong here if we were to supply the words necessary to make it read about as follows: friend, (are you misusing the kiss) for that (purpose) for which you are here? (Wlh.; EKlostermann) or thus: in connection with that (=the purposes), for which (=for the realization of which) you have appeared (do you kiss me)? (Rdm.² 78). Friend, are you here for this purpose? FRehkopf, ZNW 52, ’61, 109–15. But s. βב and iβ below.

β. But the two pronouns can also stand in different cases; in such instances the demonstr. pron. is nearly always in the nom. or acc.

א. in the nom. οὗ one whose Ac 13:25. ὧν those whose Ro 4:7 (Ps 31:1). ᾧ the one to or for whom Lk 7:43; 2 Pt 1:9. οἷς those to whom Mt 19:11; Ro 15:21 (Is 52:15). ὅ that (nom.) which (acc.) Mt 13:12; 25:29; 26:13; Mk 11:23; Lk 12:3. Likew. ἅ Lk 12:20. ὅν he whom J 3:34; 4:18; Ac 10:21. ἐφʼ ὅν the one about whom Hb 7:13.

ב. in the acc. ὧν the things of which J 13:29. ᾧ the one (in) whom 2 Ti 1:12. So also w. a prep.: ἐν ᾧ anything by which Ro 14:21. ἐν οἷς things in which 2 Pt 2:12. ἐφʼ ὅ that upon which Lk 5:25. περὶ ὧν the things of which Ac 24:13. ἐφʼ οἷς from the things of which Ro 6:21 (this passage perh. uses a commercial metaphor, for pap s. Mayser II/2, 434f §121). εἰς ὸ̔ν the one in whom Ro 10:14a.—So Mt 26:50 (s. bα above), if the words to be supplied are about as follows: friend, (do that) for which you have come! (so ESchwartz, ByzZ 25, 1925, 154f; EOwen, JTS 29, 1928, 384–86; WSpiegelberg, ZNW 28, 1929, 341–43; FZorell, VD 9, 1929, 112–16; sim. PMaas, Byz.-Neugriech. Jahrb. 8, ’31, 99; 9, ’32, 64; WEltester: OCullmann Festschr., ’62, 70–91; but s. iβ end.—S. Jos., Bell. 2, 615 at πάρειμι 1a).

ג. Only in isolated instances does the demonstr. pron. to be supplied stand in another case: οὗ = τούτῳ, οὗ in him of whom Ro 10:14b. παρʼ ὧν = τούτοις, παρʼ ὧν Lk 6:34.

ⓒ Constructions peculiar in some respect

α. The pleonastic use of the pers. pron. after ὅς (Mlt. 94f; B-D-F §297) γυνὴ ἧς εἶχεν τὸ θυγάτριον αὐτῆς Mk 7:25 is found in older Gk. (Hyperid., Euxen. 3 ὧν … τούτων.—Kühner-G. II 433f), and is not unknown in later Gk. (POxy 117, 15), but above all is suggested by Semitic languages (LXX; GrBar 2:1; Thackeray 46; JHudson, ET 53, ’41/42, 266f); the omission of αὐτῆς in the v.l. is in line w. Gk. usage. οὗ τὸ πτύον ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ Mt 3:12; Lk 3:17. οὗ … τῶν ὑποδημάτων αὐτοῦ Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16. οὗ τῷ μώλωπι αὐτοῦ 1 Pt 2:24 v.l. οὗ καὶ πολλὰ αὐτοῦ συγγράματα EpilMosq 2. In a quot. ἐφʼ οὓς ἐπικέκληται … ἐπʼ αὐτούς Ac 15:17 = Am 9:12. οὗ ἡ πνοὴ αὐτοῦ 1 Cl 21:9. Esp. freq. in Rv 3:8; 7:2, 9; 9:11 v.l.; 13:8, 12; 20:8.

β. constructions ‘ad sensum’

א. a relative in the sing. refers to someth. in the pl. οὐρανοῖς … ἐξ οὗ (οὐρανοῦ) Phil 3:20.

ב. a relative in the pl. refers to a sing. (Jdth 4:8 γερουσία, οἵ) πλῆθος πολύ …, οἳ ἦλθον Lk 6:17f. κατὰ πόλιν πᾶσαν, ἐν αἷς Ac 15:36. Cp. ἤδη δευτέραν ἐπιστολήν, ἐν αἷς (i.e. ἐν ταῖς δυσὶν ἐπιστ.) 2 Pt 3:1.

