1
THE CASES
1.1. As an inflected language, Greek uses a system called “case” to mark a group of words, nominals (nouns, pronouns, adjectives, adjectival participles, and articles), in order to indicate their grammatical function and relationship to other words within a sentences (e.g., subject, predicate nominative, direct object, indirect object). In English we primarily follow word order to determine grammatical function. If we change the order of “The player hit the ball” to “The ball hit the player,” the grammatical function (subject, object) of “player” and “ball” changes. In Greek it is the inflected endings, not word order, that indicate such things. If we follow the formal endings of the Greek case system, there are at most five cases: nominative, accusative, genitive, dative, vocative.1
The choice of a case ending by an author communicates a specific meaning, which is refined by how it relates to its broader context. A common approach to the cases is to create multiple labels (such as nominative of appellation, possessive genitive, instrumental dative) to name the various ways they function in representative contexts. So, for example, Wallace (72–175) provides some thirty-three labels for the genitive case and twenty-seven for the dative. Analyzing the cases in NT interpretation, then, sometimes consists of simply attaching the correct label or category to each occurrence of a Greek case (a method we call “pin the label on the grammatical construction”). The following points are meant to introduce our treatment of cases in the rest of this chapter.
1.2. It is helpful to distinguish, as Porter (81–82) does, between (a) the meaning contributed by the semantics of the case itself, (b) the meaning contributed by other syntactical features, and (c) the meaning contributed by the broader context. Thus the interpreter must consider all three of these in arriving at the meaning of a given case construction: the case (e.g., a genitive), other syntactical features (e.g., the genitive follows a noun that semantically communicates a verbal process), and the broader context (e.g., this construction occurs in a given context of one of Paul’s Letters).
1.3. This grammar will follow a “minimalist” approach to the cases. That is, it focuses on the basic, more common, or exegetically significant usages of the cases rather than multiplying numerous categories with their respective labels. This is not to suggest that there are no other valid usages or categories than those listed below. But it is important to remember that “these names are merely appellations to distinguish the different contextual variations of usage, and that they do not serve to explain the case itself.”2 It is important to distinguish the semantics of the case forms from the pragmatic usage of the cases in different contexts. These different labels (appellations) are not the meanings of the cases, but reflect the different contextual realizations of the meanings of the case forms. This approach also allows for ambiguity in the case functions. Sometimes more than one potential label will “fit” when there is not enough evidence to select a specific category with confidence. In such cases the interpreter should refrain from feeling the need to pin down a given case function. The focus should be on the meaning the case contributes to the context. Many grammars often illustrate different case functions with the clearest examples they can find. The problem is that students may think that in every case they must discover “the correct label.” But ambiguous examples often prove more fruitful for teaching exegesis in that they resist so easily pinning a category or label on a given case. At times NT authors may have been ambiguous as to the exact function of the case, or a single label may not capture the function of the case in a given context. At other times there is simply not enough evidence to confidently label a given case usage.
1.4. Although we hope that a “minimalist” approach to case usage will free students of the Greek NT to give their full attention to the forest rather than the trees, we acknowledge our great debt to those who have created and refined case labels. Labels help us think logically and systematically about language. There is obvious value in the discipline of considering the many ways in which one might understand, for example, τὴν πίστιν τοῦ θεοῦ (subjective genitive, objective genitive, possessive genitive, or genitive of source come to mind for τοῦ θεοῦ). Problems can and do arise, however, when we think language usage is always logical and systematic rather than intuitive—as if case endings were themselves inflected for further meaning, or as if the authors worked from a list of genitive usages. Perhaps for the majority of students of biblical Greek, labels are both intimidating and seen as ends in themselves. Our goal is to encourage students to make their goal the explanation of entire texts, not just to pick the right label for individual elements in those texts.
The Nominative Case
1.5. Defining the Greek nominative case has posed a challenge for grammars. Sometimes it is described in terms of one of its primary functions, to indicate the subject of a sentence (Dana and Mantey 68–69). Though this is one of its common uses, the description is too narrow and does not account for all of the nominatives. As frequently recognized, the Greeks themselves designated it as the “naming case” (Robertson 456). The nominative is the case that designates, or specifies, a nominal idea. It simply names or designates an entity rather than specifying a relationship (as with the genitive or dative).3 The various syntactic functions explained below may be understood in this light. Furthermore, in relation to the other cases, the nominative is the unmarked case and carries the least semantic weight (but perhaps sometimes more marked than the accusative; see below), although at times it can have important functions in a discourse.
Subject
1.6. One of the most common functions of the nominative case is to designate or name the grammatical subject of a verb in any voice (S + V). The nominative subject often indicates the topic of the sentence.4
Since Greek verbs indicate person and number through their inflected endings and therefore do not require the mention of an explicit subject, “when the subject is expressed it is often used either to draw attention to the subject of discussion or to mark a shift in the topic, perhaps signaling that a new person or event is the center of focus” (Porter 295–96). Sometimes an expressed subject is needed to indicate a change of speakers in a dialogue or to reintroduce a character who has been offstage for some time (see chap. 13, on discourse considerations).
| ἕτερος δὲ τῶν μαθητῶν εἶπεν αὐτῷ. . . . ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς λέγει αὐτῷ . . . (Matt. 8:21–22) | And another of the disciples said to him. . . . And Jesus said to him. . . . (a change of speakers in a dialogue) | |
| Ἄγγελος δὲ κυρίου ἐλάλησεν πρὸς Φίλιππον λέγων (Acts 8:26) | And an angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, saying. . . . (introduces a new subject) | |
| Παρακαλῶ οὖν ὑμᾶς ἐγὼ ὁ δέσμιος ἐν κυρίῳ ἀξίως περιπατῆσαι τῆς κλήσεως ἧς ἐκλήθητε (Eph. 4:1) | Therefore, I, the prisoner in the Lord, exhort you to walk worthily of the calling with which you were called. |
In a discourse in which the author has already identified himself, as here (Eph. 1:1), the explicit first-person reference to the author is emphatic.
| διὸ καὶ ὁ θεὸς αὐτὸν ὑπερύψωσεν, καὶ ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ὑπὲρ πᾶν ὄνομα (Phil. 2:9) | Therefore, God also highly exalted him and gave him the name above every name. (a switch to a new subject; from Christ to God) |
In Phil. 2:6–7 the subject of the finite verbs is Jesus Christ.
| Οὕτως καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς οὐχ ἑαυτὸν ἐδόξασεν γενηθῆναι ἀρχιερέα (Heb. 5:5) | So also Christ did not glorify himself in order to become a high priest. |
In the midst of the author’s discussion of the qualifications of a high priest, the nominative indicates a shift to the topic of Jesus Christ.
| Καὶ οἱ ἑπτὰ ἄγγελοι οἱ ἔχοντες τὰς ἑπτὰ σάλπιγγας ἡτοίμασαν αὑτοὺς ἵνα σαλπίσωσιν. (Rev. 8:6) | And the seven angels who have the seven trumpets prepared them, in order that they might blow them. |
The nominative resumes reference to or brings back onstage the seven angels after their introduction in Rev. 8:2 was interrupted by two other angelic figures in verses 3–5.
