Grace Theological Journal 9.1 (1988) 129-140.
[Copyright © 1988 Grace Theological Seminary; cited with permission;
digitally prepared for use at
OF OPTATIVES: A
JAMES L. BOYER
The optative mood is relatively rare in the NT and follows usage
patterns of Classical Greek. Though most NT occurrences are voli-
tive, some are clearly potential; the oblique optative, however, does
not occur in the NT. Careful analysis suggests that the optative
implies a less distinct anticipation than the subjunctive, but not less
* * *
THE student who comes to NT Greek from a Classical Greek
background notices some differences in vocabulary, i.e., old
words with new meanings and new words, slight differences in
spelling, and some unfamiliar forms of inflection. But in syntax he is
on familiar ground, except that it seems easier. He may hardly notice
one of the major differences until it is called to his attention, and then
it becomes the greatest surprise of all: the optative mood. Its surprise,
however, is not that it is used differently or strangely; it just is not
Many of the old optative functions, particularly its use in subor-
dinate clauses after a secondary tense, seemingly do not occur at all in
the NT. On the other hand, the optatives which do occur follow the
old patterns rather closely. What changes do occur are in the direc-
tion of greater simplicity.
Grammarians have pointed out that "the optative was a luxury
of the language and was probably never common in the vernacular. . .
* Informational materials and listings generated in the preparation of this study
may be found in my "Supplemental Manual of Information: Optative Verbs," Those
interested may secure this manual through their library by interlibrary loan from the
Library, Grace Theological Seminary,
46590. Also available are manuals of information supplementing previous articles of
this series covering participles, infinitives, subjunctives and imperatives.
130 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
a literary mood.”1 In the NT it is found almost solely in the writings
of Luke and of Paul, with the more complex literary patterns in
Luke. Paul's use is almost limited to the expression of a wish. There
are four instances in the epistles of Peter, two in Jude, and one each
in Mark and John. Surprisingly there is only one in the literary
epistle to the Hebrews.
The optative is so rare that most grammars of NT Greek do not
include the paradigms for the optative forms. The inflectional ele-
ments of the Greek verb in all the moods consist of three basic parts:
(1) the verb or tense stem, (2) a thematic or connecting vowel, and
(3) a set of inflectional endings indicating person and number. The
optative uses the same verb or tense stems as the other moods. It adds
a mood suffix (i or ih) to the thematic vowel, o / e, resulting in a
distinctive i-sound (-oi-, -ei-, -ai- or -oih-, -eih-, -aih-) before the
ending. The optative uses the secondary endings in all its tenses (just
as the subjunctive uses the primary endings). The actual resultant
endings may be found in the major grammars.2
The Optative of Wish (Volitive)
The name optative (from the Latin optari = to wish) points to
one major use of the mood, to express a wish or a choice. It accounts
for the majority of NT optatives (39 out of 68, or 57%). These may be
grouped into six categories.
Best known of optative uses, and one of the most frequent,3 the
phrase mh> ge<noito is an example of the volitive optative. In form it is
a wish, "may it not happen." But it has become a stereotyped,
idiomatic exclamation indicating revulsion and indignant, strong
rejection. For this reason it is given a separate classification. The
common English translation, "God forbid!" (King James Version) is
1 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of
Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934) 935-36.
2 For Classical forms, see W. W. Goodwin, Greek Grammar, rev. by C. B. Gulick
(Boston: Ginn, 1930); for NT forms see J. H. Moulton and W. F. Howard, A Grammar
of New Testament Greek, Vol. II Accidence and Word Formation (
3 It occurs 15 times, all but one is in Paul: Luke 20:16; Rom 3:4, 6, 31; 6:2, 15; 7:7,
13; ; 11:1, 11; 1 Cor ; Gal ; ; .
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF OPTATIVES 131
not, of course, a literal translation (there is no word for God, and the
verb does not mean "forbid"), but it expresses the sense accurately.4
Gal is the only place where this phrase occurs as part of a
longer sentence rather than standing alone as a two-word exclama-
tion. In every other Pauline usage, it is an appropriate negative
answer to a rhetorical question. In Luke it is also a strong
reply, this time to a threat of judgment.
