THE DEVELOPMENT OF TriE FINALE FU rURE PARTICIPLE IN NEW TESTAMENT GREEK

BY

ANTONIOS PAPANICOLAU

The finale future participle is constructed with verbs of movement in the classic authorsl This use of finale participle is continued in the Hellenistic2 and especially in the atticistic literatures In the Common - Koine language however the use of finale future participle is very much restricted instead of future participle occurs the present parti-ciple or the infinitive of purpose or the analysis of this infinitive in tva with conjunctive4bull

In this article I will research the use of finale participle in New Tes-tament The participle of future is seldom used after the moving verbs5bull

I will examine this use separatelly in each work of the Holy Scripture The Evangelist Matthew uses the finale future participle only once 2749 t3w[Jeurov et HA(Oc tJ6gtOwv 00-6 Otherwise he uses the infinitive of purpose instead of the parti-

ciple of future - one change of the Hellenistic language6 - in the fol-lowing passages

1 Stahl J NI Kritisch-historische Syntax des griechischen Verbums der klassischen Zeit Heidelberg 1907 p 685 He ike 1 J A De participiorum apud Herodotum usu Helsingforsiae 1884 p 117 f 119

2 This construction is no Atticismus See L Radermacher che Grammatik Das Griechisch des KT im Zusammenhang mit der Volksspra-che 2 Aufl

3 by A Papanikolaou Zur Sprache Chari tons Dissmiddot KOln 1963 p 84-90

4 Compare my dissertation Zur Sprache Charitons p 84 85 86 f 5 Blass-Debrunner Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch 10 Aufl

Gottingen 1959 sect 351 L Radermacher Gramm 209 S Antoniadis Esquisse de Grammaire et de stule Paris 1930 p 282 Ernest

de Witt Burton Syntax of the moods and tenses in New Testament Greek Third edltJOn-ECfililiUig 1955 p--70 BoolCofNew Testament Greek Cambridge 1953 p 103 James H Moulton A Grammar of

An introduction to the study of Testament Greek 5th edition revisedmiddotby Henry G Meecham New York 1955 sect 2544

6 Blass-Debr sect 390 - GN Hatzidakis Einleitung in dieneugriechische Gram-

The deveiopment of the finale future participie in New Testament Greek 625

22 ocurCl instead of 4 1 The b IYJcrous ets epYJpov Imo rou 1tveupocros

mo rOU 517 vop[crmiddotI]re XOCrOCAUOOCL TOV v6pov TOOs

OUX ampAAa 1tAYjpWcrOCL 829 - 9131 - 1034 - 1035 - 117 118--119-1242 - 1423

201 - 2028 - 223 - 2211 241 2510 2655 - 281 - 288 In two passages he writes the infinitive with the article geniti-

ve instead of a finale future participle 313 T6re 1tocpocy[verocL b IYJOous amp1tO rOCALAOCpoundOCs E1tt TOV IopM-

VYJV 1tPOs rov IwXvvYJv TOU 1m oclhou 111 ExeiOev rOU aLMcrxeLv xoct xYjpucrOew EV 1t6Ae- ow OCUTWV In the next passages the Evangelist avoids the future participle

and writes as follows 87 Eyw EAOWV Oepoc1teocrw an6v The meaning of this passages must be expressed so Eyw EAeucropocL Oepoc1teuOwv ocuT6v In the passages 1110 he analyzes the due participle of future in

a relative sentence Iaoo EYW (t1tOOrgMW rOv ampyyeA6v pOU 1tpO 1tP00611tOU OOU as XOCTIX-

OXeuampcreL babv crou ep1tpoOOgV crou Instead of (t1tOcrTgAAW rov ampyyeAbv pou xocrocoxeuXoovrOC 2

In the two following examples he uses the indicative future para-tactically instead of future participle

1341 (tTCocrteAel b UtOs rOU (tvOPW1tOU roos (tyygAOUS anou xoct cruAM-

Instead of xat The same as in 2431 xoct amp1tocrteAei Tolis ampyygAOUs ochou peTd crXA-

myyos peyXAYJs XOC rolis EXAexroos ocurou Instead of As known in the Common language the present participle takes

matik Leipzig 1892 p 226 L Radermacher Gramm p 186) writes laquoDie Koine geht dartiber hinaus in dem sie zu Wortern wie evocL TCopeOacr6ocL d h zu echten Intransitiva einen Infinitiv ftigt um den Zweck des Kommens Gehens u s w anzugeben So steht er oft im lestament und in verwandter Litera-tur) See also J H Moulton An introduction sect 281 1