Predicate
1.7. Another frequent usage of the nominative case is to complete a “linking verb” (S + LV + PN) that links it to the subject. The most common verbs are εἰμί and γίνομαι (and ὑπάρχω).
| ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Πέτρος λέγει αὐτῷ· Σὺ εἶ ὁ χριστός. (Mark 8:29) | Answering, Peter said to him, “You are the Christ.” | |
| οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ Μωϋσῆς ὁ εἴπας τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ· (Acts 7:37) | This is Moses, who spoke to the children of Israel. | |
| οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ βρῶσις καὶ πόσις (Rom. 14:17) | For the kingdom of God is not food and drink. | |
| Γίνεσθε δὲ ποιηταὶ λόγου καὶ μὴ ἀκροαταὶ μόνον (James 1:22) | Become doers of the word and not hearers only. | |
| Οὗτοι οἱ περιβεβλημένοι τὰς στολὰς τὰς λευκὰς τίνες εἰσὶν καὶ πόθεν ἦλθον; (Rev. 7:13) | These who are clothed with white robes, who are they and from where did they come? |
One problem emerges with the predicate use of the nominative: since this construction often involves two substantives in the nominative case, one the subject and the other the predicate nominative (S + LV + PN), and since word order cannot be the deciding factor in Greek for grammatical function, how is the reader of Greek to distinguish the subject from the predicate nominative? The main issue is with third-person examples. With first- or second-person pronouns or verbs (e.g., ἐστέ) the decision is not difficult: “I,” “we,” “you” will be the subject. The following guidelines may prove useful for third-person examples. They are also arranged in order of importance (that is, 1 trumps all the others), though 2 and 3 seem to operate on the same level (in that case, 4 comes into effect).5
1. If only one of the words in the nominative is a pronoun, it will be the subject.6
| αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή (John 17:3) | And this is eternal life. |
2. If only one of the words in the nominative has an article, it will be the subject.7
| Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν (John 1:14) | And the Word became flesh and lived among us. |
3. If only one of the words in the nominative is a proper name, it will be the subject.
| Ἠλίας ἄνθρωπος ἦν ὁμοιοπαθὴς ἡμῖν (James 5:17) | Elijah was a man with the same nature as ours. |
4. If both have the article or are proper names, the one that comes first will be the subject.
| ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ παλαιά ἐστιν ὁ λόγος ὃν ἠκούσατε. (1 John 2:7) | The old commandment is the word that you heard. |
With Names (Appellation)
1.8. Sometimes names or titles in Greek will occur in the nominative case, even when another case might be expected (BDF §143). Many of these have a grammatical explanation, such as being a subject or predicate nominative of a verbless clause or being in apposition to a noun in the nominative case.
| Ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπος ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ θεοῦ, ὄνομα αὐτῷ Ἰωάννης· (John 1:6) | There came a man, sent from God; his name [was] John. |
It is possible to understand this as an example of an elided verb: “His name was John.”
| ὑμεῖς φωνεῖτέ με Ὁ διδάσκαλος καὶ Ὁ κύριος (John 13:13) | You call me teacher and Lord. |
It is possible to treat this example as a direct quotation of what they called him: “Teacher and Lord.”
| καὶ ἀπὸ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστός, ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς (Rev. 1:5) | And from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. (three titles in the nominative in apposition to the genitive Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ) | |
| καὶ ἐν τῇ Ἑλληνικῇ ὄνομα ἔχει Ἀπολλύων. (Rev. 9:11) | And in Greek he has the name Apollyon. |
Here we might expect the accusative case. This could also be understood as the predicate nominative of a verbless parenthetical clause: “He has a name—[it is] Apollyon.”
Independent
1.9. A word in the nominative case can sometimes form its own clause. This is consistent with its meaning: to designate or specify a nominal idea. The usage is common in titles or salutations of letters, for example, and may sometimes explain its use with names above.
Absolute, or “Hanging”
1.10. Here the nominative is grammatically unrelated to the clause to which it is linked, though it is connected conceptually. This use of the nominative often occurs with a participle or a relative clause, which then gets picked up by a pronoun in another case in the following main clause (Zerwick 10). This is also known as a “left dislocation,” whereby an entity is detached from and placed outside and in front of the main clause (see chap. 13, on discourse considerations). The “dislocated” nominative then is usually resumed in the main clause with a pronoun.8 Such a construction often draws attention to the element in the nominative or serves to introduce or shift to a new topic (Porter 86).
| πᾶν ῥῆμα ἀργὸν ὃ λαλήσουσιν οἱ ἄνθρωποι, ἀποδώσουσιν περὶ αὐτοῦ λόγον ἐν ἡμέρᾳ κρίσεως· (Matt. 12:36) | Every useless word that people speak, they will give an account concerning it in the day of judgment. |
Here the nominative ῥῆμα is picked up with the genitive pronoun αὐτοῦ in the main clause.
Apposition
1.11. As with all the other cases, a substantive in the nominative case can stand in apposition to another nominative substantive. Both substantives sit side by side, “residing in the same syntactic slot in the clause,” and refer to the same entity.9
| Ἰωσὴφ δὲ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς, δίκαιος ὢν καὶ μὴ θέλων αὐτὴν δειγματίσαι, ἐβουλήθη λάθρᾳ ἀπολῦσαι αὐτήν. (Matt. 1:19) | But Joseph, her husband, being righteous and not wanting to expose her publicly, decided to divorce her in secret. | |
| Παῦλος ἀπόστολος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ καὶ Τιμόθεος ὁ ἀδελφὸς (2 Cor. 1:1) | Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus through the will of God, and Timothy, the brother. | |
| Οὗτος γὰρ ὁ Μελχισέδεκ, βασιλεὺς Σαλήμ, ἱερεὺς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ὑψίστου (Heb. 7:1) | For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God. . . . | |
| καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ μέτωπον αὐτῆς ὄνομα γεγραμμένον, μυστήριον, Βαβυλὼν ἡ μεγάλη, ἡ μήτηρ τῶν πορνῶν καὶ τῶν βδελυγμάτων τῆς γῆς. (Rev. 17:5) | And upon her forehead was a name written: Mystery, Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth. |
The Vocative Case
1.12. The vocative case is utilized when someone (e.g., the reader) or something is addressed directly. There is some debate as to whether the vocative should be considered a separate case from the nominative, since it has separate forms only in the singular.10 Its function was being taken over by the nominative case.11 The presence of the vocative seems to be emphatic, since it directly brings the addressees into the discourse. It is often used to draw attention to upcoming material and to indicate breaks in the discourse.
| ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς στραφεὶς καὶ ἰδὼν αὐτὴν εἶπεν· Θάρσει, θύγατερ· (Matt. 9:22) | And Jesus turned, and seeing her, he said: “Take heart, daughter.” | |
| Ὦ ἀνόητοι Γαλάται, τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν; (Gal. 3:1) | O foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you? |
This is a rare occurrence (17× in the NT) of Ὦ before the vocative.12
| μὴ πλανᾶσθε, ἀδελφοί μου ἀγαπητοί. (James 1:16) | Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers and sisters. | |
| Τεκνία μου, ταῦτα γράφω ὑμῖν ἵνα μὴ ἁμάρτητε. (1 John 2:1) | My little children, I write these things to you in order that you may not sin. |
For Practice
1.13. Analyze the nominatives (in bold) in the following texts, paying attention to the function of each as well as to how you determine the function.
9Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις ἦλθεν Ἰησοῦς ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ τῆς Γαλιλαίας καὶ ἐβαπτίσθη εἰς τὸν Ἰορδάνην ὑπὸ Ἰωάννου. 10καὶ εὐθὺς ἀναβαίνων ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος εἶδεν σχιζομένους τοὺς οὐρανοὺς καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα ὡς περιστερὰν καταβαῖνον εἰς αὐτόν· 11καὶ φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν· Σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ εὐδόκησα. 12Καὶ εὐθὺς τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτὸν ἐκβάλλει εἰς τὴν ἔρημον. 13καὶ ἦν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τεσσεράκοντα ἡμέρας πειραζόμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ Σατανᾶ, καὶ ἦν μετὰ τῶν θηρίων, καὶ οἱ ἄγγελοι διηκόνουν αὐτῷ. (Mark 1:9–13)
1Ἀποκάλυψις Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἣν ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεὸς δεῖξαι τοῖς δούλοις αὐτοῦ, ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐν τάχει. . . . 4Ἰωάννης ταῖς ἑπτὰ ἐκκλησίαις ταῖς ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ· χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη (Rev. 1:1, 4a)
The Genitive Case
1.14. A syntactically versatile case, the genitive has a broad range of usage, including uses that we often express with the English prepositions of and from. (Please note that of is not the meaning of the genitive case; it is the English preposition used sufficiently variously, and often ambiguously, to represent some but not all of the case’s uses in translation.) Traditional grammars refer to the genitive case as descriptive, defining, specifying, or even adjectival;13 more linguistically orientated grammars prefer the term “restrictive.”14 The genitive is most often employed in constructions in which one substantive (in the genitive, Ngen) particularizes, or restricts, another (the head noun, or substantive, N). Regardless of the genitive subcategory chosen in a given context to fine-tune one’s understanding of a phrase like ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ (“the love of God”), θεοῦ restricts “love” to love associated with God. Moreover, “restriction” is definitely the preferable term to account for uses such as genitives that modify verbs or function as direct objects. We agree with Porter, then, that “the essential semantic feature of the genitive case is restriction.”15 The common order is for the noun in the genitive to follow its head term, the noun it modifies. When this is reversed, more prominence is given to the word in the genitive.
Moisés Silva provides a partial analogy to the Greek genitive case from English usage.16 Instead of the gloss “of,” a better aid is a specialized construction found in English where, like Greek, two nouns are juxtaposed but, unlike typical Greek, the first one modifies the second:
| spring picnic | stone wall | fire rescue | tree removal |
In each of these English examples, the first noun describes or restricts the second noun. Upon closer inspection, we can even describe the relationship between them based on our understanding of the contexts in which they are used. The first one indicates a temporal relationship, the time when the picnic occurs. The second exemplifies a relationship of content or makeup of the wall. In the third example the first noun describes the setting of the second, or it may carry the sense of “rescue from fire.” In the fourth example the first noun is the object of the action implied in the second noun (“I remove the tree”). Greek does something similar to this, but rather than relying on word order, it indicates which noun is doing the restricting by placing it in the genitive.
Because of the versatility of the genitive case, there are scholars who understand it as having upward of thirty distinct uses (Wallace 72–136). Some of these seem to have more to do with the vagaries of English translation than with anything inherent in Greek (either encoded in the genitive formal ending or obvious from context); others split already-fine theological hairs. Therefore, we will limit our discussion to a manageable number of uses of the genitive that helpfully illustrate the most common or most exegetically significant uses of the case in the NT. We also encourage our readers not to assume that every use of the genitive will fit neatly into a given subcategory. In other words, it is not always clear just how a genitive restricts. Some NT genitives are rather clear as to their function in given contexts; some are too ambiguous to be labeled; others are strung together in chains for emphasis; still others are probably intended to be understood in a particular way that, because of the passage of time and our distance from the original context, will not be obvious to today’s interpreter. The genitive’s function is to restrict, and only context can indicate exactly how it does so. Our task is to consider interpretive options as well as their theological and practical implications, not necessarily to arrive at the one “correct” label. Even in the study of grammar, the journey can be the destination.
Genitive Constructions Restricting Substantives
Below are genitives in constructions in which they restrict substantives (N + Ngen).
1.15. Descriptive (attributive, qualitative). As mentioned above, some grammars view the genitive case as being essentially descriptive. In such systems the term descriptive genitive is almost redundant; hence the category “descriptive genitive” has been used as a catchall of “last resort” for genitive uses that cannot be otherwise classified (Wallace 79). We will consider descriptive genitives to be those (N + Ngen) that restrict the head noun as an adjective (“a thing of beauty,” i.e., a beautiful thing) or another noun (“ant farm”) might. The genitive of description “might well be considered the essential use of the genitive case.”17
Wallace (106) calls this a genitive of product, which may be an unnecessary refinement. God does produce peace, but nothing in the genitive case itself or the context of Romans requires that we see more than a description of God here.
| ἐν τῇ ἀποκαλύψει τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ ἀπʼ οὐρανοῦ μετʼ ἀγγέλων δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ ἐν φλογὶ πυρός (2 Thess. 1:7–8) | At the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels in fiery flame. | |
| τῷ νικῶντι δώσω αὐτῷ φαγεῖν ἐκ τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς (Rev. 2:7) | To the one who overcomes, I will grant to him/her to eat from the tree of life. |
1.16. Possessive and source (relationship, origin). We will examine these functions of the genitive together because they are semantically related. The fact that we often pair possession with the preposition of and source with from in our translations obscures that relationship; moreover, it focuses our attention more on English than on Greek. The genitive may be used to indicate possession, source/origin, or relationship because in all of these instances a head noun is restricted by a genitive noun or pronoun in terms of “some sort of” dependence or derivation (Porter 93). In the phrase ἡ μαρτυρία τοῦ Ἰωάννου (John 1:19), “John’s testimony,” we may correctly understand John as the source or origin as well as the possessor of his own testimony.
| Τοῦ δὲ Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ ἡ γένεσις οὕτως ἦν. (Matt. 1:18) | Now the birth of Jesus Christ was like this. |
Note that the genitives precede the head noun for emphasis.