ג. the relative conforms to the natural gender rather than the grammatical gender of its antecedent noun τέκνα μου, οὕς Gal 4:19; cp. 2 J 1; Phlm 10. ἔθνη, οἵ Ac 15:17 (Am 9:12); cp. 26:17. παιδάριον, ὅς J 6:9. θηρίον, ὅς Rv 13:14. ὀνόματα, οἵ 3:4 v.l. γενεᾶς σκολιᾶς, ἐν οἷς Phil 2:15. W. ref. to Christ, τὴν κεφαλήν, ἐξ οὗ Col 2:19.

ⓓ Attraction (or assimilation) of the relative. Just as in Hdt. and freq. Att., ins, pap, LXX, the simple relative ὅς, ἥ, ὅ is somet. attracted to the case of its antecedent, even though the relationship of the relative within its own clause would demand a different case.

α. In most instances it is the acc. of the rel. that is attracted to the gen. or dat. of the antecedent: περὶ πράγματος οὗ ἐὰν αἰτήσωνται Mt 18:19. τῆς διαθήκης ἧς ὁ θεὸς διέθετο Ac 3:25. Cp. Mt 24:50b; Mk 7:13; Lk 2:20; 3:19; 5:9; 9:43; 15:16; J 4:14; 7:31; 15:20; 17:5; 21:10; Ac 1:1; 2:22; 22:10; 1 Cor 6:19; 2 Cor 1:6; 10:8, 13; Eph 2:10; 2 Th 1:4; Jd 15 al.—When the antecedent is an understood but unexpressed demonstr. pron. (s. b, beg.) that would stand in the gen. or dat., the acc. of a relative pron. can be attracted to this gen. or dat.: οὐδὲν ὧν ἑώρακαν is really οὐδὲν τούτων ἃ ἑώρακαν Lk 9:36 (Schwyzer II 641); ἅ takes on the case of τούτων which, in turn, is omitted (so already Soph., Pla., et al.).—23:14, 41; Ac 8:24; 21:19, 24; 22:15; 25:11; 26:16; Ro 15:18; 1 Cor 7:1; Eph 3:20; Hb 5:8. ὧν = τούτων, οὕς J 17:9; 2 Cor 12:17. οἷς = τούτοις, ἅ Lk 24:25.

β. The dat. of the relative is less frequently attracted (B-D-F §294, 2; Rob. 717) ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ἧς (=ᾗ) ἀνελήμφθη Ac 1:22 (cp. Lev 23:15; 25:50; Bar 1:19); Eph 1:6; 4:1; 1 Ti 4:6 v.l.; κατέναντι οὗ ἐπίστευσεν θεοῦ = κατέν. τοῦ θεοῦ ᾧ ἐπίστ. Ro 4:17. διὰ τῆς παρακλήσεως ἧς παρακαλούμεθα 2 Cor 1:4.

γ. In relative clauses that consist of subject, predicate, and copula, the relative pron. somet. agrees in gender and number not w. the noun to which it refers, but w. the predicate if it is the subj. and, conversely, w. the subj. if it is the pred. of its own clause: πνεύματι …, ὅς ἐστιν ἀρραβών Eph 1:14 v.l. τῷ σπέρματί σου, ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός Gal 3:16. τὴν μάχαιραν τοῦ πνεύματος, ὅ ἐστιν ῥῆμα θεοῦ Eph 6:17.—Rv 4:5; 5:8.

δ. Inverse attraction occurs when the relative pronoun attracts its antecedent to its own case (as early as Hom.; also Soph., Oed. Rex 449; s. Kühner-G. II 413; Schwyzer II 641; B-D-F §295; Rob. 717f); τὸν ἄρτον ὸ̔ν κλῶμεν, οὐχὶ κοινωνία … ἐστιν; = ὁ ἄρτος ὅν … 1 Cor 10:16. λίθον, ὸ̔ν ἀπεδοκίμασαν … οὗτος ἐγενήθη (Ps 117:22) Mt 21:42; Mk 12:10; Lk 20:17; 1 Pt 2:7 v.l.—παντὶ ᾧ ἐδόθη πολύ, πολὺ ζητηθήσεται παρʼ αὐτοῦ Lk 12:48. ὅρκον, ὸ̔ν ὤμοσεν (=μνησθῆναι ὅρκου ὅν) 1:73 (s. W-S. §24, 7 note). τοὺς λίθους, οὓς εἶδες, ἀποβεβλημένους, οὗτοι … ἐφόρεσαν Hs 9, 13, 3. Cp. 1J 2:25.