1 Compare the same passage by Mark 21 and Luke 532 2 Compare the same passage in Marks Gospel 12

The deveiopment of the finale future participie in New Testament Greek 625

22 ocurCl instead of 4 1 The b IYJcrous ets epYJpov Imo rou 1tveupocros

mo rOU 517 vop[crmiddotI]re XOCrOCAUOOCL TOV v6pov TOOs

OUX ampAAa 1tAYjpWcrOCL 829 - 9131 - 1034 - 1035 - 117 118--119-1242 - 1423

201 - 2028 - 223 - 2211 241 2510 2655 - 281 - 288 In two passages he writes the infinitive with the article geniti-

ve instead of a finale future participle 313 T6re 1tocpocy[verocL b IYJOous amp1tO rOCALAOCpoundOCs E1tt TOV IopM-

VYJV 1tPOs rov IwXvvYJv TOU 1m oclhou 111 ExeiOev rOU aLMcrxeLv xoct xYjpucrOew EV 1t6Ae- ow OCUTWV In the next passages the Evangelist avoids the future participle

and writes as follows 87 Eyw EAOWV Oepoc1teocrw an6v The meaning of this passages must be expressed so Eyw EAeucropocL Oepoc1teuOwv ocuT6v In the passages 1110 he analyzes the due participle of future in

a relative sentence Iaoo EYW (t1tOOrgMW rOv ampyyeA6v pOU 1tpO 1tP00611tOU OOU as XOCTIX-

OXeuampcreL babv crou ep1tpoOOgV crou Instead of (t1tOcrTgAAW rov ampyyeAbv pou xocrocoxeuXoovrOC 2

In the two following examples he uses the indicative future para-tactically instead of future participle

1341 (tTCocrteAel b UtOs rOU (tvOPW1tOU roos (tyygAOUS anou xoct cruAM-

Instead of xat The same as in 2431 xoct amp1tocrteAei Tolis ampyygAOUs ochou peTd crXA-

myyos peyXAYJs XOC rolis EXAexroos ocurou Instead of As known in the Common language the present participle takes

matik Leipzig 1892 p 226 L Radermacher Gramm p 186) writes laquoDie Koine geht dartiber hinaus in dem sie zu Wortern wie evocL TCopeOacr6ocL d h zu echten Intransitiva einen Infinitiv ftigt um den Zweck des Kommens Gehens u s w anzugeben So steht er oft im lestament und in verwandter Litera-tur) See also J H Moulton An introduction sect 281 1

1 Compare the same passage by Mark 21 and Luke 532 2 Compare the same passage in Marks Gospel 12

Antonios Papanikolaou

the place of the finale future participle This use is extended princi-pally in the New Testamentl

In Matthews Gospel I found the next examples 31 nocpocYLvetOCt Iwampvvtjpound ( xtjpua(Jwv ev tn

tijpound Iou8ocLocpound xod 85 npocrijA6ev ocuti) Exoct6vtOCPlopound nOCpOCXCiANV ocUt6v xoct

914 - 1119 1425 2020 - 2617 An the contrary the Evangelist Mark uses the present participle

after the moving verbs only in two passages 114 Meta 8s to nocpoc806ijvoct Iltoampvvtjv 1iA6ev ( Itj(JoGlt etlt rocAt-

AOCLOCV xtjpucrcrltov to eOocHEAtOV tijlt toG eou xoct AEYWV Iht

And in 535 Ett ocutou AocAounolt ocno tou OCPXtcruvocywyou AEyovtelt ott 2

The future participle does not exist in Marks GospeL He uses however the same example of Matthew 1110 in the passage 12 18ou eyc1 ocnoatEAAw tov llyyeMv (LOU npo npoQwnou crou 8lt xoctocaxeuampcret amp8611 Qou crou Compare also Luke 726

The infinitive I found in 5 passages 124 ocnoAecroct 217 oux XocAEcrOCt 8txoc(oult ocna OC(LOCptWAOUlt dlt (LeuroteXvOtocv3 bull

