THE ARTICLE (ὁ, ἡ, τό)
4.1. The Greek article occurs more frequently than any other word in the NT (19,867×), more than twice as many times as the next in line, καί (9,018×). Not only is the article numerous, it is also important, supremely so because it is used in a variety of ways that the English definite article is not. Technically, the term definite article is inaccurate in the case of Koine Greek. Greek has only one article, so there is no simple opposition between definite (“the”) and indefinite (“a, an”) articles as there is in English.1 In Koine Greek both εἷς, μία, ἕν (one) and τίς, τί (someone/something) are sometimes employed to indicate that someone or something is indefinite.2 Similarly, the article ὁ, ἡ, τό may—but does not have to—indicate definiteness. In other words, the presence of the article in Greek does not require that it be translated as the definite article in English, nor does the absence of the article in Greek require that an indefinite article be added to an English translation. The Greek article is not primarily used to make definite what would otherwise be indefinite. Probably because the article traces its origin to the demonstrative pronoun, its essential function is deictic; that is, it points.3
The article points in various ways, many of which can be translated into English:
As a pointer, the article precedes its head term and must agree with it in gender, number, and case. Occasionally the article will take the place of its referent (just as a pronoun would), but it can still be said to point to that referent (e.g., καὶ ἐπέθηκεν αὐτῇ τὰς χεῖρας, “and he laid his hands” [Luke 13:13]). An important distinctive of the Greek article is its ability to point to parts of speech other than nouns in such a way that it nominalizes, or assigns “nominal status” to, them.4 Thus articles may nominalize entire phrases and clauses as well as individual adjectives, adverbs, and participles.
4.2. Carson and Porter have more than adequately demonstrated that the presence and absence of the Greek article are not easily codified.5 Indeed, Carson is correct when he concludes, “I suspect that some uses are determined more by the ‘feel’ of the speaker or writer of the language than by unambiguous principles.”6 However much we might like it to be, it is not always true that the presence of the article indicates identity and its absence indicates quality. For example, as Levinsohn observes, when an anarthrous noun that “has unique referential identity” is used to signal discontinuity (point of departure) in a discourse, it indicates special prominence.7 As Carson and Porter have shown, there is significant overlap between arthrous and anarthrous categories of usage.8 Some articular nouns represent qualitative categories (e.g., Αἱ ἀλώπεκες φωλεοὺς ἔχουσιν καὶ τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ κατασκηνώσεις, “foxes have dens and birds of the sky, nests” [Matt. 8:20]), and some anarthrous nouns refer to particular, individual entities (e.g., καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς, “and the gates of Hades will not overpower it” [Matt. 16:18]). Porter (104) states, “Matters of particularity and individuality are established not on the basis of whether the article is present, but on the basis of the wider context.” For example, articles are often absent before definite nouns in prepositional phrases (e.g., Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, “in the beginning was the Word” [John 1:1]) and in some genitive constructions (e.g., ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς κόσμου ἕως τοῦ νῦν, “from the beginning of the world until now” [Matt. 24:21]) or when a participant or object is introduced for the first time in narrative (e.g., εἶδον . . . βιβλίον, “I saw . . . a scroll” [Rev. 5:1], which becomes τὸ βιβλίον, “the scroll,” in 5:2).
We offer Robertson’s dictum as both hortatory and cautionary: “The vital thing is to see the matter from the Greek point of view and find the reason for the use of the article” (756–57). The stark reality is that we must try to find reasons for the articles we encounter without being able to see NT matters from the first-century Greek point of view. Fortunately, there are enough interesting and idiosyncratic articular uses to keep students occupied for a long time. As you consider articles, you will probably notice their absence in places where you might include them in English translation, but this book will not undertake to explain those absences. Not only does the presence of the article provide more than sufficient challenge for us who are far removed temporally and linguistically from the NT documents; we are also not convinced that its absence is a necessary grammatical category. The presence or absence is notoriously elusive of concrete explanation. “It is sometimes claimed that an important theological issue is involved in the use or non-use of the article . . . ; but each instance needs to be discussed on its own merits, and in some instances it is hard to avoid the impression that usage is arbitrary” (Moule 111–12).
Particular
4.3. Although we maintain that the practice is misleading, discussion of ὁ, ἡ, τό as the “definite article” is not without some reason. The Greek article was indeed employed to distinguish one or more particular persons, places, or things from others. It was also variously used to point forward or back to particular items in discourse. Consequently, the Greek article can be said to fill the grammatical slot of an identifier. The basic function of the article is to point out; how it does so is capable of more than one interpretation or English translation.