ε. Attraction can, as in earlier Gk. (Thu. 2, 70, 4), fail to take place when the relative clause is more distinctly separated fr. its antecedent by additional modifiers of the noun and by the importance attaching to the content of the relative clause itself (B-D-F §294, 1; Rob. 714f): τῆς σκηνῆς τῆς ἀληθινῆς, ἣν ἔπηξεν ὁ κύριος, οὐκ ἄνθρωπος Hb 8:2. But s. also Mk 13:19; J 2:22; 4:5; Ac 8:32; 1 Ti 4:3; Tit 1:2; Phlm 10; Hb 9:7; Rv 1:20.

ⓔ The noun which is the antecedent of a relative clause can be incorporated into the latter

α. without abbreviating the constr. and without attraction of the case: ᾗ οὐ δοκεῖτε ὥρᾳ = τῇ ὥρᾳ ᾗ οὐ δοκ. Mt 24:44; cp. Lk 12:40; 17:29, 30. ἃ ἡτοίμασαν ἀρώματα 24:1. ὸ̔ ἐποίησεν σημεῖον J 6:14. ὸ̔ θέλω ἀγαθόν Ro 7:19.

β. w. abbreviation, in that a prep. normally used twice is used only once: ἐν ᾧ κρίματι κρίνετε κριθήσεσθε = ἐν τῷ κρίματι, ἐν ᾧ κρίνετε, κριθήσεσθε Mt 7:2a. Cp. vs. 2b; Mk 4:24. ἐν ᾧ ἦν τόπῳ = ἐν τῷ τόπῳ ἐν ᾧ ἦν J 11:6. καθʼ ὸ̔ν τρόπον = κατὰ τὸν τρόπον, καθʼ ὅν Ac 15:11.

γ. w. a change in case, due mostly to attraction

א. of the relative pron. περὶ πάντων ὧν ἐποίησεν πονηρῶν = περὶ πάντων πονηρῶν, ἃ ἐπ. Lk 3:19. περὶ πασῶν ὧν εἶδον δυνάμεων = περὶ πασῶν δυνάμεων, ἃς εἶδον 19:37. αἰτίαν … ὧν ἐγὼ ὑπενόουν πονηρῶν Ac 25:18.—The dat. of the relative is also attracted to other cases: ἄχρι ἧς ἡμέρας = ἄχρι τῆς ἡμέρας, ᾖ Mt 24:38; Lk 1:20; 17:27; Ac 1:2. ἀφʼ ἧς ἡμέρας Col 1:6, 9.

ב. of the noun to which the rel. refers: ὸ̔ν ἐγὼ ἀπεκεφάλισα Ἰωάννην, οὗτος ἠγέρθη = Ἰωάννης ὸ̔ν κτλ. Mk 6:16 εἰς ὸ̔ν παρεδόθητε τύπον διδαχῆς = τῷ τύπῳ τῆς διδαχῆς εἰς ὸ̔ν παρεδόθητε Ro 6:17.

δ. The analysis is doubtful in passages like περὶ ὧν κατηχήθης λόγων = περὶ τῶν λόγων οὓς κατηχήθης or τῶν λόγων, περὶ ὧν κατηχήθης Lk 1:4. ἄγοντες παρʼ ᾧ ξενισθῶμεν Μνάσωνι Ac 21:16 must acc. to the sense = ἄγοντες πρὸς Μνάσωνα, ἵνα ξενισθῶμεν παρʼ αὐτῷ. S. B-D-F §294, 5; Rob. 719.

ⓕ The prep. can be omitted before the relative pron. if it has already been used before the antecedent noun: ἐν παντὶ χρόνῳ ᾧ (=ἐν ὧ.) Ac 1:21. εἰς τὸ ἔργον ὅ (=εἰς ὅ) 13:2. ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν (=ἀφʼ ὧν) vs. 38. Cp. 26:2. ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ ᾧ (=ἐν ᾧ) Rv 18:6.