314 - 321 - 514 As stated above the finale infinitive may be analyzied with (voc

and conjunctive in the Hellenistic period and mostly in the Koine language4 This substititution of the infinitive with tvoc and conjunc-tive and in modern Greek language with va and conj was the cause of the disappearance of the infinitive from the language of today

Matthew does not use tvoc with conjunctive instead of a infinitive By Marks Gospel I found it in the following passages

1 See Blass-Debr sect 351 2 Compare Luke 849 3 Compare Matth 913-Luke 532

Jannaris An historical Greek Grammar London 1897 sect 2158 L Radermacher Koifie ill Akademieder Wissensdlaften inWien 2245 1-947 p 46 bull 2MI Sprache Charitons p 86 f S Antoniadis L Evangile de Luc p 297 - Hubert Pernot Etudes sur la des Paris 1927 147 - of the moods in

p Leipzig 1855 p 299 f

The development of the finale future participle in New Testament Greek 621

138 ampYW(JeV dc txc e(o(Jevocc xW(J0n6Aetc tvoc XIXt exet xwu1w Instead of XYJPU1IXt xYJpu1wv 1bull

I It e fl 1 iO512 bullbull ne(Jt0v YJ(JOCC etC tOUC (OtpOUC tvoc ec OCUtOUC etcrel w(Jev Instead of ne(Jtjiov dcrt6nocc dcreAeUcro(Jevouc

1213 Koct ampnocrteAAoum np6C ocut6v ttVOCC tWV (fgtocptcroc[wv xed twv H- pltpatocvwv tvoc ocut6v ampypeucr(iHn A6yltp Instead of ampypeucrovtocc

1410 np6C ouc amppXLepetC (voc nocpocaij) ocut6v ocutotc Instead of nocpIXa6crwv

The Evangelist Luke mostly writes the infinitive after the moving verbs

I f f117 XOCt ocuoc npoeleucreoct eVW1CtOV OCUOu en tcrpetOCt xocp-3[occ hOL(JampcrOCt Kuptltp Aoc6v

119 xoc1 ampnecrampAY)v AM np6c cre xoc1 euocyyeA[croccrOOC[ crOt oc)ocmiddot 176 232 - 24 - 312 - 416 418 - 419 515 - 5323

612 - 617 724 -- 725 726 - 835 92 928 - 952 1131-1249 -- 1251 - 1417 1419 -- 1431 - 1515 197 -- 1910

In the following examples Luke uses the genitive of article with the infinitive instead of participle future

2419 Ked ou (JetvOGt cruv ocutotc --instead of (Jevwv 177

He analyzes this infinitive only twice 194 xoc1 np03poc(Jltbv gfLnpocrOev enL crux0(J0peocv tvoc an ocu6v 2020 ampnecrretAOGV eyxocOirouc (voc ocuoi) Myou He often uses the present participle 81 XOGL IXUOC atw3ue XIXx n6ALv xoc1 X6(JY)v X1Jpucrcrwv xOG( euocyye-

At(6(Jevoc ou 8eou

Luke never uses the future participle He avoids it in the examples

1 Not only after te verbs of movement but after other verbs as 11ltXPaxltxAw 7rlxpocyyeAAw OtAw etc is used in place of infinitive the conjuction tvoc with con-junctive Compare for example

Mark 510 11OCPE)(OCAeuroL 11001 110AAamp tvoc f11J tboOnLAll OCUToult Iijlt xwpoc 5 18-68-625 Luke 8 31 KOCL 11OCPeuro)(OCAeL ocoov tvoc tmTocl1l OCOToilt John 1210 at 01 amppXLEpTrlt tlOC )(ocl TOV ampno)(IevwOw Paul Corinth A 110 IIocpoc)(ocAw ae ufiilt rvoc TO 11010 AeYl)Te 11ampvn bullbull

1612 2 See J H Moulton An introduction sect 2811 3 Compare Mark 217 bull Matth 913 4 J H M degu 1 ton An introduction sect 2813 5 Compare the same passage by Mark 535