Here we see four genitives that are all basically possessive; the third could also be labeled a genitive of relationship, a subcategory in which a particular relationship between the head noun and the genitive is assumed rather than stated.
| Καὶ μετὰ δὲ τὸ παραδοθῆναι τὸν Ἰωάννην ἦλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν κηρύσσων τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ (Mark 1:14) | And after John was arrested, Jesus went into Galilee, preaching the good news of God. |
How should we understand τοῦ θεοῦ? Is it possessive, source, or does it belong in the section below (“Subjective and Objective”)?
| καὶ ἡ εἰρήνη τοῦ Χριστοῦ βραβευέτω ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν, εἰς ἣν καὶ ἐκλήθητε ἐν ἑνὶ σώματι· καὶ εὐχάριστοι γίνεσθε. (Col. 3:15) | And let peace from Christ rule in your hearts, to which you were indeed called in one body, and be thankful. | |
| καὶ ἔπλυναν τὰς στολὰς αὐτῶν καὶ ἐλεύκαναν αὐτὰς ἐν τῷ αἵματι τοῦ ἀρνίου. (Rev. 7:14) | And they washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. (possession) |
1.17. Subjective and objective. When a genitive restricts a noun that can be construed to indicate a verbal process (often it has a cognate verb, e.g., ἀγάπη and ἀγαπάω), it may be subjective or objective. If the genitive is the agent of the verbal process, we can label it as subjective. If the genitive is the object or patient of the verbal process, we can label it as objective. In some biblical contexts both categories, and perhaps others, make good sense and we must entertain the possibility that the author was purposely ambiguous, and/or that we just don’t know enough to make the correct call.
Πνεύματος is objective; that the Holy Spirit does not blaspheme goes without saying, and the presence of κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου in Matt. 12:32 makes the conclusion unassailable.
| τίς ἡμᾶς χωρίσει ἀπὸ τῆς ἀγάπης τοῦ Χριστοῦ; (Rom. 8:35a) | Who will separate us from the love of Christ? |
Here the context makes clear that Paul has Christ’s love for us in mind, since any or all of the items on the list in 8:35b might be misconstrued by some as contradicting his love for us. Because love is a verbal process, most would label Χριστοῦ a subjective genitive, but it would not be incorrect to think of love as being either an attribute or a possession of Christ. Nor would it be misleading to speak of Christ as being the source of love. In other words, Χριστοῦ is considered to be subjective (context makes it subjective rather than objective) because of the verbal nature of ἀγάπης, not because Christ isn’t the source or possessor of love.There is sometimes considerable overlap between the standard genitive subcategories. We do well to keep this in mind when debating fine shades of meaning.
| ἡ γὰρ ἀγάπη τοῦ Χριστοῦ συνέχει ἡμᾶς, κρίναντας τοῦτο ὅτι εἷς ὑπὲρ πάντων ἀπέθανεν· ἄρα οἱ πάντες ἀπέθανον· (2 Cor. 5:14) | For the love of Christ compels us, having decided this: that one died for all; therefore, all died. |
Most take this instance of Χριστοῦ as being subjective also, but the context is not as definitive. Héring argues that the genitive is objective,18 and a few think that Paul might have intended it to do double-duty.19
In order to account for unclear instances such as this, Wallace (119–20) has included the category “plenary genitive” (both objective and subjective), which seems only to compound the problem. This is more a matter of ambiguity in the context than a legitimate grammatical category. It is not that we have too few categories for the genitive or even, as we think, too many, but that we sometimes treat them as objective and inviolable realities rather than mere tools of our trade that should not obscure our focus on the biblical text itself. In 2 Cor. 5:14 Χριστοῦ could be either subjective or objective, but not both. We should probably avoid the “plenary” category and simply admit ambiguity.
| οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (Gal. 2:16) | A person is not justified by works of the law, but through faith in/of Jesus Christ. |
Much ink has been spilled over the use of the genitive Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ here and in Rom. 3:22, where Paul uses the same prepositional phrase. (Each should, of course, be considered separately in its own context, as nothing requires the conclusion that the same word or group of words is always used the same way.) The debate centers on whether Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ is an objective genitive (faith in Jesus Christ) or a subjective genitive (faithfulness of [i.e., produced by] Jesus Christ). Both are certainly coherent in the context. Paul could be affirming that Christian Jews have realized that their right standing before God is based not on their keeping of the law but on Jesus’ faithfulness in fulfilling all of its demands and their full trust in him (subjective gen.). Paul could also be stating quite emphatically (διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν) that Christian Jews know that their right standing with God is based solely on faith in Jesus Christ (objective gen.). Grammar and lexical range alone cannot solve the problem. Any solution must depend on broader contextual and theological considerations.
| Ἀποκάλυψις Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἣν ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεὸς δεῖξαι τοῖς δούλοις αὐτοῦ, ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐν τάχει (Rev. 1:1) | The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants what things must happen quickly. |
Given the chain of command, most commentators think Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ is subjective or source: God gave the revelation to Jesus, who in turn gives it to his servants.20
There is general consensus regarding the first two (subjective), but John may be as misunderstood as Paul is concerning the third. Is Ἰησοῦ subjective or objective?
| σύνδουλός σού εἰμι καὶ τῶν ἀδελφῶν σου τῶν ἐχόντων τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ· τῷ θεῷ προσκύνησον· ἡ γὰρ μαρτυρία Ἰησοῦ ἐστιν τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς προφητείας. (Rev. 19:10) | I am your fellow servant and of your brothers and sisters who have the testimony of Jesus. Worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. |
Both instances of Ἰησοῦ are ambiguous, though one could make a case for objective.21
1.18. Epexegetical/appositional. Although simple apposition can occur in any case (the nominal and the appositive must be in the same case; e.g., Παῦλος ἀπόστολος, “Paul, an apostle” [1 Tim. 1:1]), the genitive in particular may be used to restate, define, or explain a nominal that is usually in a different case.
| Πέτρος δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς· Μετανοήσατε, καὶ βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν, καὶ λήμψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος· (Acts 2:38) | And Peter [said] to them, “Repent and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” |
Among the many intriguing elements of this verse is the final genitive. There is agreement among modern commentators that the genitive is epexegetical; baptized believers will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift (“the gift that is the Holy Spirit” is clearer than “the gift of the Holy Spirit”). However, there may be options other than taking ἁγίου πνεύματος as epexegetical. Δωρεάν is after all a verbal noun, so ἁγίου πνεύματος could be construed as subjective or source (the gift given by the Holy Spirit). Few would dispute that the Holy Spirit gives gifts, but the focus of Acts 2:38 seems to be not on the gifts that the Holy Spirit gives but on the Holy Spirit himself as the gift that believers receive. The decision comes down primarily to context and theology.22
| καὶ σημεῖον ἔλαβεν περιτομῆς, σφραγῖδα τῆς δικαιοσύνης τῆς πίστεως τῆς ἐν τῇ ἀκροβυστίᾳ (Rom. 4:11) | And he received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness of the faith that he had while uncircumcised. |
Although the genitives τῆς δικαιοσύνης τῆς πίστεως might be debated, περιτομῆς is a straightforward example of an epexegetical genitive: the sign is circumcision.
| τὸ δὲ Ἀνέβη τί ἐστιν, εἰ μὴ ὅτι καὶ κατέβη εἰς τὰ κατώτερα μέρη τῆς γῆς; (Eph. 4:9) | But what is “He ascended” if not that he also descended to the lower [parts] of the earth? |
How should we understand the genitive γῆς? Is it possessive, is it epexegetical, or does it belong in the next section (partitive)?
| γίνου πιστὸς ἄχρι θανάτου, καὶ δώσω σοι τὸν στέφανον τῆς ζωῆς. (Rev. 2:10) | Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life. (the crown that is life) |
1.19. Partitive. The noun in the genitive indicates the whole of which the noun it modifies is a part: “some [i.e., a part] of our students [i.e., the whole].” The label of this category may be counterintuitive, but partitive genitives are common in Greek and English. In English we might say that a bite of chocolate is rarely enough. “Of chocolate” is the whole of which “a bite” is a part. Once we get past the fact that the whole, not its parts, is in the genitive, the idiom is easily recognized.