ⓖ The neut. is used

α. in explanations, esp. of foreign words and of allegories: ὅ ἐστιν which or that is, which means: βασιλεὺς Σαλήμ, ὅ ἐστιν βασιλεὺς εἰρήνης Hb 7:2; cp. Mt 27:33; Mk 3:17; 7:11, 34; 15:42. Also ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον Mt 1:23; Mk 5:41; Ac 4:36; cp. J 1:38, 41f. ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενος κρανίου τόπος Mk 15:22 v.l. (for μεθερμηνευόμενον). τόπος, ὸ̔ λέγεται, Ἑβραϊστὶ Γολγοθά J 19:17.—S. also αὐλῆς, ὅ ἐστιν πραιτώριον Mk 15:16. λεπτὰ δὺο, ὅ ἐστιν κοδράντης 12:42. τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ, ὅ ἐστιν ἡ ἐκκλησία Col 1:24. πλεονέκτης ὅ ἐστιν εἰδωλολάτρης Eph 5:5. τὴν ἀγάπην ὅ ἐστιν σύνδεσμος τῆς τελειότητος Col 3:14.—B-D-F §132, 2.

β. when the relative pron. looks back upon a whole clause: τοῦτον τ. Ἰησοῦν ἀνέστησεν ὁ θεός, οὗ πάντες ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν μάρτυρες Ac 2:32; cp. 3:15; 11:30; 26:9f; Gal 2:10; Col 1:29; 1 Pt 2:8; Rv 21:8.

γ. ὅ is to be understood as an obj. acc. and gains its content fr. what immediately follows in these places (s. W-S. §24, 9; Rob. 715): ὸ̔ ἀπέθανεν, τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ἀπέθανεν ἐφάπαξ = τὸν θάνατον, ὸ̔ν ἀπέθανεν κτλ. what he died, i.e. the death he suffered, he suffered for sin Ro 6:10a; cp. vs. 10b. ὸ̔ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί the life that I now live in the flesh Gal 2:20.

ⓗ The relative is used w. consecutive or final mng. (result or purpose): τίς ἔγνω νοῦν κυρίου, ὸ̔ς συμβιβάσει αὐτόν; who has known the mind of the Lord, so that he could instruct him? 1 Cor 2:16 (cp. Is 40:13). ἄξιός ἐστιν ᾧ παρέξῃ τοῦτο he is worthy that you should grant him this Lk 7:4. ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου …, ὸ̔ς κατασκευάσει Mt 11:10. ἔπεμψα Τιμόθεον …, ὸ̔ς ὑμᾶς ἀναμνήσει 1 Cor 4:17. ἔχετε μεθʼ ἑαυτῶν, εἰς οὓς ἐργάσεσθε τὸ καλόν 21:2.

ⓘ taking the place of the interrogative pron.

α. in indirect questions (Soph., Oed. Rex 1068; Thu. 1, 136, 4; Attic ins of 411 B.C. in Meisterhans³-Schw.; pap [Witkowski 30, 7]; oft. Joseph. [Schmidt 369]; Just., D. 44, 4 διʼ ἧς ὁδοῦ). ὸ̔ ἐγὼ ποιῶ what I am doing J 13:7. ἃ λέγουσιν 1 Ti 1:7 (Just., D. 9, 1 οὐ γὰρ οἶδας ὸ̔ λέγεις).—J 18:21.

β. NT philology has generally dismissed the proposition that ὅς is used in direct questions (Mlt. 93; B-D-F §300, 2; Radermacher² 78; PMaas [see 1bβב above]). An unambiguous example of it is yet to be found. Even the ins on a goblet in Dssm., LO 100ff [LAE 125–31], ET 33, 1922, 491–93 leaves room for doubt. Therefore also the translation of ἐφʼ ὸ̔ πάρει Mt 26:50 as ‘what are you here for?’ (so Goodsp., Probs. 41–43; similarly, as early as Luther, later Dssm.; JWilson, ET 41, 1930, 334) has been held suspect. S. ZNW 52, ’61, 109ff.—Rob. 725 doubts the interrogative here, but Mlt-Turner 50 inclines toward it. If further proof for interrogative use of ὅς can be found, lit.-crit. considerations (s. vv. 14–16) invite attention to the v.l. (s. Tdf. app.) ἐφʼ ᾦ, a combination used in commercial documents (PGrenf II, 17, 2; 5; Mayser II/1 p. 215); the colloquial use suggests the sense: What deal did you make?—See also 1bβב above.