628 Antonios Papanikolaou

1246 0 Kopwc xod xcd Instead of 0 Kopwc xocL

215 8teAOW[Leurov wc xoct C8w[Leurov ro roiho bullbull Instead of

The example mentioned above (p 3) Luke 726 gt18011 tyw

2417 8L hwv 1tAeLOVWv 1tocpeyevo[LY)v euroAeY)[Locrt)vocc 1t 0 L cr Ul v etc rO lOvoc [LOU xoct 1tpocrltpopoc

2513 Ayp(1t1tocC 0 xoct Bepv(xY) etc KocLcrocplac(V

There is also the present participle in 7 passages N 3 0 we-mw-ocu COtC etC co tepOv-1tept7tOCt(iirKOCL

ocivwv rOY 0eov

1 See Matth 1110 - Mark 12

The development of the finale future participle in New restament Greek 629

Instead of 84 - 1527 -- 1713 2025 2126

The infinitive is used 9 times fl - f f 7 23 Olel-lj ue -njl XOpo 01 CWTOU e1CLaxelOa IXL TOUe OoeAqlOUe _

734 xal autoue 109 1122 - 1125 --- 1213 1714 2016 - 2618 Iva with conjunctive is used only twice in 1636 and 225 In the Epistles of Apostle Paul I found as follows Rom present participle 1525 luvl n 1COpeuO[1aL de

I)LOXOlampV ampy[oLe Cor Infinitive A 117 ou yocp amp1CeuroateLAeuro [1e XpLatOe

rXAAOC I r IA 16 3 OUTOUe 1Ce[1IUl O1CeveyxeLI 1)1 XOpLI T

Ila A 1611 np01Ceuro[1Yate I)e IXlhol amp1 tVIX

1Cp6e [1emiddot In the following example there is the analysis of the future parti-

ciple in a relative sentence1

Cor A 417 Llvl TOUTO t1Ce[1Ya U[1Zv TL[16eeov 8e u[1iXe amplOC-roce ol)oue [10U roce euroV XpLatltl Instead of ampVIX-

GaJat Infinitive 1i8 ampVYAfov ete IepOaOAI)[1oc 24 ohLvee 1CocpeLayAfov XIXtOaxo1CtjaaL

IvlX 44 0 0eoe TOV uiov whou Ephes Iva 622 8v t1CZ[1Y1X 1Cpoe u[1iie zte aUTO TOUW tvlX

ylampre TOC mpt 1)[1amp v XIXL 1COCpaxIXAeuroa(1 xapl)(ae u[1ampv

In the Thessal Epistle A there is the infinitive with the preposi-tioneuroLe in two passages instead of a simple finale future participle A 32 yat euro1Ceuro[1Ya[1Ev TL[16)eov elc TO u[1iie XOCL 1ClXplXXIXAe-aIXL

I f - 1 -A 35 e1Ce[1I1X ZLe TO YVUlvaL rYJV 1CLaTLV 1)[16)1 Timoth Infinitive Ai 15 6TL XpLmoe Iljaoue de TOV

xoa[1ov amp[1OpTUlAoUe aampaocL IvlX A 13 1Copel)opltIoe de MlXxei)ovLlXv twx 1C1X-

payydA(le riaL eTepolhi)lXaXIXAeLv B 417 0 I)e KUpLoe [10L 1Capeuroanj XlXt eurovei)l)-

1 Compare above the examples of Mattll 1110 Mark 12

_726 _

9EOAOrJA T6[loC At TEUX0C t 41

The development of the finale future participle in New Testament Greek 621

138 ampYW(JeV dc txc e(o(Jevocc xW(J0n6Aetc tvoc XIXt exet xwu1w Instead of XYJPU1IXt xYJpu1wv 1bull

I It e fl 1 iO512 bullbull ne(Jt0v YJ(JOCC etC tOUC (OtpOUC tvoc ec OCUtOUC etcrel w(Jev Instead of ne(Jtjiov dcrt6nocc dcreAeUcro(Jevouc

1213 Koct ampnocrteAAoum np6C ocut6v ttVOCC tWV (fgtocptcroc[wv xed twv H- pltpatocvwv tvoc ocut6v ampypeucr(iHn A6yltp Instead of ampypeucrovtocc

1410 np6C ouc amppXLepetC (voc nocpocaij) ocut6v ocutotc Instead of nocpIXa6crwv

The Evangelist Luke mostly writes the infinitive after the moving verbs

I f f117 XOCt ocuoc npoeleucreoct eVW1CtOV OCUOu en tcrpetOCt xocp-3[occ hOL(JampcrOCt Kuptltp Aoc6v

119 xoc1 ampnecrampAY)v AM np6c cre xoc1 euocyyeA[croccrOOC[ crOt oc)ocmiddot 176 232 - 24 - 312 - 416 418 - 419 515 - 5323

612 - 617 724 -- 725 726 - 835 92 928 - 952 1131-1249 -- 1251 - 1417 1419 -- 1431 - 1515 197 -- 1910

In the following examples Luke uses the genitive of article with the infinitive instead of participle future

2419 Ked ou (JetvOGt cruv ocutotc --instead of (Jevwv 177

He analyzes this infinitive only twice 194 xoc1 np03poc(Jltbv gfLnpocrOev enL crux0(J0peocv tvoc an ocu6v 2020 ampnecrretAOGV eyxocOirouc (voc ocuoi) Myou He often uses the present participle 81 XOGL IXUOC atw3ue XIXx n6ALv xoc1 X6(JY)v X1Jpucrcrwv xOG( euocyye-

At(6(Jevoc ou 8eou

Luke never uses the future participle He avoids it in the examples

1 Not only after te verbs of movement but after other verbs as 11ltXPaxltxAw 7rlxpocyyeAAw OtAw etc is used in place of infinitive the conjuction tvoc with con-junctive Compare for example

Mark 510 11OCPE)(OCAeuroL 11001 110AAamp tvoc f11J tboOnLAll OCUToult Iijlt xwpoc 5 18-68-625 Luke 8 31 KOCL 11OCPeuro)(OCAeL ocoov tvoc tmTocl1l OCOToilt John 1210 at 01 amppXLEpTrlt tlOC )(ocl TOV ampno)(IevwOw Paul Corinth A 110 IIocpoc)(ocAw ae ufiilt rvoc TO 11010 AeYl)Te 11ampvn bullbull

1612 2 See J H Moulton An introduction sect 2811 3 Compare Mark 217 bull Matth 913 4 J H M degu 1 ton An introduction sect 2813 5 Compare the same passage by Mark 535

628 Antonios Papanikolaou

1246 0 Kopwc xod xcd Instead of 0 Kopwc xocL

215 8teAOW[Leurov wc xoct C8w[Leurov ro roiho bullbull Instead of

The example mentioned above (p 3) Luke 726 gt18011 tyw

2417 8L hwv 1tAeLOVWv 1tocpeyevo[LY)v euroAeY)[Locrt)vocc 1t 0 L cr Ul v etc rO lOvoc [LOU xoct 1tpocrltpopoc

2513 Ayp(1t1tocC 0 xoct Bepv(xY) etc KocLcrocplac(V

There is also the present participle in 7 passages N 3 0 we-mw-ocu COtC etC co tepOv-1tept7tOCt(iirKOCL

ocivwv rOY 0eov

1 See Matth 1110 - Mark 12

The development of the finale future participle in New restament Greek 629

Instead of 84 - 1527 -- 1713 2025 2126

The infinitive is used 9 times fl - f f 7 23 Olel-lj ue -njl XOpo 01 CWTOU e1CLaxelOa IXL TOUe OoeAqlOUe _

734 xal autoue 109 1122 - 1125 --- 1213 1714 2016 - 2618 Iva with conjunctive is used only twice in 1636 and 225 In the Epistles of Apostle Paul I found as follows Rom present participle 1525 luvl n 1COpeuO[1aL de

I)LOXOlampV ampy[oLe Cor Infinitive A 117 ou yocp amp1CeuroateLAeuro [1e XpLatOe

rXAAOC I r IA 16 3 OUTOUe 1Ce[1IUl O1CeveyxeLI 1)1 XOpLI T

Ila A 1611 np01Ceuro[1Yate I)e IXlhol amp1 tVIX

1Cp6e [1emiddot In the following example there is the analysis of the future parti-

ciple in a relative sentence1

Cor A 417 Llvl TOUTO t1Ce[1Ya U[1Zv TL[16eeov 8e u[1iXe amplOC-roce ol)oue [10U roce euroV XpLatltl Instead of ampVIX-

GaJat Infinitive 1i8 ampVYAfov ete IepOaOAI)[1oc 24 ohLvee 1CocpeLayAfov XIXtOaxo1CtjaaL