4.4. The following examples serve to illustrate the wide range of ways in which the article can point at particular nouns, including proper nouns and abstract nouns.
| ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· (Matt. 21:21) | And answering, Jesus said to them. |
The article points to the person identified by the name “Jesus,” very likely to indicate the shift of subject back to Jesus from the disciples (v. 20). This takes some getting used to because we do not use definite articles with personal names in English (though we do, for example, with rivers [the Mississippi, the Nile, etc.]) and because Koine Greek may seem inconsistent in its use of articles with proper nouns. In other words, we are dealing with an idiom we don’t quite “get” and therefore can’t always explain adequately (Wallace 246). Sometimes, as above, articles with proper nouns appear to bring someone or some place back into a story line (functioning anaphorically, i.e., pointing back), sometimes they seem to lend emphasis to a name or designate a title, and sometimes they may serve solely to identify the case of an indeclinable name (Porter 107). But none of these provide for any hard-and-fast rules. In the end we will agree with Robertson (759) that “it seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons.”
| Καὶ περιῆγεν τὰς κώμας κύκλῳ διδάσκων. (Mark 6:6) | And he was going around the villages on a circuit teaching. | |
| πλὴν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐλθὼν ἆρα εὑρήσει τὴν πίστιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς; (Luke 18:8) | However, the Son of Man having come, will he find faith upon the earth? |
“Faith” is an abstract noun, and abstract nouns (e.g., ἀγάπη, ἀλήθεια, εἰρήνη, χάρις) are often articular in Greek, perhaps to particularize them (Porter 107). We could certainly make the case that a particular type of faith evidenced by the widow in the preceding parable (vv. 2–5) is in view here.
| Ἴδε ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. (John 1:36) | Behold, the Lamb of God. |
The first article points to a definite lamb, and the second points to a definite God, but only the former is translated into English. John had particular, individual beings in mind; thus the English definite article is required to translate ὁ ἀμνός, and an uppercase G is required in the translation of τοῦ θεοῦ. This further demonstrates that the English article functions differently from the Greek article; here the Greek articles simply point at ἀμνός and θεοῦ to distinguish them from other lambs and gods.9
| εἰς τὸ μὴ ταχέως σαλευθῆναι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ νοὸς μηδὲ θροεῖσθαι (2 Thess. 2:2) | So that you not be quickly shaken from your [rather than “the”] composure nor disturbed. | |
| ὁ γὰρ θέλων ζωὴν ἀγαπᾶν καὶ ἰδεῖν ἡμέρας ἀγαθὰς παυσάτω τὴν γλῶσσαν ἀπὸ κακοῦ καὶ χείλη τοῦ μὴ λαλῆσαι δόλον (1 Pet. 3:10) | For the one wishing to love life and to see good days must keep his/her tongue from evil and his/her lips from speaking deceit. |
With Adjectives
4.5. The article may be used as a nominalizer with an adjective to mark it as substantival or to distinguish it as being in either the predicate or attributive position (see chap. 3).
| τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον· (Matt. 6:11) | Our daily bread give to us today. |
The first article is present probably because of the possessive pronoun ἡμῶν.10 The second article marks ἐπιούσιον as an attributive adjective.
| οἵτινες ἐνδείκνυνται τὸ ἔργον τοῦ νόμου γραπτὸν ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις αὐτῶν (Rom. 2:15) | Who show the work of the law [is] written on their hearts. |
The article’s position before the noun and that it is not repeated before the adjective make the latter predicative.
Because it is before the adjective ἁγίοις, the article both particularizes and nominalizes it.
With Other Parts of Speech
4.6. As with adjectives, articles can nominalize other parts of speech (participles, adverbs, and prepositional phrases). So too, they can “adjectivize” certain parts of speech.
1. Nominalizing. In the following examples the articles nominalize various parts of speech or turn them into noun equivalents or nominals.
| ὁ ἐπὶ τοῦ δώματος μὴ καταβάτω ἆραι τὰ ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας αὐτοῦ (Matt. 24:17) | The one on the roof must not go down to take things from his/her house. (prepositional phrases) |
| καὶ ἀφεὶς αὐτοὺς πάλιν ἐμβὰς ἀπῆλθεν εἰς τὸ πέραν. (Mark 8:13) | And having left them and having embarked again, he went away to the other side. (πέραν is an adverb that normally means “beyond”) |
| ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν δὲ ἔσται ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καθήμενος ἐκ δεξιῶν τῆς δυνάμεως τοῦ θεοῦ. (Luke 22:69) | And from now [on] the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God. (adverb) |
| τὸ γὰρ τί προσευξώμεθα καθὸ δεῖ οὐκ οἴδαμεν (Rom. 8:26) | For we do not know what to pray as we ought. |
The article marks the entire clause τί προσευξώμεθα καθὸ δεῖ as the direct object of οἴδαμεν.
| ὁ γὰρ εἰπών Μὴ μοιχεύσῃς εἶπεν καί Μὴ φονεύσῃς· (James 2:11) | For the one who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” (participle) |
2. Adjectivizing. In the following examples the articles either turn various parts of speech into adjectival modifiers or clarify what they modify (in the case of participles).
| οἱ δὲ ὄχλοι οἱ προάγοντες αὐτὸν καὶ οἱ ἀκολουθοῦντες ἔκραζον λέγοντες· (Matt. 21:9) | And the crowds that went before him and that followed [or those who followed] were crying out, saying. |
Since participles are technically verbal adjectives, the boldface Greek articles do not make προάγοντες and ἀκολουθοῦντες adjectival, but they certainly indicate that both participles are in agreement with ὄχλοι, are functioning adjectivally, and should be considered separately from the adverbial λέγοντες. The first participle is an attributive modifier of ὄχλοι; the second could be either another modifier of ὄχλοι (referring to the crowds behind as well as in front of Jesus) or a separate substantive (referring separately to those following Jesus).
| εἴ πως καταντήσω εἰς τὴν ἐξανάστασιν τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν. (Phil. 3:11) | If somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead. |
The article τήν marks the prepositional phrase ἐκ νεκρῶν as adjectival, modifying τὴν ἐξανάστασιν. Similarly employed articles could be translated as relative pronouns (e.g., the resurrection that is from the dead), but their function remains to demonstrate that a prepositional phrase is adjectival.
Anaphoric Use
4.7. This can be seen as a specialized function of the use of the article with nouns, which was discussed above. Some grammars call this the article of previous reference. A common pattern is for the introduction of an item to be anarthrous and then for subsequent references to the same item to have the anaphoric article, pointing back to its first (anarthrous) mention.
| καὶ συνήχθησαν πρὸς αὐτὸν ὄχλοι πολλοί, ὥστε αὐτὸν εἰς πλοῖον ἐμβάντα καθῆσθαι, καὶ πᾶς ὁ ὄχλος ἐπὶ τὸν αἰγιαλὸν εἱστήκει. (Matt. 13:2) | And large crowds gathered to him so that he, having gone into a boat, sat and the/that whole crowd stood on the shore. |
Despite the shift from plural to singular, the same crowd of people seems to be in view.
| ὃ ἐθεασάμεθα καὶ αἱ χεῖρες ἡμῶν ἐψηλάφησαν, περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς—καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἐφανερώθη (1 John 1:1–2) | What we saw and our hands touched concerning the word of life—and this/that life was manifested. |
The article before the second occurrence of ζωή is anaphoric, referring back to the particular life just mentioned. Anaphoric articles are often used after an anarthrous noun has been introduced (the introduction of τῆς ζωῆς is arthrous likely because it modifies the arthrous τοῦ λόγου; see §4.12, on Apollonius’s canon, below).
| Τί ὄφελος, ἀδελφοί μου, ἐὰν πίστιν λέγῃ τις ἔχειν ἔργα δὲ μὴ ἔχῃ; μὴ δύναται ἡ πίστις σῶσαι αὐτόν; (James 2:14) | What is the profit, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Is that faith able to save him/her? |
The article is anaphoric, referring back to the first mention of faith (without the article).
| ἰδοὺ θρόνος ἔκειτο ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον καθήμενος (Rev. 4:2) | Look, a throne was placed in heaven, and there was one seated upon the/that throne. |
The introduction of the throne is anarthrous (even though it is a specific throne that John sees). All the remaining mentions of the throne in Rev. 4:2–11 contain anaphoric articles that point back to its first mention (vv. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10) in the pericope.
Categorical/Generic Use
4.8. Articles point out categories or classes. Where the particular article distinguishes one or more individual entities from others, the categorical article designates one or more entities as representative (when the substantive is singular) or definitive (when the substantive is plural) of an entire class/category. We can sometimes translate singular, categorical articles with the indefinite “a”/“an” in English.
| λέγει γὰρ ἡ γραφή· Βοῦν ἀλοῶντα οὐ φιμώσεις, καί· Ἄξιος ὁ ἐργάτης τοῦ μισθοῦ αὐτοῦ. (1 Tim. 5:18) | For Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox treading grain,” and “A/the worker is worthy of his/her wage.” |
Although most English translations render the boldface article as “the,” the translation “a” works just as well and avoids giving the impression that a particular worker is in view. “A worker” here represents the class of all working people.
| ἐν γὰρ τῷ Μωϋσέως νόμῳ γέγραπται· Οὐ κημώσεις βοῦν ἀλοῶντα. μὴ τῶν βοῶν μέλει τῷ θεῷ, (1 Cor. 9:9) | For in the law of Moses is written, “You shall not muzzle an ox treading grain.” God isn’t concerned about oxen, is he? |
“Oxen” defines a class.
Other Uses
4.9. Articles can stand alone as substantives, indicate case for indeclinable or partially declinable words (proper nouns, infinitives, and adverbs), bracket units of thought, distinguish a subject from a predicate nominative (see chap. 1, on case), and introduce genitives and indirect speech or quotations. Some of the examples below also fit the categories above; that is, the article often serves more than one purpose.
| οἱ δὲ λέγουσιν αὐτῷ· Οὐκ ἔχομεν ὧδε εἰ μὴ πέντε ἄρτους καὶ δύο ἰχθύας. (Matt. 14:17) | And they said to him, “We have here only five loaves and two fish.” |
The article, standing alone, is the subject of the finite verb λέγουσιν. In narrative, οἱ δέ often acts as a “switch reference” device to indicate a shift to a new subject (see chap. 13, on discourse considerations).
| ὥσπερ γὰρ ἡ ἀστραπὴ ἀστράπτουσα ἐκ τῆς ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανὸν εἰς τὴν ὑπ᾽ οὐρανὸν λάμπει (Luke 17:24) | For as lightning flashing from one part of the sky shines into another part of the sky. |
Both articles are simple objects of prepositions (and in turn are modified by prepositional phrases).
| Τῇ ἐπαύριον πάλιν εἱστήκει ὁ Ἰωάννης καὶ ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ δύο (John 1:35) | On the next day again, John stood and two of his disciples. |
This time the article makes the indeclinable adverb ἐπαύριον dative as well as nominalizing it.
| καὶ ἐμβλέψας τῷ Ἰησοῦ περιπατοῦντι λέγει· Ἴδε ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. (John 1:36) | And having seen Jesus walking, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God.” |
Whatever else it may be doing, the article indicates that the partially declinable proper noun Ἰησοῦ is dative.
| καὶ τὰ νῦν λέγω ὑμῖν (Acts 5:38) | And concerning present things I tell you. |
Along with nominalizing and assigning a case to the adverb νῦν, the article makes it plural.
In both uses the boldface article and the italic head noun “bracket” what is between them, marking off a unit of thought.
| τὸ γὰρ· Οὐ μοιχεύσεις, Οὐ φονεύσεις, Οὐ κλέψεις, Οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις (Rom. 13:9) | For “Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not covet.” | |
| or For the commandments “Do not . . .” |
The article probably introduces a quotation (τό functions like an opening double quotation mark) and should not be translated, but it could be shorthand for the second table of the law.11
| τίς γὰρ οἶδεν ἀνθρώπων τὰ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου εἰ μὴ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τὸ ἐν αὐτῷ; (1 Cor. 2:11) | For who among persons knows the things/thoughts of a person if not the spirit of the person that [is] in him/her? |
The neuter plural article is substantival, filling the slot of a head noun modified by a genitive. The last article τό functions as an “adjectivizer,” which turns the prepositional phrase into an attributive modifier of τὸ πνεῦμα.
| εἰ δὲ αἰσχρὸν γυναικὶ τὸ κείρασθαι ἢ ξυρᾶσθαι, κατακαλυπτέσθω. (1 Cor. 11:6) | But if for a woman to cut off [her hair] or to shave is disgraceful, she should cover up. |
Despite the word order, the placement of the article shows that the infinitives are the subject and αἰσχρὸν is a predicate adjective.
| καὶ ταύτην τὴν φωνὴν ἡμεῖς ἠκούσαμεν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ἐνεχθεῖσαν (2 Pet. 1:18) | And we heard this voice carried from heaven. |
The article in one of the predicate positions is used with both near and far demonstrative modifiers (see chap. 2, on pronouns).
| ἐγὼ τὸ Ἄλφα καὶ τὸ Ὦ, ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος, ἡ ἀρχὴ καὶ τὸ τέλος. (Rev. 22:13) | I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. |
These articles not only nominalize a series of letters and adjectives but also turn them into titles.
Granville Sharp’s Rule
4.10. Sharp’s rule can be simplified to state that the use of an article only before the first of two or more singular, personal substantives (A [art.] + S + καί + S) in the same case and joined by καί indicates that “the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first.”12 The rule, one of six regarding articular use for which Sharp is responsible, “is in fact quite complex, too complex to analyze here.”13 Because it has been misunderstood and misapplied, it is imperative to recognize that Sharp’s rule is conclusive only with singular, personal, common (not proper) nouns and substantival adjectives or participles. In cases where all of the above restrictions do not obtain, there will still be some conceptual link between the substantives, but they may or may not refer to the same entity.14
The rule is followed: the King and Lord are the same person and further define the blessed and only Ruler.
| καὶ ἐποίησεν ἡμᾶς βασιλείαν, ἱερεῖς τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ—αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων· ἀμήν. (Rev. 1:6) | And he made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father—to him [be] the glory and power for ever [and ever]. Amen. |
The rule is followed: “God” and “his [Jesus’] Father” are the same person.
| ἔλεγον τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ· Ὅτι μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐσθίει; (Mark 2:16) | They [scribes and Pharisees] said to his disciples, “[Why] does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” |
The rule does not apply here, because the nouns in the phrase “tax collectors and sinners” are plural, and yet there definitely is a link between them: the two distinct groups are treated as united (Wallace 278–79).
Colwell’s Rule
4.11. This rule pertains to nominatives joined by the copula εἶναι. The rule states, “A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb, [but] it does not have the article when it precedes the verb.”15 The rule, to which Colwell identifies exceptions (definite, arthrous predicate nominatives follow the verb in 90 percent of instances, and definite, anarthrous predicate nominatives precede the verb in 87 percent),16 assumes the definiteness of the nouns under its rubric.17 That is, it is not a rule about determining definiteness but an observation of a pattern: predicate nominatives that are already determined to be definite tend to lack the article when they precede the verb εἶναι. Based on this pattern, Colwell predicts definiteness in more-ambiguous contexts. The opening verse of John’s Gospel contains one of the many passages where this rule suggests the translation of a predicate as a definite noun. The noun θεός in the clause καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος is definite, it is suggested, because it precedes the verb and is anarthrous. The clause should be translated, “And the Word was God.” Yet, as Carson points out, Colwell’s statistics are insufficient to predict definiteness.18 The sample size from which Colwell extrapolates is small (367 predicate nouns); he does not examine all anarthrous predicate nominatives that precede the verb nor all arthrous predicate nominatives that follow the verb. It is worth reiterating here that words without articles are not necessarily indefinite simply because they lack articles, nor are words definite simply because they have the article; word order, structure, or individual style may require articles or allow for their absence.
In the case of John 1:1, the article distinguishes the subject from the predicate nominative (because when two common nouns are joined by εἶναι and only one has the article, the one with the article is the subject regardless of word order; see chap. 1, on cases), and its absence is not a reliable predictor of indefiniteness. Wallace (269), for example, thinks θεός, rather than being definite, is probably qualitative (the focus is on the Word’s divine essence), “for the largest proportion of pre-verbal anarthrous predicate nominatives fall into this category.” This observation rests on an assumption similar to Colwell’s, however; Wallace determines what constitutes a qualitative noun. And while we agree with his theology, that the Word “shared the essence of the Father, though they differed in person” (Wallace 269), we are not at all convinced that John’s grammar was intended to reflect such fine trinitarian nuances. It is one thing to say that John 1:1 avoids various forms of modalism but quite another to say that it does so by John’s conscious, grammatical choice. It seems more likely that John left θεός anarthrous to confirm that ὁ λόγος is the subject all three times that it appears in the verse (Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος) without disturbing the pattern of ὁ λόγος ending the first clause, beginning the second, and ending the third, and a form of θεός ending the second clause and beginning the third.
Apollonius’s Canon and Corollary
4.12. As we mentioned above, in genitive constructions there is a tendency for an anarthrous head (governing) noun to be modified by an anarthrous genitive (governed) noun. The full rule is that when a head noun governs a genitive noun, both will either have the article or lack it (A + noun + A + noungen, or noun + noungen). The rule holds about 80 percent of the time in the NT, and most of its exceptions can be explained. Hull, who studied 461 exceptions, found that all but 32 could be explained by one or more of seven “conditions.”19 Five of these conditions have been neatly subsumed under two broader points by Young (67, italics added):
(1) The head noun may be anarthrous while the genitive qualifier is articular, especially if the head noun is the object of a preposition, a predicate nominative, or a vocative; (2) either may be anarthrous if it is a proper name (including κύριος) even though the other may be articular.
The final two conditions involve anarthrous head nouns that are modified by either anarthrous adjectives or genitives of apposition.20
4.13. A corollary to Apollonius’s rule has been proposed by David Hedges, who observed of Paul’s Greek that when both the nouns in a genitive construction are anarthrous, both will be definite, indefinite, or qualitative about 75 percent of the time.21 Wallace (250) observes that Hedges’s work with the Pauline corpus comports with that of scholars looking at other NT books. The corollary, like the canon, is merely an observation of a pattern. The former is incapable of predicting definiteness or other qualities, and the latter is incapable of predicting the presence or absence of the article. Therefore, neither canon nor corollary is of weighty exegetical significance.
For Practice
4.14. Analyze the articles (in bold) in the following texts.
1Προσέχετε δὲ τὴν δικαιοσύνην ὑμῶν μὴ ποιεῖν ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων πρὸς τὸ θεαθῆναι αὐτοῖς· εἰ δὲ μή γε, μισθὸν οὐκ ἔχετε παρὰ τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν τῷ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. 2Ὅταν οὖν ποιῇς ἐλεημοσύνην, μὴ σαλπίσῃς ἔμπροσθέν σου, ὥσπερ οἱ ὑποκριταὶ ποιοῦσιν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς καὶ ἐν ταῖς ῥύμαις, ὅπως δοξασθῶσιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων· ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀπέχουσιν τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν. 3σοῦ δὲ ποιοῦντος ἐλεημοσύνην μὴ γνώτω ἡ ἀριστερά σου τί ποιεῖ ἡ δεξιά σου, 4ὅπως ᾖ σου ἡ ἐλεημοσύνη ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ· καὶ ὁ πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ ἀποδώσει σοι. 5Καὶ ὅταν προσεύχησθε, οὐκ ἔσεσθε ὡς οἱ ὑποκριταί· ὅτι φιλοῦσιν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς καὶ ἐν ταῖς γωνίαις τῶν πλατειῶν ἑστῶτες προσεύχεσθαι, ὅπως φανῶσιν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις· ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀπέχουσιν τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν. (Matt. 6:1–5)
14Ὅταν δὲ ἴδητε τὸ βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως ἑστηκότα ὅπου οὐ δεῖ, ὁ ἀναγινώσκων νοείτω, τότε οἱ ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ φευγέτωσαν εἰς τὰ ὄρη, 15ὁ ἐπὶ τοῦ δώματος μὴ καταβάτω μηδὲ εἰσελθάτω τι ἆραι ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας αὐτοῦ, 16καὶ ὁ εἰς τὸν ἀγρὸν μὴ ἐπιστρεψάτω εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω ἆραι τὸ ἱμάτιον αὐτοῦ. 17οὐαὶ δὲ ταῖς ἐν γαστρὶ ἐχούσαις καὶ ταῖς θηλαζούσαις ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις. 18προσεύχεσθε δὲ ἵνα μὴ γένηται χειμῶνος· 19ἔσονται γὰρ αἱ ἡμέραι ἐκεῖναι θλῖψις οἵα οὐ γέγονεν τοιαύτη ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως ἣν ἔκτισεν ὁ θεὸς ἕως τοῦ νῦν καὶ οὐ μὴ γένηται. (Mark 13:14–19)
26ἐὰν οὖν ἡ ἀκροβυστία τὰ δικαιώματα τοῦ νόμου φυλάσσῃ, οὐχ ἡ ἀκροβυστία αὐτοῦ εἰς περιτομὴν λογισθήσεται; 27καὶ κρινεῖ ἡ ἐκ φύσεως ἀκροβυστία τὸν νόμον τελοῦσα σὲ τὸν διὰ γράμματος καὶ περιτομῆς παραβάτην νόμου. 28οὐ γὰρ ὁ ἐν τῷ φανερῷ Ἰουδαῖός ἐστιν, οὐδὲ ἡ ἐν τῷ φανερῷ ἐν σαρκὶ περιτομή· 29ἀλλ᾽ ὁ ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ Ἰουδαῖος, καὶ περιτομὴ καρδίας ἐν πνεύματι οὐ γράμματι, οὗ ὁ ἔπαινος οὐκ ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ. (Rom. 2:26–29)