ⓙ combined w. particles

α. with ἄν (ἐάν), s. ἄν I. b.

β. with γέ (s. γέ aβ and cp. PFlor 370, 9) Ro 8:32.

γ. w. δήποτε whatever J 5:3(4) v.l. (the vv.ll. vary betw. οἵῳ and ᾧ, δηποτοῦν and δήποτε).

δ. w. καί who also Mk 3:19; Lk 6:13f; 7:49 al.

ε. with περ = ὅσπερ, ἥπερ, ὅπερ (TestSol, TestAbr; TestJob 7:13; JosAs 14:12; GrBar; ApcSed 2:1; Jos., Ant. 2, 277, Vi. 95; apolog. [exc. Mel.]) just the one who Mk 15:6 v.l. ὅπερ which indeed Ox 840, 35; ISm 4:1. πάντα ἅπερ whatever GPt 11:45.

ⓚ used w. preposition (s. also above: 1bα; 1bβב; 1eβ,γ; 1f, and s. Johannessohn, Präp. 382f [ind.]), whereby a kind of conjunction is formed:

α. with ἀντί: ἀνθʼ ὧν (s. ἀντί 4) because Lk 1:20; 19:44; Ac 12:23; 2 Th 2:10; therefore Lk 12:3.

β. w. εἰς: εἰς ὅ to this end 2 Th 1:11.

γ. with ἐν: ἐν οἷς connects w. the situation described in what precedes under which circumstances = under these circumstances Lk 12:1; Ac 24:18 v.l.; 26:12. So also perh. ἐν ᾧ 1 Pt 1:6; 2:12; 3:16, 19; 4:4. S. also ἐν 7 and cp. 1bα above.

δ. w. ἐπί: ἐφʼ ᾧ (normally, ‘for which’: Plut., Cimon 483 [8, 6] Cimon receives honors in requital for his generous deed [cp. the pl. ἐφʼ οἷς IPriene 114, 22 of honors heaped on a gymnasiarch for his numerous contributions]; cp. Plut., Mor. 522e and Diog. L. 7, 173. Conversely Plut., Aratus 1048 [44, 4]: A. suffers some dishonor ‘for what’ he did to one of his associates) has freq. been interpreted=ἐπὶ τούτῳ ὅτι for the reason that, because Ro 5:12 (lit. on ἁμαρτία 3a); 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:12; for 4:10. But a commercial metaphor may find expression in the first 3 passages cited here; s. ἐπί 6c. Difft. on Ro 5:12 JFitzmyer, NTS 39, ’93, 321–39; also comm. (Anchor), ad loc.: ‘with the result that, so that’

ε. οὗ χάριν therefore Lk 7:47.

ζ. in indications of time: ἀφʼ ἧς (s. ἀπό 2bγ and cp. BGU 252, 9 [98 A.D.]) from the time when; since Lk 7:45; Ac 24:11; 2 Pt 3:4; Hs 8, 6, 6 v.l.; as soon as, after 8, 1, 4.—ἀφʼ οὗ (s. ἀπό 2bγ) when once, since Lk 13:25; 24:21; Rv 16:18. ἄχρι οὗ (s. ἄχρι 1bα) until (the time when) Ac 7:18; Ro 11:25; 1 Cor 11:26; Gal 3:19. Also ἕως οὗ until Mt 1:25; 13:33; 14:22; 17:9; Lk 13:21; D 11:6 al. μέχρις οὗ until Mk 13:30; Gal 4:19.—On the gen. οὗ as an adv. of place s. it as a separate entry.

② Demonstrative pron. this (one) (Hom.+; prose of Hdt. et al. [Kühner-G. II 228f]; pap, LXX).

ⓐ ὸ̔ς δέ but he (Ps.-Lucian, Philopatris 22; PRyl 144, 14 [38 A.D.]) Mk 15:23; J 5:11 v.l. Mostly

ⓑ ὸ̔ς μὲν … ὸ̔ς δέ the one … the other (Hippocr.+; very oft. in later wr.; POxy 1189, 7 [c. 117 A.D.]; SibOr 3, 654) the masc. in var. cases of sing. and pl. Mt 22:5; Lk 23:33; Ac 27:44; Ro 14:5; 1 Cor 11:21; 2 Cor 2:16; Jd 22f. ὸ̔ μὲν … ὸ̔ δέ this … that Ro 9:21. ἃ μὲν … ἃ δέ (Lucian, Rhet. Praec. 15) some … others 2 Ti 2:20. ὸ̔ς μὲν … ὸ̔ς δὲ … ὸ̔ς δέ Mt 21:35; 25:15 (Lucian, Tim. 57 διδοὺς … ᾧ μὲν πέντε δραχμάς, ᾧ δέ μνᾶν, ᾧ δὲ ἡμιτάλαντον). ὸ̔ μὲν … ὸ̔ δὲ … ὸ̔ δέ Mt 13:8b, 23. ᾧ μὲν … ἄλλῳ δὲ … ἑτέρῳ (ἄλλῳ δέ is then repeated five times, and before the last one there is a second ἑτέρῳ) 1 Cor 12:8–10. ὸ̔ μὲν … καὶ ἄλλο κτλ. Mk 4:4. ὸ̔ μὲν … καὶ ἕτερον (repeated several times) Lk 8:5. ἃ μὲν … ἄλλα δέ (repeated several times) Mt 13:4–8a. In anacoluthon οὓς μέν without οὓς δέ 1 Cor 12:28. ὸ̔ς μὲν … ὁ δὲ ἀσθενῶν Ro 14:2.—B-D-F §250. MBlack, An Aramaic Approach³, ’67, 100f.—DELG 1 ὅς. M-M.

Grammatical information: v.

Meaning: `break, break off'

Other forms: ( ἐνι-κλᾶν, κατ-έκλων) Il., aor. κλάσ(σ)αι, pass. κλασθῆναι (Il.), athem. ptc. ἀπο-κλά̄ς (Anacr. 17; cf. below), fut. κλάσω, perf. pass. κέκλασμαι (IA.),

Compounds: often with prefix, e. g. ἀνα-, κατα-, περι-, συν-,

Derivatives: κλάσις `breaking' (IA.), κλάσμα `broken piece' (Att.) with κλασμάτιον (Delos III^a), ἀνα-κλασμός `bending back' (Heliod.), κλάστης ἀμπελουργός H., also ὀστο-κλάστης (Kyran.) a. o., κλαστήριον `knife for clipping the vine' (Delos II^a u. a.); sec. κλαστάζω `clip the vine', metaph. `chastize' (Ar. Eq. 166); on the formation Schwyzer 706. - On κλών, κλωνός m. `sprout' (Att.) with the diminutives κλωνίον, - ίδιον, - άριον, - ίσκος (Thphr., hell. inschr., Gp.), further κλωνίτης `with sprouts' (Hdn.), κλῶναξ = `κλάδος' (H.), κλωνίζω `clip' (Suid.) see on κλάδος; not from *κλα-ών (Schwyzer 521; s. also 487 n. 3). On κλῶμαξ, ἀπόκλωμα below. - With diff. ablaut κλῆμα `twig (of the vine), tendril of the vine', κλῆρος ( κλᾶρος) `lot', κλῶμαξ `heap of stones' (s. vv.), ἀπόκλωμα. ἀπολογία ἐπὶ τὸ χεῖρον H. - Quite doubtful Κλαζομεναί PlN (Anatolia), acc. to Fraenkel KZ 42, 256; 43, 216 "where the waves break" (free imagination).

Origin: PG [a word of Pre-Greek origin]

Etymology: The uniform verbale system, is based on κλᾰ(σ)-; it may be the result of simplification. Whether this started from a presens or an aorist cannot be decided because there are no non-Greek cognates; cf. the presentation in Schwyzer 676 a. 752 and in Chantraine Gramm. hom. 1, 354 (who considers the present κλάω as secondary against κλάσαι). In the isolated ἀπο-κλά̄ς an old athematic form (present or aorist? Schwyzer 676 a. 742) could have been preserved; but an analogical innovation (as after φθᾰ́σαι: φθάς?) cannot be excluded however. For the old passive κλασθῆναι one might think of κλαδ- (Schwyzer 761), but extension of an aorist-stems κλασ- combined with analogy is also possible (Chantraine Gramm. hom. 1, 404f.). An old s-present *κλά[σ]-ω from IE. *kl̥-s-ō (Brugmann Grundr.² 2: 3, 342, Schwyzer 706) has no support. - The primary verbs of the other languages are completely deviant: Lith. kalù, kálti `forge, hammer' = OCS koljǫ, klati, Russ. kolótь `sting, split, hew' (full grade IE. * kolH-; on the meaning WP. 1, 438 and Vasmer Russ. et. Wb. s. v.); Lith. kuliù, kùlti (zero grade, IE. kl̥H-); Lat. per-cellō `smash' (basis uncertain). Further forms Pok. 545ff., W.-Hofmann s. clādēs. S. also κλαδαρός, κλάδος, κόλος etc. So no IE etym. It cannot comes from IE *klas- as this form cannot be made from IE. So prob. the word is of Pre-Greek origin.