IvlX 44 0 0eoe TOV uiov whou Ephes Iva 622 8v t1CZ[1Y1X 1Cpoe u[1iie zte aUTO TOUW tvlX

ylampre TOC mpt 1)[1amp v XIXL 1COCpaxIXAeuroa(1 xapl)(ae u[1ampv

In the Thessal Epistle A there is the infinitive with the preposi-tioneuroLe in two passages instead of a simple finale future participle A 32 yat euro1Ceuro[1Ya[1Ev TL[16)eov elc TO u[1iie XOCL 1ClXplXXIXAe-aIXL

I f - 1 -A 35 e1Ce[1I1X ZLe TO YVUlvaL rYJV 1CLaTLV 1)[16)1 Timoth Infinitive Ai 15 6TL XpLmoe Iljaoue de TOV

xoa[1ov amp[1OpTUlAoUe aampaocL IvlX A 13 1Copel)opltIoe de MlXxei)ovLlXv twx 1C1X-

payydA(le riaL eTepolhi)lXaXIXAeLv B 417 0 I)e KUpLoe [10L 1Capeuroanj XlXt eurovei)l)-

1 Compare above the examples of Mattll 1110 Mark 12

_726 _

9EOAOrJA T6[loC At TEUX0C t 41

628 Antonios Papanikolaou

1246 0 Kopwc xod xcd Instead of 0 Kopwc xocL

215 8teAOW[Leurov wc xoct C8w[Leurov ro roiho bullbull Instead of

The example mentioned above (p 3) Luke 726 gt18011 tyw

2417 8L hwv 1tAeLOVWv 1tocpeyevo[LY)v euroAeY)[Locrt)vocc 1t 0 L cr Ul v etc rO lOvoc [LOU xoct 1tpocrltpopoc

2513 Ayp(1t1tocC 0 xoct Bepv(xY) etc KocLcrocplac(V

There is also the present participle in 7 passages N 3 0 we-mw-ocu COtC etC co tepOv-1tept7tOCt(iirKOCL

ocivwv rOY 0eov

1 See Matth 1110 - Mark 12

The development of the finale future participle in New restament Greek 629

Instead of 84 - 1527 -- 1713 2025 2126

The infinitive is used 9 times fl - f f 7 23 Olel-lj ue -njl XOpo 01 CWTOU e1CLaxelOa IXL TOUe OoeAqlOUe _

734 xal autoue 109 1122 - 1125 --- 1213 1714 2016 - 2618 Iva with conjunctive is used only twice in 1636 and 225 In the Epistles of Apostle Paul I found as follows Rom present participle 1525 luvl n 1COpeuO[1aL de

I)LOXOlampV ampy[oLe Cor Infinitive A 117 ou yocp amp1CeuroateLAeuro [1e XpLatOe

rXAAOC I r IA 16 3 OUTOUe 1Ce[1IUl O1CeveyxeLI 1)1 XOpLI T

Ila A 1611 np01Ceuro[1Yate I)e IXlhol amp1 tVIX

1Cp6e [1emiddot In the following example there is the analysis of the future parti-

ciple in a relative sentence1

Cor A 417 Llvl TOUTO t1Ce[1Ya U[1Zv TL[16eeov 8e u[1iXe amplOC-roce ol)oue [10U roce euroV XpLatltl Instead of ampVIX-

GaJat Infinitive 1i8 ampVYAfov ete IepOaOAI)[1oc 24 ohLvee 1CocpeLayAfov XIXtOaxo1CtjaaL

IvlX 44 0 0eoe TOV uiov whou Ephes Iva 622 8v t1CZ[1Y1X 1Cpoe u[1iie zte aUTO TOUW tvlX

ylampre TOC mpt 1)[1amp v XIXL 1COCpaxIXAeuroa(1 xapl)(ae u[1ampv

In the Thessal Epistle A there is the infinitive with the preposi-tioneuroLe in two passages instead of a simple finale future participle A 32 yat euro1Ceuro[1Ya[1Ev TL[16)eov elc TO u[1iie XOCL 1ClXplXXIXAe-aIXL