This phrase indicating strong rejection is not limited to NT
writers. It was used in classical,5 and in LXX.6 Some have identified it
as the only remnant of the optative in modern Greek.7
This group and the next are actually indirect prayers, since,
although addressed to someone else, they express a wish that God
might do something. They are rather formal "benedictions" in which
the spiritual leader, here Paul, invokes divine favor upon his readers.
Their formal character is indicated also by two somewhat
standardized patterns of expression: (1) God (o[ qeo<j or o[ ku<rioj or
both) is named first, usually rather formally described in terms
appropriate to prayer, with the aorist active optative following: for
example, Rom 15:5, o[ de> qeo>j th?j u[pomenh?j kai> th?j paraklh<sewj
d&<h u[mi?n. "Now the God who gives perseverance and encouragement
grant you. . . ."8 (2) The optative is in the passive voice, the items
wished for constitute the subject, and the agent or doer is unnamed,
although clearly understood as God; 1 Pet 1:2, xarij u[mi?n kai> ei]rh<nh
pleiqunqei<h "May grace and peace be yours in fullest measure" (also
2 Pet 1.2, Jude 2, and 1 Thess 5.23b).
Attention needs to be called here to the very large number of
such benedictions in the NT where the verb is unexpressed and needs
4 The NASB uses "May it never be!" The New King James version uses "Certainly
not!" in every instance except one, where it preserves the KJV "God forbid!" The NIV
uses a variety of phrases: "Not at all!" (4 times), "By no means!" (4), "Absolutely not!"
(2), and once each, "May it never be!," "Certainly not!," "Far from it!," "Never!" and
"May I never. . . ! ."
5 W. W. Goodwin, Grammar, 279 (#1321).
6 F. Blass and A. DeBrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other
trans. and rev. by Robert Funk (
7 J. T. Pring,
Grammar, 939. But others have doubted this; cf. J. H. Moulton; Grammar of
New Testament Greek, Vol. 1 Prolegomena (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1906) 240;
Vincent A. Heinz, "The Optative Mood in the Greek New Testament," unpublished
Master of Theology thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1962,20.
8 Also, Rom , I Thess 3:11, 12 (two optatives involved), (first optative),
2 Thess (two optatives), 3:5, 16; Heb . English translations are given from the
NASB unless otherwise stated.
132 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
to be supplied. In most cases that verb, if it were used, would be the
optative of the copulative verb, ei@h.
A second group of indirect prayers is less formal, expressing a
wish for some specific blessing for someone else (Acts 26:29, 2 Tim
, 18, ) or for oneself (1 Thess , Phlm 20). In these the
optative stands before the reference to the Lord, and no descriptive
words are used; 2 Tim , d&<h e@leoj o[ ku<rioj. "The Lord grant
mercy" (also , Jude 9).
Not all wishes are specifically addressed to God; sometimes they
relate to providence. Only two optatives are included in this category:
2 Tim is a gesture of Paul's forgiveness reflected in his wish that
others will do the same; and Philemon 20 is a simple personal request.
However, several of the wishes in the categories following might also
be included here.
The optative mood can be used for an adverse wish, or a curse.
Only two that use the optative are usually listed for the NT, Mark
11:4, Acts ; another, Jude 9, probably also belongs here. In
imprecatory sentences Classical Greek normally used the optative,
but in the NT the imperative is used more often (cf. Gal 1:8, 9
a]na<qema e@stw. "Let him be accursed," also 1 Cor (with a
colloquial form, h@tw); in Acts , Luke uses the
instead of the LXX optative hla<boi quoting from Ps 108:8).
The close kinship between the optative of wish and the imperative of
command is seen also in Mark 11:4.
One example uses the optative in a passage which seems to
express permission or acceptance rather than the eager hope which
the English word 'wish' conveys. Luke ge<noito< moi kata> to> r[h?ma<
sou "Be it done to me according to your word." It is possible that
Mary's attitude toward the announcement she had just received may
have been strong anticipation and desire, but it seems more plausible
that these words express deliberate choice and willing submission on
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF OPTATIVES 133
The Potential Optative
The term "potential" is used in grammar to describe action which
is dependent on circumstances or conditions, that which would or
might happen if circumstances are right or if conditions are met. In
Greek there is a potential indicative used to express a past action as
dependent on past circumstances or conditions, and the potential
optative used to express such actions in the future, as well as
potential uses of the subjunctive in third class conditions and de-
liberative questions. Usually these constructions use the modal par-
ticle a@n. Concerning the potential optative, the Classical grammarian
Wm. W. Goodwin says,
The limiting condition is generally too indefinite to be distinctly present
to the mind, and can be expressed only by words like perhaps,
possibly, or probably, or by such vague forms as if he pleased, or if
he should try, if he could, if there should be an opportunity, etc.