Page in Frisk: 1,866-867

διαθήκη, ης, ἡ (Democr., Aristoph.+; ins, pap, LXX, En, TestSol, TestAbr, Test12Patr; ParJer 6:21; ApcEsdr, ApcMos; AssMos Fgm. a; Philo, Joseph., Just.; Mel., HE 4, 26, 14) apart from the simplex θήκη ‘case, chest’, for the mng. of this word one must begin with the mid. form of the verb διατίθεμαι, which is freq. used in legal and commercial discourse of disposition of things (s. L-S-J-M s.v. διατιθημι B), w. implication of promissory obligation. Disposition of one’s personal effects would naturally come under testamentary law, hence

① last will and testament (so exclusively in Hellenistic times, Eger [s. 3 below] 99 note; exx. e.g. in Riggenbach 292ff; Behm 10, 1; 2; Philo, Joseph., Test12Patr; loanw. in rabb.) Hb 9:16f; δ. κεκυρωμένη a will that has been ratified Gal 3:15; cp. 17, where δ. shades into mng. 2 (s. κυρόω 1, προκυρόω); s. also EBammel, below, and JSwetnam, CBQ 27, ’65, 373–90. On Jewish perspective s. RKatzoff, An Interpretation of PYadin 19—A Jewish Gift after Death: ProcXXCongPap 562–65.

② As a transl. of בְּרִית in LXX δ. retains the component of legal disposition of personal goods while omitting that of the anticipated death of a testator. A Hellenistic reader would experience no confusion, for it was a foregone conclusion that gods were immortal. Hence a δ. decreed by God cannot require the death of the testator to make it operative. Nevertheless, another essential characteristic of a testament is retained, namely that it is the declaration of one person’s initiative, not the result of an agreement betw. two parties, like a compact or a contract. This is beyond doubt one of the main reasons why the LXX rendered בְּרִית by δ. In the ‘covenants’ of God, it was God alone who set the conditions; hence covenant (s. OED s.v. ‘covenant’ sb. 7) can be used to trans. δ. only when this is kept in mind. So δ. acquires a mng. in LXX which cannot be paralleled w. certainty in extra-Biblical sources, namely ‘decree’, ‘declaration of purpose’, ‘set of regulations’, etc. Our lit., which is very strongly influenced by LXX in this area, seems as a rule to have understood the word in these senses (JHughes, NovT 21, ’79, 27–96 [also Hb 9:16–20; Gal 3:15–17]). God has issued a declaration of his purpose Ro 11:27 (Is 59:21); 1 Cl 15:4 (Ps 77:37); 35:7 (Ps 49:16), which God bears in mind (cp. Ps 104:8f; 105:45 al.) Lk 1:72; it goes back to ancestral days Ac 3:25 (PsSol 9:10; ParJer 6:21). God also issued an ordinance (of circumcision) 7:8 (cp. Gen 17:10ff). Since God’s holy will was set forth on more than one occasion (Gen 6:18; 9:9ff; 15:18; 17:2ff; Ex 19:5 and oft.), one may speak of διαθῆκαι decrees, assurances (cp. διαθῆκαι πατέρων Wsd 18:22; 2 Macc 8:15.—But the pl. is also used for a single testament: Diog. L. 4, 44; 5, 16. In quoting or referring to Theophr. sometimes the sing. [Diog. L. 5, 52; 56] is used, sometimes the pl. [5, 51; 57]) Ro 9:4; Eph 2:12. Much emphasis is laid on the δ. καινή, mentioned as early as Jer 38:31, which God planned for future disposition (Hb 8:8–10; 10:16). God’s decree or covenant directed toward the Christians is a καινὴ δ. (δ. δευτέρα Orig., C. Cels. 2, 75) Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Hb 8:8; 9:15a; PtK 2 p. 15, 5, or δ. νέα Hb 12:24; PtK 2 p. 15, 6 which, as a δ. αἰώνιος (cp. Jer 39:40; En 99:2) Hb 13:20, far excels 7:22; 8:6 the παλαιὰ δ. 2 Cor 3:14, or πρώτη δ. Hb 9:15b, with which it is contrasted. Both are mentioned (Did., Gen. 46, 4; 235, 26) Gal 4:24; B 4:6ff (Ex 34:28; 31:18; Just., D. 67, 9). Blood was shed when the old covenant was proclaimed at Sinai Hb 9:20 (Ex 24:8); the same is true of the new covenant Hb 10:29. τὸ αἷμά μου τ. διαθήκης Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24 (ELohse, Märtyrer u. Gottesknecht², ’63, 122–29) is prob. to be understood in connection w. this blood (s. WWrede, ZNW 1, 1900, 69–74; TRobinson, My Blood of the Covenant: KMarti Festschr. 1925, 232–37; for a critique of this view s. GWalther, Jesus, D. Passalamm des Neuen Bundes, ’50, 22–27 and JJeremias TLZ, ’51, 547. For Syriac background JEmerton, JTS 13, ’62, 111–17; s. also ÉDelebrecque, Études grecques sur l’vangile de Luc ’76, 109–21).—The v.l. Lk 22:29 may be derived from Jer 39:40 or Is 55:3 LXX (for the cognate acc. s. Aristoph., Aves 440).—δ. may also be transl. decree in the Ep. of Barnabas (4:6ff; 6:19; 9:6; 13:1, 6; 14:1ff δ. δοῦναί τινι); but the freq. occurrence of the idea of inheritance (6:19; 13:1, 6; 14:4f), makes it likely that the ‘decree’ is to be thought of as part of a will.