I f - 1 -A 35 e1Ce[1I1X ZLe TO YVUlvaL rYJV 1CLaTLV 1)[16)1 Timoth Infinitive Ai 15 6TL XpLmoe Iljaoue de TOV

xoa[1ov amp[1OpTUlAoUe aampaocL IvlX A 13 1Copel)opltIoe de MlXxei)ovLlXv twx 1C1X-

payydA(le riaL eTepolhi)lXaXIXAeLv B 417 0 I)e KUpLoe [10L 1Capeuroanj XlXt eurovei)l)-

1 Compare above the examples of Mattll 1110 Mark 12

_726 _

9EOAOrJA T6[loC At TEUX0C t 41

The development of the finale future participle in New restament Greek 629

Instead of 84 - 1527 -- 1713 2025 2126

The infinitive is used 9 times fl - f f 7 23 Olel-lj ue -njl XOpo 01 CWTOU e1CLaxelOa IXL TOUe OoeAqlOUe _

734 xal autoue 109 1122 - 1125 --- 1213 1714 2016 - 2618 Iva with conjunctive is used only twice in 1636 and 225 In the Epistles of Apostle Paul I found as follows Rom present participle 1525 luvl n 1COpeuO[1aL de

I)LOXOlampV ampy[oLe Cor Infinitive A 117 ou yocp amp1CeuroateLAeuro [1e XpLatOe

rXAAOC I r IA 16 3 OUTOUe 1Ce[1IUl O1CeveyxeLI 1)1 XOpLI T

Ila A 1611 np01Ceuro[1Yate I)e IXlhol amp1 tVIX

1Cp6e [1emiddot In the following example there is the analysis of the future parti-

ciple in a relative sentence1

Cor A 417 Llvl TOUTO t1Ce[1Ya U[1Zv TL[16eeov 8e u[1iXe amplOC-roce ol)oue [10U roce euroV XpLatltl Instead of ampVIX-

GaJat Infinitive 1i8 ampVYAfov ete IepOaOAI)[1oc 24 ohLvee 1CocpeLayAfov XIXtOaxo1CtjaaL

IvlX 44 0 0eoe TOV uiov whou Ephes Iva 622 8v t1CZ[1Y1X 1Cpoe u[1iie zte aUTO TOUW tvlX

ylampre TOC mpt 1)[1amp v XIXL 1COCpaxIXAeuroa(1 xapl)(ae u[1ampv

In the Thessal Epistle A there is the infinitive with the preposi-tioneuroLe in two passages instead of a simple finale future participle A 32 yat euro1Ceuro[1Ya[1Ev TL[16)eov elc TO u[1iie XOCL 1ClXplXXIXAe-aIXL

I f - 1 -A 35 e1Ce[1I1X ZLe TO YVUlvaL rYJV 1CLaTLV 1)[16)1 Timoth Infinitive Ai 15 6TL XpLmoe Iljaoue de TOV

xoa[1ov amp[1OpTUlAoUe aampaocL IvlX A 13 1Copel)opltIoe de MlXxei)ovLlXv twx 1C1X-

payydA(le riaL eTepolhi)lXaXIXAeLv B 417 0 I)e KUpLoe [10L 1Capeuroanj XlXt eurovei)l)-

1 Compare above the examples of Mattll 1110 Mark 12

_726 _

9EOAOrJA T6[loC At TEUX0C t 41

630 Antonios Papaniko]aou

In Hebrews Epistle

1amp(Jwcrs (Je tlC aL euro(JOU 0 1tA1)pocpoP1) xed ocxoucr71 gOlJ (v 1 ampxoocrwcrLI)

1t(xIOC OC

Infinitive924 d01lAOel b XpLcr6t 1UI euro(JcpocnO01jl(xL (1 1tPO-tOU 0eou (i1tEP -fJ(JWImiddot

hlY in 416 1tpocrepxw(JeOC 0)1 (Jetoc 1tCP(1)crtoct 41 Op611p 11ltXamp-PLtOt tl(x gAeol XOCL Xamppw e5pw(Jel de e6-X(XLPOl

1317 present participle 1313 totiUI 1tpot lYutOl t1le

01 bleLaLcr(JOl (Xut41 cpepoltee The participle cpspoltee has here the meaning of ((with)) The

later authors use such participle as also ocyWl gXWl after moving verbs not as finale but as adverbiale participle of mannerl

nt with future participle Hebr 1317 OCUtOL yap ampypU1tlOUOLI 01tEP tWI tyenUXWI o(Jwv we 6yol

cX1tOaW 001ee2

The Apostle John in His Revelation uses twice the present parti-ciple

62 XOCL 1IXWI 109 xoct amp1t9jA6(X 1tpot 01 ampyyeAOl Atyow ocut(1 aouloct pOL 0 The infinitive 6 times 1910 xoct g1teOoc tWI 1tOaWI (Xjou 1tpoOXUIrjOOCL 208 1tAOClrjcroc toc OUI(Xy(Xyel1 (Xotou 226 228 - 2212 - 2216 He analyzes this infinitive to and conjunctive 4 times 62 XlXt 1tX()1 X(xL tl(X

AOL ot ov-rse tac ha crampAmyylYt

(Xe 1915 - 1917 He never uses the future participle In the next passage he avoids

cally 216 (JeCv61)Oolmiddot d ae- epX0(Joct crOt TOCXU XlXt1toXe(J1jOw (JeT lXOTilY

1 See my dissertation Zur Sprache Charitons p 87 - Blass-Debr sect 419 2 Here he writes vith the future participle because the verb ocypU1tllouatl

has no meaning of movement Cf Zur Sprache Charitons p 84 r

The development of the finale future participle in New Testament Greek 631

ill Tn OllcPIX(q TOU 0T6JIXT6 JOU Instead of SpxoJcd Trxxu bullbull

After this research with the respect to the syntax of the moving verbs I form the following conclusion

The finale future patriciple already started from the New Testa-ment -the principal sample of the Common Language- to be eli-minated An in all in the New Testament I found only 7 times this fu-ture partipciple (Matth 2749 - Acta Apost 827 225 - 2411 2417 2513 Hebr 1317)

In its place comes the present participle Besides this use the in-finitive l and its analysis to conjunctive occurs The Evangelist John mostly sets tllOC with conjunctive after the moving verbs

Another manner to avoid the future participle is the analysis in a relative sentence or the syntax of parataxe (see the example above 216 of Johns Revelation also cf Matth 1341 2431 Luke 1246 215 )

This substitution of finale future participle to the infinitive of purpose and the analysis of this infinitive to twx and conjunctive brought the result generally both future participle and infinitive from the modern Greek language to have no existence

1 The infinitive supplies constructions to express the idea of purpose with the article in the accusative after ltt or repo and with article in the genitive (see for example Mtth 2019 reocpoc8dlOoUOLV XUTOV TO d TI amp[Jreocr1ocI x01 [J()(OTIyWOOCI Rom 326et tb dVXI ()(UTbv 3xoOv x()(l 31XOCIOUVTX Luke 2429 xlaquo1 etcr7jAOeV toil [Jetvoct Ouv ()(llTO)

The development of the finale future participle in New Testament Greek 631

ill Tn OllcPIX(q TOU 0T6JIXT6 JOU Instead of SpxoJcd Trxxu bullbull

After this research with the respect to the syntax of the moving verbs I form the following conclusion

The finale future patriciple already started from the New Testa-ment -the principal sample of the Common Language- to be eli-minated An in all in the New Testament I found only 7 times this fu-ture partipciple (Matth 2749 - Acta Apost 827 225 - 2411 2417 2513 Hebr 1317)

In its place comes the present participle Besides this use the in-finitive l and its analysis to conjunctive occurs The Evangelist John mostly sets tllOC with conjunctive after the moving verbs

Another manner to avoid the future participle is the analysis in a relative sentence or the syntax of parataxe (see the example above 216 of Johns Revelation also cf Matth 1341 2431 Luke 1246 215 )

This substitution of finale future participle to the infinitive of purpose and the analysis of this infinitive to twx and conjunctive brought the result generally both future participle and infinitive from the modern Greek language to have no existence

1 The infinitive supplies constructions to express the idea of purpose with the article in the accusative after ltt or repo and with article in the genitive (see for example Mtth 2019 reocpoc8dlOoUOLV XUTOV TO d TI amp[Jreocr1ocI x01 [J()(OTIyWOOCI Rom 326et tb dVXI ()(UTbv 3xoOv x()(l 31XOCIOUVTX Luke 2429 xlaquo1 etcr7jAOeV toil [Jetvoct Ouv ()(llTO)