Sometimes a general condition, like in any possible case, is felt to be
implied, so that the optative with a@n hardly differs from an absolute
future. . . . 9
The NT potential use of the optative is in accord with the
Classical usage, except it is much less frequent and does not include
all the facets found in Classical Greek. These have been summarized
into four groups.
Potential Optative in Questions
Certainly one of the characteristics of the NT use of the optative
mood is its strong tendency to occur in questions and in connection
with questions. As noted above, 13 out of 15 occurrences of mh>
ge<noito serve as answers to rhetorical questions. Even more surpris-
ing is the fact that 20 of the 29 potential optatives in the NT occur
No indication has been found of such a tendency in older
Greek,10 nor any suggestion as to the reason for and significance of
this phenomenon in the NT. It may be that it is related to the basic
idea of potentiality that belongs to the mood. At a time when the
optative was becoming archaic and other forms of expression were
replacing it in ordinary speech, the added "potentiality" which
9 Goodwin, Grammar, 282 (#1327).
10 H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard Univ., 1976) 407-8
mentions the use of the optative in questions, but no indication is given that this is a
special feature of the mood.
134 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
inherently is involved in a question may have made it more likely that
the optative should survive there.
Potential Optative in Direct Questions. Two examples are
found in this category: Acts and . Both have the particle a@n
and the sense is clearly potential. They express puzzled curiosity. Like
those following, they are within a quotation, but it is a direct quota-
tion, which would require that the original forms be preserved.
Potential Optative in Indirect Questions. The difference be-
tween these and the preceding category is that they are in indirectly
quoted questions rather than direct. This raises the question (to be
discussed below) whether they should rather be classified as "oblique"
optatives. They are grouped here, however, on the basis of their
This group is the largest, with 17 examples. All but one are in the
writings of Luke.11 The indirect question is introduced by the inter-
rogative pronoun ti<j, ti< 11 times, 8 of them12 with the particle a@n; by
the interrogative ei] (= whether) 4 times, by mh<pote (= whether) and
potapo<j, once each. When a@n is present the potential quality is
obvious. Those introduced by ei] are not conditional in meaning;
rather they are interrogative, reflecting a direct question that is
potential.13 Most are introduced by governing verbs which suggest the
element of uncertainty and perplexity, dialogi<zomai (3), diapore<w
(2), dialale<w, e]perwta<w, punqa<nomai, suzhte<w. They may be sub-
divided into several types, illustrating different potential factors:
1) What does it mean? (Luke ,8:9,,, Acts )
2) Which of many? (Luke 1 :62, , , )
3) Yes or No? (Luke , Acts )
4) Who are you? / Who is he? (John , Acts )
5) What will come of this? (Acts )
6) Are you willing? (Acts 25:20)
7) Shall we try? (Acts twice)
A crucial question here is whether or not these questions would
be in the optative if they were standing alone or quoted directly.
11 Luke 1:29, 62; 3:15; 6:11; 8:9; 9:46; 15:26; 18:36; 22:23; John 13:24; Acts 5:24;
; , 27 (two optatives), ; 25:20.
12 One, Luke , has a@n as a textual variant, as noted in Nestle's Greek
Testament, edition 26.
13 There may be another example in Acts 27:12 if we understand the sense to be
that they put to sea [to see] whether they could spend the winter in a safe harbor (the
direct question involved would be "Can we possibly do it?"). But it seems better to
understand it to mean that they went "thinking that they might reach. . .", or "in order
to, if possible, reach. . . ." If that is the meaning it becomes an example of a parenthetic
fourth class protasis.
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF OPTATIVES 135
Whether they are optative because they are potential, or because they
are being quoted indirectly after a past tense main verb (i.e., oblique
optatives), will be discussed below.