“In water” (ὕδατος) may also be loosely construed as partitive but is taken as a genitive with a verb of filling (in this case, dipping: the object dipped is in the accusative, and the entity into which it is dipped is in the genitive) in BDF§172.
| κατὰ μίαν σαββάτου ἕκαστος ὑμῶν παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ τιθέτω θησαυρίζων ὅ τι ἐὰν εὐοδῶται, ἵνα μὴ ὅταν ἔλθω τότε λογεῖαι γίνωνται. (1 Cor. 16:2) | On the first day of the week each of you individually should put something aside, saving as you prosper, so that there be no collections when I come. | |
| οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν νεκρῶν οὐκ ἔζησαν ἄχρι τελεσθῇ τὰ χίλια ἔτη. (Rev. 20:5) | The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were finished. |
Genitive Constructions Restricting Adjectives or Verbs
Below are genitives in constructions in which they restrict adjectives or verbs (A + Ngen or V + Ngen).
1.20. With adjectives (and occasionally adverbs). Genitives that restrict the comparative forms of adjectives or adverbs often express comparison and require “than” in English translation. There are also some adjectives and adverbs whose meanings are fine-tuned or restricted by the genitive case.
1.21. With verbs. Genitive nouns can directly modify or restrict verbs and thus function as adverbs. Truly adverbial genitives are not widely used in the NT. Under this category we would include two functions of the genitive that are often treated separately by other grammars: time and price.
1. Genitive expressing time
| ἦλθεν δὲ καὶ Νικόδημος, ὁ ἐλθὼν πρὸς αὐτὸν νυκτὸς τὸ πρῶτον (John 19:39) | And Nicodemus, who had first come at night, also came. |
Functioning as an adverbial genitive of time, νυκτός restricts Nicodemus’s previous visit to the nighttime. Temporal genitives are most often employed to designate the time within which something occurs as opposed to a specific point, short or long, at which something occurs (dative, e.g., “Nicodemus came on that night”), or an extent of time (accusative, e.g., “Nicodemus came for the night”).
| τιμῆς ἠγοράσθητε· μὴ γίνεσθε δοῦλοι ἀνθρώπων. (1 Cor. 7:23) | You were bought for a price; do not become people’s slaves. |
Here the genitive answers the question “How much?” and thus restricts the meaning of the verb “bought.”
1.22. As objects of verbs. Some verbs, especially those expressing perception/sensation (e.g., ἀκούω, ἅπτω, κρατέω), volition/acquisition (e.g., ἐπιθυμέω, τυγχάνω), emotion (e.g., ἀνέχω, ἐπιμελέομαι), memory (e.g., ἐπιλανθάνομαι, μιμνῄσκομαι, μνημονεύω), and governing (e.g., ἄρχω, κυριεύω), as well as certain verbs with prepositional prefixes (especially verbs prefixed by ἀπό, ἐκ, and κατά), may take their direct objects in the genitive case (S + V + DOgen). If you are unsure whether a particular verb can take a complement (direct object) in the genitive case, consult BDAG.
| ἀκούσας δὲ ὄχλου διαπορευομένου ἐπυνθάνετο τί εἴη τοῦτο· (Luke 18:36) | And having heard a crowd passing by, he asked what this might be/mean. |
There is some debate concerning the fact that ἀκούω can take either the accusative or genitive as its direct object. The traditional understanding is that ἀκούω with the genitive means to hear without understanding, while ἀκούω with the accusative means to hear with comprehension (Robertson 506). This distinction is not always observed in the NT, however. We agree with Wallace (133) that Koine Greek writers did not follow strict rules when deciding to use the genitive or accusative case with ἀκούω.
| οὐχ ὅτι κυριεύομεν ὑμῶν τῆς πίστεως, ἀλλὰ συνεργοί ἐσμεν τῆς χαρᾶς ὑμῶν (2 Cor. 1:24) | Not that we rule your faith, but we are fellow workers for your joy. |
1.23. Genitive absolute. This genitive construction will be covered in chapter 10, on participles.
For Practice
1.24. Analyze the genitives (in bold) in the following texts from Rom. 8 and 2 Pet. 2, identifying their various possible functions. We have not included genitive objects of prepositions.
1Οὐδὲν ἄρα νῦν κατάκριμα τοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ· 2ὁ γὰρ νόμος τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ζωῆς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἠλευθέρωσέν σε ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ τοῦ θανάτου. 3τὸ γὰρ ἀδύνατον τοῦ νόμου, ἐν ᾧ ἠσθένει διὰ τῆς σαρκός, ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἑαυτοῦ υἱὸν πέμψας ἐν ὁμοιώματι σαρκὸς ἁμαρτίας καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας κατέκρινε τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἐν τῇ σαρκί, 4ἵνα τὸ δικαίωμα τοῦ νόμου πληρωθῇ ἐν ἡμῖν τοῖς μὴ κατὰ σάρκα περιπατοῦσιν ἀλλὰ κατὰ πνεῦμα· (Rom. 8:1–4)
13ἀδικούμενοι μισθὸν ἀδικίας· ἡδονὴν ἡγούμενοι τὴν ἐν ἡμέρᾳ τρυφήν, σπίλοι καὶ μῶμοι ἐντρυφῶντες ἐν ταῖς ἀπάταις αὐτῶν συνευωχούμενοι ὑμῖν, 14ὀφθαλμοὺς ἔχοντες μεστοὺς μοιχαλίδος καὶ ἀκαταπαύστους ἁμαρτίας, δελεάζοντες ψυχὰς ἀστηρίκτους, καρδίαν γεγυμνασμένην πλεονεξίας ἔχοντες, κατάρας τέκνα, 15καταλιπόντες εὐθεῖαν ὁδὸν ἐπλανήθησαν, ἐξακολουθήσαντες τῇ ὁδῷ τοῦ Βαλαὰμ τοῦ Βοσὸρ ὃς μισθὸν ἀδικίας ἠγάπησεν 16ἔλεγξιν δὲ ἔσχεν ἰδίας παρανομίας· ὑποζύγιον ἄφωνον ἐν ἀνθρώπου φωνῇ φθεγξάμενον ἐκώλυσεν τὴν τοῦ προφήτου παραφρονίαν. (2 Pet. 2:13–16)
The Dative Case
1.25. The dative case is often described as the case of personal interest, location, and means.23 However, this does not necessarily convey its meaning. More comprehensively, the dative case may be defined as conveying relation.24 This seems to account for its various usages. A very common use of the dative is to indicate the indirect object, though this is only one of its functions. Also common is the function of the dative as an adjunct modifying the verb.
Indirect Object (Advantage, Disadvantage)
1.26. A substantive in the dative case may be used to specify the indirect object in a sentence, that is, the person or thing toward which the action of a verb form is directed (“I gave authority to him”). This also includes what grammarians label the dative of advantage or disadvantage: the dative indicates the person or thing for whose benefit (advantage) or detriment (disadvantage) the action occurs, depending on the broader context.
Reference or Respect (Possession)
1.27. In this use, an action is done more generally “with reference to” or “with respect to” something or someone, indicated by the dative. This usage may be closest to the dative’s fundamental meaning. We have also included the dative of possession here.
This is a classic example of reference or respect cited by most grammars.
| οὐχ ὁ θεὸς ἐξελέξατο τοὺς πτωχοὺς τῷ κόσμῳ πλουσίους ἐν πίστει; (James 2:5) | Has not God chosen the poor in [with respect to or in the world’s view] the world to be rich in faith? |
Instrumental (Agent, Cause, Manner, Means)
1.28. Though most grammars tend to separate these usages, they are frequently difficult and/or unnecessary to distinguish.25 In the sentence “She killed him with a sword,” is “sword” the means, the instrument, or the manner (the way) in which the killing takes place? (English “with” is itself ambiguous.) The dative specifies that someone brings about an action in relation to something else (e.g., a sword).
| καὶ νῦν δόξασόν με σύ, πάτερ, παρὰ σεαυτῷ τῇ δόξῃ ᾗ εἶχον πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι παρὰ σοί. (John 17:5) | And now you glorify me, Father, in your presence with the glory that I had with you before the world was. (Is this instrument or manner?) | |
| τῇ ἀπιστίᾳ ἐξεκλάσθησαν, σὺ δὲ τῇ πίστει ἕστηκας. (Rom. 11:20) | They were cut off on account of their unbelief, but you stand on account of your faith. (causal; BDF §196) | |
| πίστει νοοῦμεν κατηρτίσθαι τοὺς αἰῶνας ῥήματι θεοῦ (Heb. 11:3) | By faith we know that the universe was created by the word of God. | |
| Καὶ εἶδον ἕνα ἄγγελον ἑστῶτα ἐν τῷ ἡλίῳ, καὶ ἔκραξεν φωνῇ μεγάλῃ (Rev. 19:17) | And I saw an angel standing in the sun, and he cried out with a great voice. |
1.29. This usage could easily fall under the instrumental dative or even the dative of respect. The dative indicates that an action is performed in association with someone or something else.
| καὶ πολλοὶ τελῶναι καὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ συνανέκειντο τῷ Ἰησοῦ καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ (Mark 2:15) | And many tax collectors and sinners sat at the table with Jesus and his disciples. |
Association is suggested by the verb with the συν- prefix.
| διὸ καὶ πυκνότερον αὐτὸν μεταπεμπόμενος ὡμίλει αὐτῷ. (Acts 24:26) | Therefore, also summoning him very often, he conversed with him. | |
| εἰ γὰρ τοῖς πνευματικοῖς αὐτῶν ἐκοινώνησαν τὰ ἔθνη, ὀφείλουσιν καὶ ἐν τοῖς σαρκικοῖς λειτουργῆσαι αὐτοῖς. (Rom. 15:27) | For if the nations shared in their spiritual blessings, they ought to minister to them also in material things. |
Location (Place, Sphere)
1.30. The dative case specifies the location, either physical (place) or metaphorical (sphere or realm), where an action takes place. “Sphere” could also fit under the dative of respect.
| καὶ οἱ στρατιῶται πλέξαντες στέφανον ἐξ ἀκανθῶν ἐπέθηκαν αὐτοῦ τῇ κεφαλῇ (John 19:2) | And the soldiers, having woven together a crown of thorns, placed it on his head. (physical location) | |
| τῇ δεξιᾷ οὖν τοῦ θεοῦ ὑψωθείς (Acts 2:33) | Therefore, having been exalted to the right hand of God. (spatial location) | |
| εἴ γε ἐπιμένετε τῇ πίστει (Col. 1:23) | If indeed you remain in faith. (sphere) a | |
| ἵνα ὑμᾶς προσαγάγῃ τῷ θεῷ, θανατωθεὶς μὲν σαρκὶ ζῳοποιηθεὶς δὲ πνεύματι· (1 Pet. 3:18) | In order that he might offer you to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit. | |
| aConstantine R. Campbell, Colossians and Philemon: A Handbook on the Greek Text (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2013), 19. | ||
The dative πνεύματι seems to indicate metaphorical location (sphere), though it could also be classified as respect or manner (again showing how difficult it sometimes is to sharply distinguish these functions of the dative).
Time
1.31. As an extension of the category of location, the dative also indicates a particular place or point in time (cf. the genitive and accusative of time).26
| δεῖ αὐτὸν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἀπελθεῖν καὶ . . . ἀποκτανθῆναι καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἐγερθῆναι. (Matt. 16:21) | It is necessary for him to depart into Jerusalem and . . . to be put to death and to be raised on the third day. | |
| καὶ αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ ἐπιστᾶσα ἀνθωμολογεῖτο τῷ θεῷ (Luke 2:38) | And at that very hour she came and was praising God. | |
| Οὐαὶ οὐαί, ἡ πόλις ἡ μεγάλη, Βαβυλὼν ἡ πόλις ἡ ἰσχυρά, ὅτι μιᾷ ὥρᾳ ἦλθεν ἡ κρίσις σου. (Rev. 18:10) | Woe, woe, the great city, Babylon the strong city, for in one hour your judgment has come. |
Direct Object
1.32. Some verbal processes are completed (i.e., take a direct object) not with a noun in the accusative case but with one in the dative case (S + V + DOdat). That is, the meanings of some verbs seem to lend themselves to the notion of relation communicated by the dative.27
The verb προσκυνέω (to worship) frequently takes the dative case (e.g., Matt. 2:11; 4:9; John 4:21; Heb. 1:6; Rev. 4:10), but it also can take the accusative (Matt. 4:10; Rev. 9:20; 13:8; 14:9, 11).
After Certain Adjectives
1.33. Some adjectives, especially belonging to the word group of “likeness” (e.g., ὅμοιος), or adjectives compounded with συν- (e.g., σύμμορφος) are commonly accompanied by a noun in the dative (BDF §194[2]). Some examples might be classified as datives of reference (Wallace 174).
| Ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν κόκκῳ σινάπεως (Matt. 13:31) | The kingdom of heaven is likened to a mustard seed. | |
| ὃς μετασχηματίσει τὸ σῶμα τῆς ταπεινώσεως ἡμῶν σύμμορφον τῷ σώματι τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ (Phil. 3:21) | Who will transform our humble bodies in conformity to his body of glory. | |
| καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ὅμοιος ὁράσει λίθῳ ἰάσπιδι καὶ σαρδίῳ, καὶ ἶρις κυκλόθεν τοῦ θρόνου ὅμοιος ὁράσει σμαραγδίνῳ. (Rev. 4:3) | And the one seated on the throne [was] like in appearance to a jasper and ruby stone, and [there was] a rainbow around the throne like in appearance to an emerald. |
The dative ὁράσει (appearance) in both instances is probably a dative of means or manner (“in appearance”) or respect (“with respect to appearance”).