③ The mng. compact, contract seems firmly established for Gr-Rom. times (FNorton, A Lexicographical and Historical Study of Διαθήκη, Chicago 1908, 31ff; EBruck, D. Schenkung auf d. Todesfall im griech. u. röm. Recht I 1909, 115ff; JWackernagel, D. Kultur d. Gegenw. I 8² 1907, 309). It remains doubtful whether this mng. has influenced our lit. here and there (exc. quite prob. Lk 22:29 v.l. with its administrative tenor; the phrase διατίθεμαι δ. as Aristoph., Av. 440 of a treaty agreement), but the usage of the term δ. in such sense would again serve as a bridge to LXX usage.—The expr. ἡ κιβωτὸς τ. διαθήκης covenant chest i.e. the sacred box (Eng. ‘ark’ as loanw. from Lat. arca) that symbolized God’s pledge of presence w. Israel (Ex 31:7; 39:14 al.) Hb 9:4; Rv 11:19 or αἱ πλάκες τ. διαθ. (Ex 34:28; Dt 9:9, 11) Hb 9:4 would have required some acquaintance with Israelite tradition on the part of ancient readers.—ERiggenbach, D. Begriff d. Διαθήκη im Hb: Theol. Stud. f. TZahn 1908, 289ff, Hb² 1922, 205ff al.; ACarr, Covenant or Testament?: Exp. 7th ser., 7, 1909, 347ff; JBehm, D. Begriff D. im NT 1912; ELohmeyer, Diatheke 1913; WFerguson, Legal Terms Common to the Macedonian Inscr. and the NT, 1913, 42–46 (testamentary exhibits); HKennedy, Exp. 8th ser., 10, 1915, 385ff; GVos, Hebrews, the Epistle of the Diatheke: PTR 13, 1915, 587–632; 14, 1916, 1–61; OEger, ZNW 18, 1918, 84–108; EBurton, ICC Gal 1921, 496–505; LdaFonseca, Διαθήκη foedus an testamentum?: Biblica 8, 1927; 9, 1928; EBammel, Gottes διαθήκη (Gal 3:15–17) u. d. jüd. Rechtsdenken, NTS 6, ’60, 313–19; NDow, A Select Bibliography on the Concept of Covenant, Austin Seminary Bulletin 78, 6, ’63; CRoetzel, Biblica 51, ’70, 377–90 (Ro 9:4); DMcCarthy, Berit and Covenant (Deut.), ’72, 65–85; EChristiansen, The Covenant in Judaism and Paul ’95.—DELG s.v. θήκη. M-M. TW. Sv.