Potential Optative in Protases
There is no complete example in the NT of the Classical Future
Less Vivid condition (often referred to as fourth-class conditions),
which used the potential optative in both the protasis and the
apodosis. In a few places, the protasis uses the potential optative, but
the apodosis does not follow the pattern. Either it is incomplete, with
the verb left to be understood (1 Pet , 17), or it takes a different
form (Acts 24:19), or it is totally absent (Acts , 27:39, 1 Cor
One group poses no problem of identification: some form of the
verb ei]mi< is to be supplied and the whole is a mixed condition. If, as is
likely in 1 Pet , the indicative e]ste< is supplied, the fourth-class
protasis is combined with a first-class apodosis. In 1 Pet , if an
indicative e@stin is supplied, the result is the same. If, as is presumably
possible, an optative ei@h is supplied, it becomes a full fourth-class
condition. In both cases, the optative in the protasis is a potential
Acts 24:19 has a potential optative in the protasis, and an
imperfect indicative in the apodosis, e@dei. Classical grammar provides
a suggestion: "The imperfects e@dei, xrh?n or e@xrhn, e@chn, ei]ko>j h#n,
and other impersonal expressions denoting obligation, propriety,
possibility, and the like, are often used without a@n to form an
apodosis implying that the duty is not or was not performed, or the
possibility not realized.”14 Thus e@dei, even without a@n, is in effect a
potential indicative and this example comes close to being a full
Another group is quite different. There is no apodosis, nor is one
to be mentally supplied. The sentences are not conditional sentences
at all. In each case a brief stereotype phrase15 in the form of a
protasis is attached almost as a parenthesis to some element of the
sentence, not to the sentence itself. This seems especially clear in
1 Cor and , where ei] tu<xoi is translated "perhaps" in
14 Goodwin, Grammar, 297 (#1410a).
15 Horn several times calls attention to the frequent appearance of the optative in
set phrases or expressions; "The optatives that do occur frequently (wishes, potential,
possible protases) occur for the most part in certain well defined phrases and
expressions", and "certain fixed phrases occur, some of which. . . are rather paren-
thetical." (R. C. Horn, The Use of the Subjunctive and Optative in the Non-Literary
Papyri, Westbrook Publ. Co., [
136 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
NASB; "it may be" and "it may chance" in KJV; literally, "if it should
turn out so". The other examples are very similar. In Acts the
phrase ei] du<naton ei@h does not go with e@speuden ("he was hurrying if
he were able"), but with gene<sqai ("he was hurrying to be in
du<nainto, goes with e]cw?sai ("they resolved to drive, if they could, the
ship onto it"). Probably Acts 27:12, using the same phrase, belongs
here also (cf. footnote 13). In all these the optative is potential.
The Oblique Optative
One of the commonest of Classical usages of the optative was the
change of the mood of a verb in a subordinate clause from indicative
or subjunctive to optative following a governing verb in a secondary
or past tense, or the change to optative when the sentence was
included in indirect discourse after a secondary tense. This use has
been referred to by various terms;16 here it will be called the Oblique
The almost total absence of this construction in the NT may in
part reflect that in the NT, direct discourse is preferred over indirect,
and that even in the Classical the change was not required. It is
apparent that the general decline of the optative was more severe in
this usage than in the volitive and potential. This is not surprising, for
the extreme complexity of the practice, as reflected by the multiplicity
of "rules" generated by the Classical grammarians in their effort to
describe it, would have tended toward its abandonment.
In discussing this usage Blass-Debrunner includes the examples
listed above under the heading, Potential Optatives in Indirect
Questions. It is true that indirect questions could in Classical Greek
use this oblique optative. The optative then could be representing an
indicative or subjunctive in the direct question. But an examination
of the actual examples points strongly to the conclusion that the
optative is what we should expect in the original question. Blass-
Debrunner recognizes this in at least some of the examples, saying
"[Luke's] examples usually have a@n with the optative and accordingly
correspond to the potential optative of the direct question."17
Robertson expresses the same evaluation, speaking about Acts 17:18,
16 Blass-DeBrunner (Grammar, 195) calls it the Oblique Optative. Several gram-
marians, for example, Robertson (Grammar, 1030), Smyth (Grammar, 379), Goodwin
(Grammar, 314), refer to it as Optative in Indirect Discourse. This designation,
however, only partially describes the practice, which includes not only clauses in
indirect discourse but many other subordinate clauses after secondary tenses, and is
therefore somewhat misleading.