1.34. Analyze the datives (in bold) in the following texts from Rom. 8, identifying their various possible functions. We have not included datives that occur with prepositions.
7διότι τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκὸς ἔχθρα εἰς θεόν, τῷ γὰρ νόμῳ τοῦ θεοῦ οὐχ ὑποτάσσεται, οὐδὲ γὰρ δύναται. . . . 12Ἄρα οὖν, ἀδελφοί, ὀφειλέται ἐσμέν, οὐ τῇ σαρκὶ τοῦ κατὰ σάρκα ζῆν. . . . 14ὅσοι γὰρ πνεύματι θεοῦ ἄγονται, οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν θεοῦ. . . . 16αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα συμμαρτυρεῖ τῷ πνεύματι ἡμῶν ὅτι ἐσμὲν τέκνα θεοῦ. . . . 20τῇ γὰρ ματαιότητι ἡ κτίσις ὑπετάγη, οὐχ ἑκοῦσα ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸν ὑποτάξαντα. . . . 24τῇ γὰρ ἐλπίδι ἐσώθημεν· ἐλπὶς δὲ βλεπομένη οὐκ ἔστιν ἐλπίς, ὃ γὰρ βλέπει τίς ἐλπίζει; . . . 26Ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα συναντιλαμβάνεται τῇ ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν· . . . ἀλλὰ αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα ὑπερεντυγχάνει στεναγμοῖς ἀλαλήτοις. . . . 28Οἴδαμεν δὲ ὅτι τοῖς ἀγαπῶσι τὸν θεὸν πάντα συνεργεῖ εἰς ἀγαθόν, τοῖς κατὰ πρόθεσιν κλητοῖς οὖσιν. (Rom. 8:7, 12, 14, 16, 20, 24, 26, 28)
The Accusative Case
1.35. In Classical Greek the accusative case, thought by some to be the oldest case (Robertson 466), was employed more than any other, including the nominative. By the Koine period, though the accusative still was the most used of the oblique cases, its range had diminished. Its predominant uses in the NT are as the object of verbs and prepositions and as the “subject” of infinitives. Some grammars call it the case of limitation or extent;28 Louw labels it “the indefinite case.”29 Porter says that it “expresses an idea without defining it.”30 Since the meanings of limitation (as expressed by the accusative case) and restriction (as expressed by the genitive) significantly overlap, it might be helpful to repeat that the accusative frequently limits the action of verbs as the default case for their direct objects, whereas the genitive more often restricts substantives. Verbs in general take accusative direct objects; verbs of specific types or with particular nuances can take their objects in the genitive or dative cases. Adverbial accusatives are more frequent and flexible than adverbial genitives.
1.36. Most verbs take their direct object in the accusative case: S + V + DOacc
| Ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου (Mark 1:3) | Prepare the Lord’s way. | |
| ἠγάπησας δικαιοσύνην καὶ ἐμίσησας ἀνομίαν· (Heb. 1:9) | You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness. | |
| Καὶ ὅτε ἤνοιξεν τὴν σφραγῖδα τὴν δευτέραν, ἤκουσα τοῦ δευτέρου ζῴου λέγοντος· Ἔρχου. (Rev. 6:3) | And when he opened the second seal, I heard the second living creature saying, “Come.” |
Cognate
1.37. This is really just a type of direct object. As the label suggests, the construction involves a verb taking its cognate (same-root) noun as an object or as an adverbial modifier. In English we also have cognate direct objects (we can sing songs, pray prayers, and fight good fights) and adverbs (we can pray prayerfully and rejoice joyfully). In both languages cognate constructions are sometimes used for emphasis.
| καὶ μὴ δυνάμενοι προσενέγκαι αὐτῷ διὰ τὸν ὄχλον ἀπεστέγασαν τὴν στέγην ὅπου ἦν (Mark 2:4) | And being unable to bring [him] to him [i.e., to Jesus] because of the crowd, they unroofed the roof where he [i.e., Jesus] was. |
This awkward translation preserves the cognate accusative, but “they made a hole in the roof” would certainly be more accurate English, since there is no indication that they removed the entire roof.
| εἰ οὖν τὴν ἴσην δωρεὰν ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς ὡς καὶ ἡμῖν πιστεύσασιν ἐπὶ τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, ἐγὼ τίς ἤμην δυνατὸς κωλῦσαι τὸν θεόν; (Acts 11:17) | Therefore if God gave them the same gift as [he gave] also to us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I, that I could hinder God? |
This time the cognates “gave” and “gift” work well in English.
The second of these cognate pairs is usually rendered in English as “you made your good confession”; alas, this seems to blunt Paul’s force.
| ἐάν τις ἴδῃ τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ ἁμαρτάνοντα ἁμαρτίαν μὴ πρὸς θάνατον (1 John 5:16) | If anyone sees his/her brother or sister sinning a sin not [leading] to death. | |
| ὃς ἐμαρτύρησεν τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὅσα εἶδεν. (Rev. 1:2) | Who testifies to the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ, as much as he saw. |
Double
1.38. Some verbs may have two objects in the accusative case that are not joined by a coordinating conjunction such as καί. In these cases we can have (1) a personal (remote/indirect) and impersonal (direct) object (e.g., Alex gave Mack a book) or (2) an object (direct) and predicate complement (e.g., Peter also gave a book as a present). At first glance, all of the examples below seem to involve objects that are personal (ὑμᾶς, τοὺς προφήτας, and αὐτὸν refer to persons) and impersonal (ἅ, γάλα, ὑπόδειγμα, and στῦλον are things). The distinction between the two types of double accusative depends not solely on the personal nature of one of the accusatives but rather on whether or not both accusatives in a doublet refer to the same person or entity. If they do, they make up an object/complement double accusative (in the English example above, “book” and “present” have the same referent). If they do not, they make up a personal/impersonal double accusative (“Mack” and “book” have different referents).
In this example, we reversed the word order in English translation so that the articular τοὺς προφήτας is the direct object and the anarthrous (without the article) ὑπόδειγμα is the predicate complement.
| ὁ νικῶν ποιήσω αὐτὸν στῦλον ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ θεοῦ μου (Rev. 3:12) | The one who overcomes, I will make him/her a pillar in the temple of my God. (object/complement) |
The personal pronoun αὐτόν is the direct object, and the impersonal noun στῦλον is the predicate complement. We could add “to be” (“I will make him/her to be a pillar”) to our English translation, but it is not necessary.
Adverbial
1.39. As the label suggests, nominals or adjectives in the accusative case can function as adverbs. An accusative can indicate how and how long, how far or to what extent (manner/measure), when (time), and with respect/reference to what an action occurs.
1. Manner
| ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς παρακούσας τὸν λόγον λαλούμενον λέγει τῷ ἀρχισυναγώγῳ· Μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε. (Mark 5:36) | But Jesus, overhearing what was being said, said to the synagogue ruler, “Don’t be afraid; only believe.” |
The adjective μόνον cannot modify anything but the verb in this sentence. We have an unambiguous adverbial accusative here, which answers the question “To what extent . . . ?”
2. Measure
| καὶ αὐτὸς ἀπεσπάσθη ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν ὡσεὶ λίθου βολὴν, καὶ θεὶς τὰ γόνατα προσηύχετο (Luke 22:41) | And he drew away from them about a stone’s throw, and, having gotten to his knees, he prayed. |
Here the extent (“How far . . . ?”) of Jesus’ withdrawal is indicated by accusative βολήν, which is further restricted by the genitive λίθου.
3. Time
| λέγει αὐτοῖς· Ἔρχεσθε καὶ ὄψεσθε. ἦλθαν οὖν καὶ εἶδαν ποῦ μένει, καὶ παρ᾽ αὐτῷ ἔμειναν τὴν ἡμέραν ἐκείνην· (John 1:39) | He said to them, “Come and you will see.” So they went and saw where he was staying and stayed with him that day. |
In this example, extent of time, rather than extent of space, is indicated by the accusatives τὴν ἡμέραν ἐκείνην.
4. Respect/reference
| ἀληθεύοντες δὲ ἐν ἀγάπῃ αὐξήσωμεν εἰς αὐτὸν τὰ πάντα, ὅς ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλή, Χριστός (Eph. 4:15) | But speaking the truth in love, let us grow in all respects into him who is the head, Christ. |
With Infinitives
1.40. Infinitives can take both a subject and direct object in the accusative case. When, as is often the case, the subject of the infinitive is different from that of the main verb, the infinitive’s subject will be in the accusative case. Some older grammars explained the accusative subject of the infinitive as the accusative of general reference.31 We will simply refer to the accusative functioning as the subject of the infinitive. And although infinitives have a wider range of usage in Greek than in English, we do have at least a partial equivalent for accusatives functioning as subjects. In the sentence “God enables us to love them,” the word us is both the direct object of “enables” and also the functional subject of “to love.” Subjects and complements of infinitives of being in Greek will also usually be in the accusative case (but note an exception below). When a Greek infinitive has both a subject and an object in the accusative case, word order or context almost always clarifies which is which.
| λέγει αὐτοῖς· Ὑμεῖς δὲ τίνα με λέγετε εἶναι; (Matt. 16:15) | He said to them, “But whom do you claim me to be?” |
This translation preserves the somewhat awkward infinitive clause and takes με as the subject and τίνα as the predicate accusative of εἶναι, despite the Greek word order.
| Οὐ γὰρ θέλω ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, τὸ μυστήριον τοῦτο (Rom. 11:25) | For I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers and sisters, of this mystery. |
In this instance, sense and word order point in the same direction: ὑμᾶς is the subject of the infinitive and τὸ μυστήριον τοῦτο is its object.
| καὶ γὰρ ὀφείλοντες εἶναι διδάσκαλοι διὰ τὸν χρόνον, πάλιν χρείαν ἔχετε τοῦ διδάσκειν ὑμᾶς τινὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τῆς ἀρχῆς τῶν λογίων τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ γεγόνατε χρείαν ἔχοντες γάλακτος, οὐ στερεᾶς τροφῆς. (Heb. 5:12) | For [although] you ought to be teachers by now, you have need for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God again, and you have become ones having need of milk, not solid food. |
Both the participle ὀφείλοντες and the predicate noun διδάσκαλοι are nominative (rather than accusative) around the first infinitive, εἶναι, because they agree with “you,” the subject of the main verb ἔχετε. With the shift in subject from “you” to “someone,” we also see a shift in case from the nominative to the accusative τινά used with the second infinitive διδάσκειν. Additionally, διδάσκειν is complemented by a double accusative: the personal object is ὑμᾶς and the impersonal object is τὰ στοιχεῖα. The presence of three accusatives with one infinitive demonstrates at least that the author thought his readers had mastered the elementary principles of grammar!
The first accusative is the subject of both πορνεῦσαι and φαγεῖν, and the second is the object of φαγεῖν alone.
For Practice
1.41. Analyze the accusatives (in bold) in the following texts, identifying their various possible functions. We have not included accusatives that occur with prepositions.
21κἀκεῖθεν ᾐτήσαντο βασιλέα, καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς τὸν Σαοὺλ υἱὸν Κίς, ἄνδρα ἐκ φυλῆς Βενιαμίν, ἔτη τεσσεράκοντα· 22καὶ μεταστήσας αὐτὸν ἤγειρεν τὸν Δαυὶδ αὐτοῖς εἰς βασιλέα, ᾧ καὶ εἶπεν μαρτυρήσας· Εὗρον Δαυὶδ τὸν τοῦ Ἰεσσαί, ἄνδρα κατὰ τὴν καρδίαν μου, ὃς ποιήσει πάντα τὰ θελήματά μου. 23τούτου ὁ θεὸς ἀπὸ τοῦ σπέρματος κατ᾽ ἐπαγγελίαν ἤγαγεν τῷ Ἰσραὴλ σωτῆρα Ἰησοῦν (Acts 13:21–23)
1Καὶ εἶδον ἄγγελον καταβαίνοντα ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, ἔχοντα τὴν κλεῖν τῆς ἀβύσσου καὶ ἅλυσιν μεγάλην ἐπὶ τὴν χεῖρα αὐτοῦ. 2καὶ ἐκράτησεν τὸν δράκοντα, ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαῖος, ὅς ἐστιν Διάβολος καὶ ὁ Σατανᾶς, καὶ ἔδησεν αὐτὸν χίλια ἔτη, 3καὶ ἔβαλεν αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν ἄβυσσον, καὶ ἔκλεισεν καὶ ἐσφράγισεν ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ, ἵνα μὴ πλανήσῃ ἔτι τὰ ἔθνη, ἄχρι τελεσθῇ τὰ χίλια ἔτη· μετὰ ταῦτα δεῖ λυθῆναι αὐτὸν μικρὸν χρόνον. 4Καὶ εἶδον θρόνους, καὶ ἐκάθισαν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς, καὶ κρίμα ἐδόθη αὐτοῖς, καὶ τὰς ψυχὰς τῶν πεπελεκισμένων διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ καὶ διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ οἵτινες οὐ προσεκύνησαν τὸ θηρίον οὐδὲ τὴν εἰκόνα αὐτοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἔλαβον τὸ χάραγμα ἐπὶ τὸ μέτωπον καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν χεῖρα αὐτῶν· καὶ ἔζησαν καὶ ἐβασίλευσαν μετὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ χίλια ἔτη. (Rev. 20:1–4)