17 Blass-Debrunner, Grammar, 195.
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF OPTATIVES 137
"Why not rather suppose a "hesitating" (deliberative) direct question
like ti< a@n qe<loi o[ spermolo<goj ou$toj le<gein; . . . As already
remarked, the context shows doubt and perplexity in the indirect
questions which have a@n and the opt. in the N. T."18 If that is the case
they should be so classified, rather than assigned to the oblique
category. The same may be said of all the examples, as has been
shown in the discussion above.
Aside from these indirect questions there is only one other
example claimed of the oblique optative. It is in Acts 25:16, involving
two optative verbs in a temporal clause after a secondary tense, thus
in form fitting the definition of the oblique optative. But again, it
need not be so if there is reason to think that the mood would have
been optative in the direct form. Here again Classical grammar helps.
Pri?n was used with an infinitive chiefly when it meant before, and
when the leading clause was affirmative. It was used with the indica-
tive, and with the subjunctive and optative only after negatives.19
Several examples are given where pri?n is followed by the optative. So
it is possible that the optative verbs after pri?n are not the oblique
form, but the original form. The potential character of the sentence is
obvious. It should then be listed as the only example of another
category, Potential Optative in Subordinate Clauses.
Therefore, it may be concluded that there are really no oblique
optatives to be found in the NT. All the possible instances are
explainable as potential optatives apart from the fact that they occur
in a subordinate clause after a secondary tense.
DEGREES OF POTENTIALITY
The concept of degrees of potentiality has been discussed else-
where20 as it relates to the comparison of third and fourth class
conditional sentences. There the claims and comments of the gram-
marins on the concept in general as well as its application to that
specific question were reviewed. That discussion is assumed when
application of it is made to the optative mood and its two major NT
The optative is generally, and properly, called a potential mood,
as are also the subjunctive and the imperative. It speaks of something
as being contingent, depending on conditions or circumstances,
involving some degree of uncertainty or doubt. The problem arises
when the choice of moods is made whether some well-defined scheme
18 Robertson, Grammar, 940.
19 Goodwin, Grammar, 311 (#1485 a.,b; #1486 b.).
20 See James L. Boyer, "Third (and Fourth) Class Conditions," GTJ 3 (1982)
138 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
of graduated degrees of potentiality is reflected, so that the sub-
junctive becomes the mood of probability, the optative of improba-
bility. As the earlier study showed, the subjunctive in third class
conditions does not fit into any such pattern, but rather runs the
whole spectrum from certainty to impossibility with the vast majority
showing no indication at all as to probability. The same is also true
with the optative. There are degrees of potentiality within the moods,
but not between the moods.
Goodwin's comment on the potential optative cited above21
The potential optative can express every degree of potentiality from the
almost absolute future. . . to the apodosis of a future condition ex-
pressed by the optative with a@n. The intermediate steps may be seen in
[a number of] examples. . . ."22
He uses almost the same words to describe the potential indicative:
The potential indicative may express every degree of potentiality from
that seen in [# 1336: 'what would have been likely to happen, i.e., might
have happened (and perhaps did happen) with no reference to any
condition.'] to that of the apodosis of an unfulfilled condition actually
expressed. . . . The intermediate steps to the complete apodosis may be
seen in [a number of] examples. . . .“23
As indicated elsewhere, this same latitude is present in the
subjunctive third class conditions and in other uses of the subjunctive
as well. Also, the imperative expresses ideas ranging from commands
to requests, from ultimatums to permissions.24
Thus, degree of potentiality is a factor within all the moods, but
it is not a distinguishing factor between the moods. It is not correct to
say that the subjunctive is "more probable" or that the optative is
"less probable." The mood used does not in any sense indicate how
confident one can be that something will or will not happen. A fairer
explanation of the distinction is to be found in the terminology used
in Classical grammars to distinguish between conditional protases
with the subjunctive and with the optative, calling them respectively
"Future More Vivid" and "Future Less Vivid.”25 The distinction is
not in an evaluation of the degree of potentiality, but in the distinct-
21 Footnote 9 above.
22 Goodwin, Grammar, 282 (#1328).
23 Ibid., 284 (#1339).
24 See James L. Boyer, "A Classification of Imperatives: A Statistical Study" GTJ 8
25 Goodwin, Grammar, 298-99 (#1418); Smyth, Grammar, 522-23 (#2322). Smyth
expresses it especially well: "The difference between the More Vivid Future and the
Less Vivid Future, like the difference between if I (shall) do this, and if I should do
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF OPTATIVES 139
ness and vividness with which the speaker or writer chooses to
express the potentiality.
ALTERNATIVE WAYS OF EXPRESSING A WISH
While one of the most common uses of the optative is to express
a wish, it should not be concluded that this was the only, or even the
most common, way of doing so. It is beyond the scope of this article
to examine these other ways, but it may be helpful to mention some
of them. Particularly, it will be helpful to compare NT Greek with the
Classical patterns to see what changes actually occurred.
One very obvious way to express a wish is a simple statement
using the word "wish" or "want" or "desire." Many NT wishes are
expressed by using the verb qe<lw or bou<lomai. These words are
capable of expressing many degrees of appeal to the will, from the
slightest expression of hope or desire (as the English word "wish"
does) to a strong request or demand.
There was a tendency in NT Greek to use the imperative mood
where the older Greek would probably have used the volitive optative.
For example, in imprecations or adverse wishes, for which the
Classical used the optative, the NT sometimes substitutes the impera-
tive: Gal 1:8, 9 a]na<qema e@stw "let him be accursed," also 1 Cor .
Acts the imperative
which in the LXX (Ps 108:8) had the optative la<boi.
o@felon with the indicative is used four times in the NT to
express a wish, in a construction which in Classical used an infinitive
instead of an indicative following.
The protasis of a conditional clause, with the apodosis omitted,
may be a way of expressing a wish, as in Luke ei] e@gnwj . . . , "If
you had known . . . !”
this, depends on the mental attitude of the speaker. With the Vivid Future the speaker
sets forth a thought as prominent and distinct in his mind; and for anyone or more of
the various reasons. Thus, he may (and generally does) regard the conclusion to be
more likely to be realized; but even an impossible (2322c) or dreaded result may be
expressed by this form if the speaker chooses to picture the result vividly and distinctly.
The More Vivid Future is thus used whenever the speaker clearly desires to be graphic,
impressive, emphatic, and to anticipate a future result with the distinctness of the
"The Less Vivid Future deals with suppositions less distinctly conceived and of less
immediate concern to the speaker, mere assumed or imaginary cases. This is a favorite
construction in Greek, and is often used in stating suppositions that are merely possible
and often impossible; but the form of the condition itself does not imply an expectation
of the speaker that the conclusion may possibly be realized. The difference between the
two forms, therefore, is not an inherent difference between probable realization in the
one case and possible realization in the other. The same thought may often be
expressed in either form without any essential difference in meaning. The only
difference is, therefore, often that of temperament, tone or style."
140 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Ei@qe, a dialectic variant of ei] and ei] ga<r, which was used in
Classical Greek with the optative to express a wish, is not found in
Of the 28,121 verbs in the New Testament there are 68 optatives,
less than one quarter of 1%. The optative had practically disappeared
from the common language, and only later received a temporary
revival by Atticizing purists who were attempting to restore the
literary language of
book written in the koinh< of the people? It is a needless question,
and probably unimportant. But Turner26 makes a very interesting
. . . the old potential optative--admirably suited to Christian aspira-
tion and piety! Indeed, one must not reject too lightly the possibility
that the optatives in the NT owed their preservation in some measure
to their incidence in the pompous and stereotyped jargon of devotion.
These optative phrases are decidedly formal. . . . The retention of the
optative at a time when everywhere they were diminishing need not
surprise us in view of their value for the liturgy, Jewish [in the LXX]
26 Nigel Turner, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, vol. 3; Syntax (
T. & T. Clark, 1963) 131-32.
This material is cited with gracious permission from:
Grace Theological Seminary
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at: