NOTE that, as to its primitive force, the genitive is anything in its nature, origin, or character, of. [The word is of Julius Cזsar, they say, and is derived from genus.']
The dative is immediate connection or proximity to.
The accusative, objective, towards. These senses are modified by the preposition, or, rather, the preposition borrows the sense of the case, and adds its own peculiar meaning to give a special form to the thought, as παρα, μετα, εκ: παρα with a genitive, from,' but it is genus still; περι around or about you is more remote from the radical sense, but still the circumstances draw their character from the relationship to the governed word; what they are is περι ὑμων, etc. With the accusative, it is the object whom they do or will refer to, περι εμε. Eκ is only source and characteristic source, hence has only the genitive. Mετα is like περι, the thing is characterized by its association, μεθ’ ἡμων. They are thought of as associated with "us.' This characterizes them: μετα ταυτα, they are separated, and they are a distinct object by themselves when ταυτα are complete, hence they come after. Προς and παρα have genitive, dative, and accusative.
Ava: Besides the idea of respectively, each, we have only ανα μεσον, Matt. 13:25, Mark 7:31, 1 Cor. 6:5, Rev. 7:17, among, between, in the midst of. 1 Cor. 14: 27 shows Connection of prepositional and adverbial use, ανα μερος [each] for [his] part, in, his 'turn, by course; so, by fifties, or fifty each, man by man, each man. Aνα has the accusative from its objective force, up to, reaching up to, in all cases, even when it means each respectively. The translation of it may be various. Aνα μεσον is not εν μεσω, which may be a point unconnected with the rest. Aνα connects the thing which is ava with that ava (up to) which it is, so as to have to say to all. He fills up that to which ava applies. It is not Μittelpunft but mitten unter. Not in the middle but in the midst.
Anti, in the place of, and so for, sometimes, because; the force being, I apprehend, you get this as a recompence,' αντι, answering to.' So Luke 1:20;12: 3; 19: 44; 2 Thess. 2:10, and Eph. 5:31, it passes, by use, into the more general sense of because.' The rest are ' correspondence,' or 'instead of,' James 4:15, the last, John 1:16, ' grace upon grace,' one grace taking the place of another in succession, a beautiful idea.
'Aυα is used for a preposition instead of συν, Matt. 13:29.
Aπο: Genitive: point of departure: Hence, by reason of, occasioned by, (Matt. 13:44;14. 26, Luke 22:45) Acts 11:19, Heb 5:7, Matt. 18:7. On the part of, not simply by but of, away from, Luke 9:22;17: 25; but here, after αποδοκιμαζω. So Acts 2:22, where απο is in the verb, not in 2 Cor. 7:13. It is not for 'ὑπο. The cases are after απο in the verb or after αναπεπαυται which supposes toil, and ceasing to have it; not the present effect of an agent (ὑπο) under whose power and influence the matter happens, or the person is. In a good state, Titus might have been received and cheered ὑπο; though scarcely this last, but not αναπεπαυται when they had been going wrong before. His refreshment now proceeded from them: peace from ' is simple, delivered from,' also; so with παρελθη, Mark 14:35. The point of departure is clear in αφ ἑαυτου, αφ ἑαυτων, etc. Luke 12:57, John 5:19;10.18; 16:13. It is used of material of clothes or food. A mass is supposed, and the part is taken from' it; as we say, made from wool.' So, choice from, Matt. 7:16: απο, point of departure of the judgment: it is a conclusion drawn from, not by means of, instrument ally; in the same verse materially from:' Luke 14:18, απο μιας is idiomatic; said to be, one point of view left out as understood;' if so, it is simple. Their minds started from one point to the common conclusion.
Eκ. Genitive, out of, a place, set of people, or what any one is sunk in, or the like. Hence a moral source: goes deeper than απο;απο is a motive; this a principle. English uses it so, too. He did it out of fear,' 'from fear.' Both are English. There is a shade of difference in the sense, fear in the latter case is a motive, the point of departure of the mind. Eκ supposes one more in the state referred to. I can say, are απο του ὑδατος; one leaves the water to be on land;Εκ του ὑδατος, out of the water in which one was. What answers to απο is ' at,' to; εκ is ' in.' Hence εκ is more abstract εκ πιστεως, on that principle. Απο ευλαβειας, that was the actual governing and producing motive. Eκ is sometimes merely a shade of meaning different from απο, but there is the difference noticed. Hence εκ has the force of the character of anything εκ του κοσμου, εκ του διαβολου, εκ του πατρος. And this tone of thought is found even where place is in question and the article is used. " New Jerusalem descended εκ του ουρανου απο του θεου." It came out of, no doubt, but it stamps its character in revealing its source. Aπο is the point of departure. It came from God Himself. It was heavenly, but it came from God, was not merely divine. Speaking of time, it differs little practically from απο, though the ideal difference remains, απο πολλων ετων since many years, εκ χρονων ἱκανων a long while, beginning from many years ago, and taking its rise in a period which still lasted. The first is a date, the last a characterized period; so εκ νηοτητος. But characterizing, as marking origin out of which anything is, is the common use, where not materially used. "The baptism of John, was it εξ ουρανου; hence, Matt. 1:20, " is of the Holy Ghost;" John 1:13, " born of God." Hence characteristic of the state or thing which causes the action of the verb, one 'lives by faith.' It is not δια, the means of living, but the character of the life. " A tree is known εκ του καρπου," Matt. 12:33 and Luke 6:44. In Matt. 7:16,20, it is απο. The former is characteristic in the thing, the latter a conclusion in knowledge from.' "Οἱ εκ περιτομης:" "ὁ εξ ουρανου:" "ὁ εκ της γης:" "εκ του κοσμου λαλειν:" "οἱ εξ εριδειας." In a multitude of shapes it is used for characterizing, as the source of anything does, only that its use to express character goes far, as in εκ μερους; partly, in part, εξ ισοτητος. It becomes thus adverbial. Thus he agreed with the laborers εκ δηναριου, we say, at a penny, Matt. 20:2. Eκ is commonly used where we have the genitive, where it is one or more from among a set of objects whether left or not:
Eν. Governs the dative. It means properly 'in:' then, with plurals, 'amongst.' Where it is connected with words of motion, it indicates the result in which that motion places and leaves them, ανεληφθη εν δοξη.
It is used to mean what accompanies and characterizes, where we should say, with' `in the power of,' εν ραβδω with a rod.' It is not the origin of the character as a source, but characterizes the power by which we act, see Col. 1:8, εν πνευματι.
A strong case of this instrumental character is in Luke 14:31; if εν δεκα χιλιασσι.... ‘with ten thousand.' So Heb. 9:25, εν αἱματι αλλοτριω: Matt. 6:7, εν πολυλογια. Hence it is not the effective instrument of activity, that is δια, but what characterizes: πολυλογια is not looked at as the means, but as the character of the prayer which will be heard. Hence the state or occasion, 1 Cor. 15:52, εν σαλπιγγι εσχατη; at or during, within, when referring to time, John 2:19,20, εν τρισιν ἡμεραις. So (here more literally used) Matt. 11:25;12: 1, εν εκεινῳ τῳ καιρῳ, John 5:16, εν σοαββατῳ. It has thus the force of the means by which,' εν τουτῳ γνωσονται, John 13:35. We have a peculiar case in εν ὑμιν κρινεται ὁ κοσμος, 1 Cor. 6:2— ' If the judgment of the world shall be characterized by your doing it, surely,' etc.: ifεω ὑμιν—if such be the case with the judgment of the world.' It is not simply as instruments; but if such a judgment be found to be in the hands of the saints, and so characterized as to be by us f if that be the case with that judgment. So in Heb. 10:10, εω ᾡ θεληματι. Christ comes to do God's will. That is what sanctifies us, that will (i.e., Gοd's) which Christ was to do is what sanctifies us. One must in English say by,' but the emphasis is on which.' But it is not the δια of an instrument, but the εν or character of what does it. So he came, Luke 2:27, εν τῳ πνεματι into the temple.' It is not the instrument, but what characterized His coming, only the τῳ personifies the Spirit, i.e., gives personality to the thought, `the Spirit,' as one acting not merely εν πνευματι—i.e., the state of the person. He casts out devils, Matt. 12:24, εν τῳ αρχοντι τ. δ. It was what characterized His power (personally again) or miracle. Acts 20:19, εν ταις επιβουλαις, that was the state of things in which he found himself, and which caused his tears. It was not δια, simply, instrumentally, but what characterized the situation.
Heb. 11:2, εω ταυτῃ, Col. 1:16, εν αυτῳ εκτισθη, in same verse, and compare verse 20, and Heb. 1:1,2, compare εν ὑμιν, 1 Cor. 6:2; Matt. 12:24,27,28; and see use of εν and δια in Rom. 5:9 (comp. 10).
Is not δια an historical word when the fact that took place is looked at as taking place at a given time? Whereas εν is the abiding character and being of Him or it, by which the work is wrought, εω ῳ εκτισθη, δι’αυτου εκτισται, Col. 1:16,17. So Rom. 5:9,10, justified εν τ. α., reconciled δια τ. θ. Then when any one is looked at as a distinct agent or means it is δια, Rom. 5: 9, δἱ αυτου; so Col. 1:20, δἰ αυτου, because Christ is looked at as such, as a distinct person, as a man, though εν αυτῳ is applied to the fullness of the Godhead. Heb. 1:1,2, God spoke εν υἱῳ. There they are not separated; but δἰ οὑ εποιησε, a particular historical act, and God is looked at as distinct, see verse 3 in John 1, δἰ αυτου εγενετο. There He is looked at as a distinct person, verse 2, προς τον θεον, and it is an historical fact. Col 1: 16, εν αυτῳ εκτισθη, its literal ordinary cause and abiding characteristic, δἰ αυτου in verse 20, historical (see the cases further on). Δια is the instrument of a fact, εν an abiding cause or state (δια may be used as a state through which we pass, but it is then, also, only temporary), what characterizes a state which produces a consequence. Thus 2 Cor. 6:5, εν πληγαις would be in that state of things he proved himself a minister: δια πληγων would have been the means of proving himself so. Hence 2 Cor. 6:7,δἰ ὁπλων, because that was the proof. It might be thought that verse 8 δια δυσφημιας και ευφημιας was in going through it, but I doubt it.
In 2 Cor. 6 we have a string of examples, of different shades of meaning, still showing that in which he approved himself a minister of. God; that in which the characterizing power came out in which he was shown to be suitably such. It was not merely that in those states his conduct proved it, nor simply by these things as a means, all concurred in giving evidence. This case is the more remarkable because he changes it after a while to δια. This is only a change of style occasioned by ὁπλων, which were clearly instruments, and not merely characteristic as to the state he was in; and δια goes on rightly because there is contrast,' the most opposite things were the means of showing it. The 'yet' inserted in English (ver. 8) is wrong. So "the unbelieving husband is sanctified by (εν) the wife"-not by means of (δια). Then it would be more real; but, just as a Jew was profaned in the Gentile wife- was so characterized in respect of the wife, as, qua husband of the Gentile woman -the marriage gave him this character,-so the converse held good in Christianity, the other stood, as wife, sanctified by the husband; or, vice versa. This characteristic force is plain in many cases, εν αληθεια, εν δολω, εν κρυπτω, εν προσωπω, λογος εν εξουσια -where it does not mean being really in Christ, it is the same with Christ,' or the Lord.' 'Receive her in the Lord,' 'only in the Lord.' That is the sense of the Lord, and what He is in the soul, and what the person is as respects His will and claims, is to characterize the reception, the marrying, etc. So of' children,' "obey your parents in the Lord." "Ye are not in flesh but in spirit." That characterizes your state, if the Spirit of God dwells in you. So Christ was declared to be Son of God 'in power,' εν δθναμει; that characterized the state of sonship of which the proof was 'given. On the whole, when it is not used in a material or local sense, εν characterizes (not in its source that is εκ, but) what accompanies it; very commonly in English it must be rendered ' with' or 'by.' So in English, 'He did it out of hatred' to me. That was its source, cause. 'He did it in hatred' or 'with hatred.' This characterizes the act when he was doing it. 'He did it in self-will.' It is the description of the state or condition in which he who acts is.
Δια: Genitive and accusative. Its sense is through. With a genitive, simply so, physically and morally, or figuratively: with the accusative, more remotely so. It is then a motive or reason for a thing of which the thing is not independent, but not the effective instrument by which an effect is wrought-i.e., that is not the sense of δια with an accusative. There are some important passages connected with this distinction: as to time, the literal 'through,' δια τριων ἡμερων, in the course of (Matt. 26:61); δι'ὁλης της νθκτης, δια πυρος, 1 Cor. 3:15. So I doubt not, δι' ὑδατος, 1 Pet. 3:20. Hence, 'for in a state of,' δι' ακροβυστιας, and
analogously δια της τεκνογονιας, 1 Tim. 2:15; the article denotes the childbirth she was to undergo. Rom. 4:10, we have εν ακροβυστια, the state, as noticed in εν; that characterized his state. In ver. 11, we have εν τη α. and δι'α. δια I apprehend to be more vague and general. That condition specifically and contrastedly characterized Abraham. He was εν ακροβυστια. For Gentile believers it was merely de facto they were in that state. So of τεκνογονιας, so of νυκτος. It is a time, state, or period, not a characteristic. For the rest the application of through' to time, place, and circumstance is very simple. It then comes to mean the instrument or means by which, or through which a thing 'through' through ' being still the radical thought. It is an intermediate instrument; "all things were made by him" (John 1:3). " By whom also he made the worlds" (Heb. 1:2). It is not that the same being may not be the author; but that his action in that case, where δια is used, is looked at as the intermediate instrument of His will, or, it may be, an actually intermediate agency if Divine-" without him was not anything made." This 1 Cor. 8:6, εἱς θεος ὁ πατηρ εξ οὑ -εἱς κυριος δι'οὑ. Christ is the divine Creator, but He is in this case viewed as an agent of a divine will. So Heb. 1:2. The use of δια does not hinder the source of action and the primary agent to be the same person. We read in the chapter, δι'ἑαυτου καθαρισμον ποιησαμενος. So in Col. 1:16, we see He was the end and object, τα παντα εις αυτον εκτισται, which is said, as to us at least, distinctively of God the Father, 1 Cor. 8:6; δι'αυτου being applied to Christ. And in Colossians we have εν αυτω εκτισθη (comp. εν) and δι'αυτου. Creation was characterized by his action, as the world's judgment by burs (εν ὑμιν): but there He was the one by whom all things were created. So, "spoken by the prophets," here they were intermediate to the Holy Ghost (δια), it was not αφ'αυτων, but δι'αυτων, Luke 1:70, more fully and absolutely.
The accusative is still through, but a cause or motive, and so more remotely 'through'; not the means or instrument. "They had delivered him through envy," that was the moving cause; their hearts and minds did it; but the medium, intermediate passion, through which they acted, was envy. Matt. 13:58, "because of their unbelief," still 'through,' but it was not indeed a motive, but a cause, what occasioned it, because. Here we may notice John 6:57, κἀγω ζω δια τον πατερα κ.ὁ.τ.μ. ζησεται δι'εμε: "'because' of the Father, he that eats Me even he shall live 'because' of Me:" again not as motive, but cause or reason why (14:19, ὁτι εγω ζω και ὑμεις ζησεσθε). There was such connection between Him and the Father, that because the Father lived, He lived. The Lord only states the fact, we know they were one. What the Lord states is that it was not an independent life, but that, as inasmuch as the Father lived, he lived. The two things could not be separated, and He, speaking as on earth, takes the dependent side, yet the connection was such that if His Father did, He did. So, he that eats Him will live, by reason of His living. There was an indissoluble connection. Yet our life is dependent on His, but therefore cannot fail. So Rev. 11, 'through, ' 'by reason of.' The use of δια with an accusative for a motive is common: thus, John 7:13, Matt. 12:27, so with το and an infinitive, Luke 2:4: both genitive and accusative, Rom. 5:12: so, διατι, δια.
There is another point to be mentioned in connection with the intermediate character of δια. When the instrument is the proper cause or instrument, the immediate instrument, the noun, is in the dative (the δι'ἑαυτου of Heb. 1:3 only confirms it). The genitive with δια is viewed as another agent from the one who uses it-as a distinct agent. Thus, Rom. 5:15,17, τω του ἑνος παραπτωματι; then 16, δι'ἑνος ἁμαρτησαντος, το δωρημα, by the offense of one, it was the act of the offender himself which brought ruin on all that belonged to him; it was not merely through it as a distinct means, but that act of the one brought the evil in on the many; but God's free gift was by the means of a person brought before us distinctly. So 17, τω του ἑνος παραπτωματι ὁ θανατος εωασιλευσε δια του ἑνος; here the one Adam is viewed as a distinct person from death personified, but "by the offense of one" was his act; so at the end of 17, δια του ἑνος Ιησου Χριστου. In 18, we have it as a distinct act, δι' ἑνος παραπτωματος, εις παντας, in and by itself as a means, "and so by one righteousness." Compare the use of 'εν' in this same passage. The dative is a mere means identified with the agent, the δια makes a distinct object to the mind.
In Heb. 13:20, 'the God of peace brought Christ from the dead, εν αἱματι,' in that way and character; but in Heb. 9. He entered in once, δια του ιδιου αἱματος' (ver. 12). This refers to ου χωρις αἱματος of ver. 7. I do not think it means that that was the means of His entering in simply. As to Himself, His person, we all know it was not so, He says, "the Son of man who is in heaven," and could, as to the external fact, have had twelve legions of angels. This is not the question. But even as to us it is not simply that it was needed, but that was the way and state in which He entered in: not He, got in by that means even as to us, but He went in in that way. The glorious work, according to the importance. and character of the place, would not otherwise have been, suitably done, but He did so enter in δια, for it is the force of δια I inquire into here. Χωρις αἱματος, there could have been no fitting association, however small, between Israel and the most holy place, and He entered in thus offering it (προσφερει). Christ as our High Priest, and representing us, could not enter thus without blood, or, as regards us, God would not have been glorified, so He entered, δια His own, showing, indeed, His own worth and perfectness not only to be there Himself, but to obtain the entrance of others and (before that) guilty ones; and as Priest He enters in with this, to present in its power and efficacy for others. It was the witness that He had put away their sins, so that they could come to God, and God was fully glorified. The holiness of the place required this blood-shedding, seeing sin had come in, but according to a holy redemption, in which the innocent never would have been. So He entered in δια His own blood. Man could have had that place in no other way. And He had taken up man's cause. (Christ's personal place is more in the cloud of incense, which is not in question here.) This is a little obscure, but right. It was His act, not His necessity; He entered in with that in its power, and not (as I have said) got in by it.
Εις is in general simple. The direction towards; reaching, if not hindered. I am going to Rome.' It is well known that where it is used with verbs of rest it implies arrival there by motion. "Thou wilt, not leave my soul εις ἁδου," where it had gone on leaving the body. What is said (Acts 8:23) of Simon, that he was; (see 2 Thess. 2:4, where it depends on the active force of καθισαι, sets himself down there). εις χολην πικαριας is different in sense from εν. Εν would have been a mere state; here there was will, and the bent of his own mind; 'given up to' would not express it. That implies another, possibly final possession by it. But his mind was gone that way; 'your heart is gone into the gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity:' οντα is its state, but its then state was to have given itself to that. Mark 8:19 is plain enough, it is the direction of the act; he broke it to them, giving it to them, the act was towards them. So, ἁμαρτανς εις, Matt. 18:15, against thee, as to thee, that was the direction his sin took. So Luke 12:10, speak a word against, as to. It is used also for time, ver. 19, "laid up for many years." As we say against winter, as provisions, or for. So for an object, aim, or purpose, Matt. 26:8, εις τι ἡ απωλεια (Mark 14:4;15. 34), " to what purpose is this waste." (Where it is a contact of violence επι is used; nation shall rise επι nation.) This use of as to as an object is common. " She has wrought a good work εις εμε," and in several forms, as the baptism of repentance εις αφεσιν ἁμαρτιων. Mark 1:4,38, εις τουτο εξεληλυθα. In connection with the object to which the mind or faith is directed, we have πιστευω εις. So Ελπιζω εις, 2 Cor. 1:10; as in John 6:47; 7:38; 12:44, and frequently. When it is the believing simply what a man says, it is the dative, as x. 37 and 38, and elsewhere. 1 John 5:13, πιστευω εις το ονομα; and to the same purport, βαπτιζω εις το ονομα, εις Μωσην, εις το βαπτισμα Ιωαννου, εις Χριστον. It is that at which they arrived, to which they were attached by the baptism as they went to Christ. Here morally, as to Rome materially. See 1 Cor. 12:13, Matt. 28.19, with Jesus. It is επι τω ονοματι in Acts 2:38, εις το in Acts 19:1; so 1 Cor. 1:13, etc. A singular use of this is in Matt. 10:41, in the name of a prophet, εις ονομα. Εν ονοματι would, it seems to me, be in another's name (επι, Matt. 18:5, Mark 9:37, as the condition of reception), as John 5:43, where the end of the verse has the same force, pleading, presenting himself, his name, as warrant for reception, as Jesus did the Father's; whereas here εις ονομα is not the warrant for receiving, but that to which they were received, i.e., according to the honor due to a prophet he was received into that place. Εν ονοματι is bearing it as a character and warrant of reception, εις the place and title in (into) which he is received. Where we have εις το γενεσθαι (Rom. 4:18), it is no purpose in the person, nor so that it so resulted, but the bearing of the act, "he believed in hope to the becoming." So εις το ειναι δικαιον,3:26: so 1:20, Acts 3:19; 1 Cor. 8:10; 2 Cor. 7:3; Eph. 1:18; see 1 Thess. 4:9. This idea of an effect or the bearing of any act takes some times a very peculiar form. "The Ninevites repented εις το κηρυγμα." They met the preaching by repentance, Matt. 12:41. So 14:31, εις τι εδιστασας, "to what [end] or to what [purpose]." In the first passage it takes the form of a cause, but having an effect characteristic of the cause. In the second, cause is supposed, wherefore, for the question why supposes a cause, here the want of one. What was the good of it? But it never loses its etymological sense. The idea of towards' requires little notice: in the sense of for, in favor of, διακονιας εις ἁγιους, 2 Cor. 4, and 9:1: so λογιας, 1 Cor. 16:1. The use of it in 15:54, is striking; "death is swallowed up εις νικος," not in,' as if it was lost in a sea which subsisted, but absorbed into' a victorious power and gone. The end and object is apparent in Phil. 1:5, "your fellowship, εις το ευαγγελιον," so 2:22, εδουλευσεν εις το ευαγγελιον; 4:15,17, εις λογον, 'to put to the account,' I apprehend. Col. 3:10, ανακαινομενον εις απιγνωσιν (comp. 1:10, αυξανομενοι τη ε). So ver. 12, ἱκανωσεν ἡμας εις την μεριδα, where the force of εις is the same. It is the goal reached, or to be reached, by ανακαινουμενοι and ἱκανωσεν. I remark on Gal. 3:17. It is to Christ, not in. The covenant was confirmed to Him, the seed (according to Gen. 22), and then we have an example of εις το, as the bearing, ουκ ακυροι, ις το καταργησαι την επαγγελιαν, to the making of no effect. In 2 Cor. 10:16, besides εις το, we have εις τα ἑτοιμα; so in ver. 13, 15, εις τα αμετρα, and 16, εις τα ὑπερεκεινα. (See Gal. 6:4), 2 Cor. 2:9, "obedient εις παντα"; Phil. 2:16, εις ἡμεραν. All these, and other like cases which present the same difficulty, I apprehend flow all from the idea of reaching to the object looked forward to, so as to be up to or fail in this. See a peculiar case, Luke 13:9. As to time this is common. So I suppose "the law a schoolmaster εις Χριστον," reaching unto Him as its object (compare Eph. 1:14), εις τα αμετρα, εις τα ὑπερεκεινα, and εις τα ἑτοιμα, with some irony; 2 Cor. 11:3, εις τον Χριστον. But it has the general sense of as to, concerning, as the object of thought, thus 1 Thess. 5:18, Eph. 5:32; but in both with "you," with 6° Christ," with "the church," as the object in view. See Gal. 5:10. So above, 2 Cor. 2:9, Luke 16:8, 1 Thess. and Eph. are the strongest, for the mere sense of concerning 'as to,' but they have the force of application to, as applying to. Τενεσθαι εις is simple in structure, to become anything, what is produced. Δογιζεσθαι 'esteemed such,' is pretty nearly as plain. See the difference of ελλογειται and ελογισθη, the former putting so much to account, Rom. 5:13, Phil. 18; only, I believe, in these two places. λογιξομαι, 'to esteem, or account as such.'
Επι, with genitive, dative, and accusative. The two first, upon; the last, to, towards, to direct oneself; επι anything, as usual with the accusative, motion, not rest. I state here generally that the genitive is the fact, the dative is more characteristic or permanent connection. With the genitive it signifies on, or before (as before magistrates, etc.); επι Τιτου, 2 Cor. 7:14. aupres de. Most cases where the sense is not physical still have the sense of on. Miracles on the sick, επ'εσχατου των ἡμερων, the last of the days. It is always 'at,' or 'approximation,' but as added, or upon.
It is used for time, hence Matt. 1:11, επι της μετοικεσιας; so Luke 3:2, Acts 11:28. I doubt as to Mark 2:26, and 12:26, whether it do not mean the section of Jewish Scripture. The general sense is adjunctive apposition, without fixed relationship, with the general thought of super-induced. This connects it with the sense of before. Hence we have over anything, in the Genitive, or upon, as, ὁ ων επι παντων Θεος, Rom. 9:5. But here peculiarities have to be noticed, and shades of thought in the writer. Eph. 4:6, we have again Θεος ὁ επι παντων: so with βασιλευει επι. Matt. 2:22, καθιστημι. Acts 6:3, οὑς καταστησομεν επι, της χρειας ταυτης: Acts 8:27; 12:20. We may add Rev. 9:11, 11:6. In Matt. 24:45, the genitive (καταστησω), but in ver. 47 the dative. So in Luke 12:42, the genitive, and ver. 44 the dative. Matt. 25:21,23, genitive with καταστησω (επι πολλων). The general sense of επι is at, and so upon, before, at, over, against. All these are forms of juxtaposition. But the dative gives more closeness of connection, as in a relative place of charge, when used in the literal sense. As to over, the fact is expressed in the genitive, it is mere place; so of before; 'over many things,' 'over his household,' the fact of being, living, or placed above, suffices. With the dative it is not the fact, but the relation conferred. One was over the θεραπεια, in a place of course, but in a superior one. So over many things. That is in the genitive. So where God is spoken of, it is the genitive. Of course He is above-or over all things. But "set him over all his goods " is a distinct, relative, permanent place, definitively given. There it is the dative. Locality is genitive, 'before magistrates,' 'on a hill '; but επι with the dative characterizes a state, and in such cases without an article, and denotes the state or character not merely the locality, επι πινακι, Matt. 14:8. Acts 9:33, κατακειμενον επι κραββατω (comp. Mark 2:4), that was his state. In Mark 6:55, we have carrying about the sick, επι τοις κραββατοισ, the dative; it was their state, but the article shews the beds the sick were lying habitually on; in 7:30, we have βεβλημενην επι της κλινης; it was the fact. Sitting on horseback,' Rev. 6:2,3,5, is the dative. It was a fixed characteristic relationship; given as such. 4:2 on the throne, genitive, it was a fact, a locality. Often sitting has the accusative as if the act of him who sits, sets himself on. One must not press the grammar as to language in Revelation, but so it is in 4:4. The constant use of the dative is to present the condition, occasion, cause, circumstance, which gives its occasion to the existence of what it refers to. This in a multitude of shapes, but always that, by reason, or occasion of which the act takes place, sometimes a formal condition, sometimes a mere occasion. The cases are very frequent. Matt. 4:4, "man lives επι παντι ρηματι." It is the condition or occasion of his living: 7:28, "they were astonished επι τη διδαχη." It was the occasion, what led to their astonishment; as we say, at.' This is often found. I add a considerable list; -Matt. 19:9, by reason of; 22:33; Mark 1:22; 3:5, " He was grieved επι τη πωρωσεις' 9: 37, επι τω ονοματι μου: his name was the occasion and motive for receiving: so, v. 39, and chap. 10:22, Luke 1:14; 5:5, 9:48, 13:17. Acts 3:12,16, the second case worthy of remark, επι τη πιστει (see Phil. 3:9), or faith, we might say, iv. 21, v. 35, is also a special case, "take heed," επι τοις ανθρωποις τουτοισ, it was the occasion or object which was the occasion, what the) were was a motive. It is a more unusual case, Acts 8:2. I suppose, by his occasion," by reason of him.' So we should say in English over him. It is almost literal. It is not ὑπερ αυτω. 14:3 (see Heb. 1; Acts 5:35, 2 Cor. 9:14), as to the last the Lord being the occasion and motive, the moving object. As to is the nearly resulting sense, but weak. Acts 15:31; 20:38; 26:6, Rom. 5:2; 10:19, 1 Cor. 1:4; 9:10, moved sustained by hope. 13:6, 14:16, 2 Cor. 1:4; 3:14 the occasion, but the force of occasioning is small: still it is at, on that occasion. 12: 4, 7, 13, the first is again 'occasion' ('as to') without motive; second, its common use; third, the same again, επι Τιτου v. 14 in aupres de, analogous to before a magistrate. The sense very general, 'my boasting in the case of Titus, my Titus boasting. 9:13, 15, simple cases: as to 14, it is more doubtful; but I believe it to be 'in your case;' see 1 Thess. 3:7. I doubt its being upon. Eph. 2:10, with that in view, under that condition -I do not mean as a condition to be fulfilled, -but he so created us, that being the state and character which entered into the ( conditions of the creation in God's mind (see 1 Thess. 4:7). Phil. 1:3, 5; 3:9; again επι τη πιστει, moyenant Acts 3:16;1 Thess. 3: 7, 9, 4:7. These are as to, by occasion of,' by reason of,' what comes in as at occasion or ground, Titus 1:2, επ'ελπιδι; this calls for attention. It is in view of having that as his object. As the good works or holiness, so this hope was it God's mind (now revealed), one of the conditions o existence of this gospel scheme. Philem. 1:7, Heb. 7:11, under that condition and order of things. The law being the condition of their existence with God their raison. d'ךtre. So Heb. 9:10, 15,17,26, (8 seems to me a case we have had, amounting in sense to in respect of, taking these into view, as to these this is the sum: the summing up to be attached to them; see Acts 5:35, 2 Cor. 9:14, Acts 14:3), Heb. 10:28. This connects with another branch of the same general meaning, but the two or three were the condition of conviction, James 5:1, Rev. 18:9, this is, as to her, on her occasion; so verse 11. I have dwelt on this, because the general idea of the condition of existence of that which is expressed in the verb is, where it is not physical, the main use of επι with the dative. The accusative, as ever, puts the object farther off, and supposes or states movement towards it. Some cases may appear singular, and, as with as, verbs of rest are so put, if movement has led to it: and the difference depends on what is in the writer's mind. Some cases remain; duration of time, ' till,' has επι with an accusative; it looks forward to it as a point for time to move on to. As Acts 17:2;19: 8, 10, 20: 9, 11, Rom. 7:1, Gal. 4:1, Acts 18:20, and doubtless others. When it is a given point attained we have the genitive, as Heb. 1:1; 2 Peter 3:3 (comp. Luke 3:2, Acts 11:28). As to falling and sitting, genitive and accusative will be found, I apprehend, as the writer looks at the act of falling (accusative), or to the result and to the ground (there genitive). One would be, fell to,' the other on '; compare Matt. 26:7, the act, with accusative: 12, the result when on the body (genitive); Luke 22:44, accusative. In Acts 10:11, we have both: the sheet was καταβαινον επ'αυτον, and καθιεμενον επι της γης there it was actually on it. Rev. 4:2,4, you have both with καθημενον. Luke 22:30, it is genitive (so as to eating at table). Rev. 20:4, accusative: sat ' is more active here. Acts 12:21, genitive: ' being set down επι του βηματος.' Matt. 23:2, genitive: "sit on Moses' seat." 25:31, genitive, ' on the throne of his glory.' In Matt. 24:3, we have the genitive; Luke 21:35, accusative. Then with καθημαι, Acts 8:28, genitive, John 12:15, accusative. Perhaps we might say 'seated on' for genitive, sitting on' for accusative. The genitive is the fact of locality, the accusative more the activity of the person. (In Rev. 6:2,4,5, αυτω should be αυτον, accusative). Matt. 9:9, accusative. In chap. 28: 2, αυτου επανω being locality always, has always the genitive. The only apparent exception is 1 Cor. 15:6; but that is attractively governed by ωφθη. There are a few other cases to notice: John 8:7, επ'αυτη; 59, επ'αυτον. The latter, simple and physical, "cast stones at him:" 7, "let him first cast the stone in respect of her, with her in view, as to her." In Matt. 16:18, "on this rock," dative. 1 Cor. 3:12, "build on this foundation," επι (accusative). The former, I apprehend, fixed relationship, as we have-seen. It is the object to which his activity tends in the actual fact of building. The rock is there; he builds on it. In the second he actively adds materials to the foundation. Heb. 10:21; 3:6, 12, 13, and 8:8, are all accusative, which may be noted. 'Over the house,' etc., is always the accusative. There are other passages, as Acts 7:10, Luke 1:33. It is not locality, not proper relationship as connected with it, but set over.' In the case of superiority necessarily and permanently abiding over various things or persons, it is genitive, as we have seen (Matt. 24:45, Luke 12:42), and when set over in formed determinate relationship, dative (Matt. 24:47, Luke 12:44). Here with setting over a house or people,' accusative. He is at the head of the house; I could not say at the head of all his goods, but over them. You could not have the immediate relationship with a house, and it falls into the government of what has set him there. (I doubt the word own' in Heb. 3:6; it does not affect this question). There remains: πιστευω επι, ελπιξω επι, etc. Thus, we have 1 Tim. 4:10, ηλπικαμεν επι Θεω; v. 5, επι Θεον; 1 Peter 3:5, ελπιξουσαι επι τον Θεον; 1 John 3:3, ελπιδα εχειν επ'αυτω; Heb. 2:13, εσομαι πεποιθως επ'αυτω; Rom. 15:12, επ' αυτω ελπιουσι. In these counting, reckoning, leaning on Him, as in English. 1 Tim. 6:17, dative, riches. The difference is the same, the accusative looks out at the object of trust (often εις), the dative rests in Him on whom we lean. The difference of idea with the same fact is seen in. Matt. 26:7,12, the act and the result, when it was on his body, the first accusative, the second genitive. The general idea of adding with a dative is frequent, επι πασι, επι τουτοις "Besides these I have gained ten, or five, talents more," Matt. 25:20, 22. "Besides all this, shut up John in prison," Luke 3:20, and in many ordinary cases, as Eph. 6:16. What is Rom. 4:18? The condition or state of his mind in believing, as in 1 Cor. 9:10, and Rom. 8:20. (The first, Rom. 4:18, only doubtful because of πιςτευω) we say on trust,' or credit,' in the same way (not on hope). It characterizes the state or condition.
Κατα, save in a few isolated cases, does not present any difficulty in its application. It means literally down with a genitive; and with the accusative, down along, primarily; but it seems to me to have more the sense of going through the governed object; even in the genitive it is not down to an object, but down along,' as a hill. Its secondary meaning in the genitive, and more frequent in N. T. is against. In the accusative it has more distinctly the sense of along, through, amongst, throughout, when literally used. Its secondary meaning is the object governed by it measuring the action which is connected with it by κατα, according to the sense of the word governed by it, as καθ'ἡμεραν, day by day, or every day: κατ'οικον. It is much oftener used in the accusative than in the genitive, and in most cases can be translated according to. It has always the same sense, though it cannot be rendered the same in English, but the action of the sentence is measured or estimated by the word governed by κατα, whatever comes under that category; thus καθ'ὁδον, κατα πασαν αιτιαν, so far as for every cause. Here the every cause measures the action: κατ'επαγγελιαν ξωης, this measured the Apostleship and so gave it its character. He was an Apostle by the will of God in a service morally measured and characterized by that: περιπατειν κατα αγαπην, ξην κατα την αἱρεσιν; according to love, and the principle of that sect were the measure and character of his walk and life. It is always the same fundamentally, as κατα τας πλατειας, his walk was measured and characterized by the streets of the city, or ὁγην την χωραν, 'all the region.'
Hence it has the sense implicitly of through or thorough, and this is the origin of its use in composition, κρινω, κατακρινω, καταχρωμενος, where the sense is not abusing,' but using' it as ours.
A few questions arise. What is 1 Cor. 15:15, "borne witness κατα Θεου"? We find also swearing by God, Matt. 26:63, and Heb. 6:13,16. But I believe the sense to be reaching to and embracing all through' its object. When the swearing is merely the fact of bringing a person in, it is εν, not κατα, as in all N. T. examples,- I believe, but Matt. 26 and Heb. 6, where the solemnity of the case gives κατα, and against has the same radical force. The connection of the two is seen in 1 Cor. 15:15, we have testified of God, κατα του Θεου. It reached to and embraced even God, so as to comprise Him in the matter; we have said that He raised Him. Hence we can have καθ'ὁλης της περιχωρου, and ὁλην την πολιν; the general idea being the same,' reaching to and embracing,' going through,' only the genitive being more of local rest, throughout,' and the accusative connected with motion, or objective, his walk reached to the whole city and took it in; the καθ'ὁλης is more complete and absolute, more pervading than καθ'ὁλην; but this, though seemingly a nice difference, is distinct enough when the mind expresses it. "A fame went throughout the whole region," gives the idea of pervading; " he went through all Galilee," the country he traversed as a general fact, going to different parts of the whole country. Yet these things form the power and beauty of style. I could hardly say "he went καθ'ὁλης της πολεως." It fills the place too much, unless he went to every house in it, and then there is too much the object of activity. But 'reaching to,' embracing,' and so measured by it materially or morally, is always the leading idea, taking in that and measured by it in the sentence in which it is used, against, according to, down, are the general English translation. Hence we have καθ'ὁμας with the sense of apud; see Rom. 16:5, 1 Cor. 16:19, Col. 4:15, church in his house. In English, your' being the sense, "a poet of yours." Acts 17:28, "your faith," Acts 17:28, Col. 4:7, Eph. 6:21, Phil. 1:12, Eph. 1:15, faith found with you' It is still carrying the mind on to them and taking them in; what precedes is found there, it singles him out as belonging to them, the measure of his character was that it was theirs. See 1 Peter 4:14; here measure.' We say in English, as far as they are concerned,' Rom. 11:21,24, κατα φυσιν κλαδοι natural branches, or according to nature,' it was their measure, estimate, and character; other branches were not that, but παρα φυσιν. Hence καθ'ὁδον, Acts 8:36, journeying characterized the place of the vision, it was not κατ'οικον, but καθ'ὁδον.
Μετα is simple enough; it is juxtaposition; o-vv is connection. Hence, μετα with the genitive is among, with; but in the accusative, still juxtaposition, but what is μετα is removed on, and at the end of what it is placed in juxtaposition to. Practically it is always with, when the noun is in the genitive, and often when in the accusative. I know but one sentence where the sense is doubtful, Luke 1:72. The English can hardly be borne out. The fathers are looked at as those with whom mercy was in exercise, but in the blessing confirmed in their children, according to the promise made to them.
Παρα is always by, by the side of, and, in genitive and dative, as far as I am aware, near a person.' In the genitive 'from with a person,' in the dative, with or near him. In the accusative having the force of movement withal it refers also to places, but still with the force of beside: hut hence may mean beyond, outside of, out of the way, along, besides, but always with the same radical force: πιπτειν παρα την ὁδον, 'by the way side,' περιπατειν παρα την θαλασσαν, ἁμαρτωλοι παρα παντας beyond all, ἡμερα παρ'ημερας, beyond, i.e., as better, παρα φυσιν, 'unnatural," not according to nature,' something beside and beyond it, παρ'ελπιδα, beyond hope: παρα τον κτισαντα, more than, besides, and beyond. 1 Cor. 12:15, is the only difficult passage I am aware of; I do not think it can be on account of ' παρα has also thus the force of comparison, excellent; παρα because it is beyond the thing compared with. Παρα τουτο is I apprehend assuming this to be so, if I set this by the side of the other, supposing it is not a foot, is it therefore not of the body?
Περι is simply about, the accusative, giving as usual more the idea of activity as to the object, even where the sense is substantially the same, of οἱ καθημενοι περι αντον: περι εμε Phil. 2:23: αἱ περιθυμιαι περι τα λοιπα.
Mark 4:19. The only thing to remark is Acts 25 where it may be a question whether it is to be connected with σταθεντεσ, which is hardly the case, and so used physically (compare 7), or with επεφερον, concerning him. It runs into the sense of in reference to. It answers to about in English pretty exactly. There is the well known peculiarity of οἱ περι τινα being used for the person himself as Acts 13:13, 'including;' προς τς περι (M. scat M.), John 11:19, where it is the persons themselves, hence Tas. If Acts 25:18 be not so there is no example of περι governing the genitive in the N. T. in a material sense. With the noun in the accusative it is frequent. The different shade of meaning may be noticed in Phil. 2:19,20,23, περι ὑμων. In 20, it was the actual circumstances that surrounded them, the state they were in. In 23, it was what related to him, what was going to happen to him, what referred to him, not what he was then in. But these are mere shades of thought, yet sensible ones, and give beauty and tone to speech. As regards things and places to which the things which are περι refer, we have seen that in N. T., if it be not the one exception, the word after περι is always in the accusative.
Προ, genitive only; before, as to time, place, and hence in front of, as in English. It calls for no particular remark.
Προς, gen., dat., ace. Its common us is the accusative with, as ever, the thought of motion towards a remote object, or rather an object not in connection already with that which acts by the preposition. There are but six exceptions (two, new readings) in the N. T. to the objective case, in die Richtung hin. Five have the dative, where it is at, connection, proximity. Thus Luke 19:37, εγγιξοντος προς την καταβασιν would be " drawing near the descent," but τη καταβασει, "as he drew near (i.e., Jerusalem) at the descent," etc. The only case that requires any notice is the one instance of the genitive, Acts 27:34, in which the genitive force is remote at first sight, but it was towards the side of connected with, their safety that their eating took place. With the genitive it seems to me there is an ellipse; προς τινος, by some one, that is, by, at his side. The text is the same; it was on the side of; associated with their safety. It was προς, in the direction of the accomplishment of their safety. Hence 'for' is quite right in sense. Προς always directs the thought to; hence the accusative is its natural case, but it may show me something directing me towards another as its cause or source, and then it is genitive. If directing my thoughts to it, as at, it is dative; if as towards, the accusative προς το ὁρον, 'towards the mountain;' προς τω ὁρει still so, but at it, an der, an die. We have προς ἑαυτους, προς αλληλους διελογισεσθε, because it was in addressing, speaking to, each other. So Acts 28:25, a more striking case. The objectivity is less sensible in some cases, but still is there, as in περι. " Are not his sisters all προς ἡμας," Mark 6:3; so 9:19, προς ὑμας (so John 1:2, Mark 2:2;4: 1, 1 Cor. 16:6,7,10, 2 Cor. 12: 21) 'with you,' not μετα associated, but 'apud,' not cum.' So προς καιρον πιστευουσι up to a certain time,' a more unusual case is Luke 12: 47, προς το θελημα, not κατα taking it as the rule or measure, but up to it, reaching it, acting with a view to it, as an object to be attained, had it as his object. It was not failure in measure merely, but in purpose, and taking it as his measure, the object of his mind and will; and this sense (practically' according to') goes far in its use. 2 Cor. 5:10, " received according to what he has done," προς ἁ. Gal. 2:14, προς την αληθειαν, according to the truth, keeping it in view as an object; Eph. 3:4, 2 Cor. 3:4: so, "we have peace towards God," Rom. 5:1, looking at Him as the object. Acts 24:16, conscience, and Rom. 15:17, a more peculiar case, but the same. Hence it may be comparative, as the object to which we refer, Rom. 8:18. Hence Matt. 19:8, "Moses in view of the hardness of your heart." So προς τους αγγελους, Heb. 1:7,8, as to, speaking with them in view in his mind. As to time we have προς, towards, προς ἑσπεραν, Luke 24:29, 1 Cor. 7:5, προς καιρον 'up to a certain time,' for a season.' It is used as to swearing to any one. Mark 9:10, some ' kept it to themselves.' Mark 13:22, note, in order to seduce' the object; in Matt. we find ὡστε πλανησαι.
It practically has the sense of against with certain verbs. They murmured against the disciples,' Luke 5:30, they were the objects of their murmur; Luke 20:19, with them in view. 'At' would do in English. Acts 19:38; 23:30; 24:19; 25:14, 1 Cor. 6:1, so Eph. 6:12, but still as the object in view; thus in Col. 3: 19, towards would do as well as against, or better. Another use of it still with the sense of having the other as an objective view is found 2 Cor. 6:14,15, fellowship of light with darkness, concord of Christ with Belial. If I bring one to the other there is no concord or fellowship, nothing in common. In Eph. 4:12, the object is the perfecting of the saints, a result to be attained as a second consequence was ministry and the body. It is to be noted that the individual saint comes first in Ephesians, though the epistle be full of the church. Eph. 5:31 is somewhat peculiar joined to, not with. He was to "leave father and mother and be joined to her."
The object is distinctly seen in 1 Tim. 4:7,8, 2 Tim. 3:16,17, 2 Peter 1:3. In Heb. 1.13, it may be, doubtful if to or as to be best, on account of its common use after speaking, see vers. 7, 8. See 1 John 5:16,17: we see that object does not mean always mental intention, but προς in fact, and here James 4:5 comes in.
Συν needs no comment. It is with governing a dative. It is different from "hem in that it is not only accompanying as to being together or near so as to mean after, as we have seen, with the accusative; but association, Connection. There is no passage requiring observation. It naturally governs the dative, which is the case of close connection or relationship, as the accusative is of object in view. I add, it is together in something common to both, not mere proximity as μετα.
'Υπερ requires more attention: over is its natural meaning; only over, not on-that would be επι. Then with the accusative, which always gives an object or motion, over in place,' i.e., beyond; ὑπερ in the genitive in the moral sense, in which alone it is used in the N. T., has the sense of for, in favor of, and as for also has in English, in the place of, in that place in which another would have been, if the one who is there for him had not, or at any rate, taking that place when lie cannot. Thus, to pray for, or in favor of,' it takes hence the sense of for in general in favoring or having any good (i.e., what is favorable) as an object, 2 Cor. 1:11, "by prayer ὑπερ ἡμων:" 2 Cor. 1:6, "for your consolation ' ὑπερ του ονοματος αυτου: Rom. 8:31,32, Θεος ὑπερ ἡμων: Rom. 1:5, ὑπερ του ονοματος ςυτου: John 17:19, "ὑπερ αυτων, I sanctify myself." Hence it runs into the sense of on our account, as 2 Cor. 5:12, " to glory on our behalf;" so vii. 4, and even into in respect of, but still in the sense of favorable feeling: 2 Cor. 7:4,7,14.
All this is sufficiently plain. It is the same in English with for.' The remaining point is that as it descends to what is, in respect of,' so it rises to the sense of ' instead of,' in the place of so, in English, I could not do it, but he has done it for me.' It is in my favor,' but means withal, in my stead.' Its being in my favor does not drop out of the sense, but there is the added idea of its being done in my stead. Thus in 2 Cor. 5:20, ὑπερ Χριστου πρεσβευομεν, with the context which precedes.
In 1 Peter 3:18, "'Christ suffered περι ἁμαρτιων," so 1 John 2:2; but 4:1, ὑπερ ἡμων, and in 1 Peter 3:18, itself ὑπερ αδικων. So 2:21 and often. Nor is it merely on our account, through us, that is &a, 1 Peter 1:20. He has been manifested δι'ἡμας; so Christ was περι ἁμαρτιας "a sacrifice for sin," the technical word therefore for the sin offering, Heb. 10:6,8, and Rom. 8:3. But in Heb. 5:1, and 7:27, we have ὑπερ ἁμαρτιων, also in the former case in the same sentence with ὑπερ ανθρωπων. This is the extreme case noticed of descending to the sense in respect of.' Still it is in the sense of an object which the favor of the actor or efficacy of the instrument would obtain for us. Nor is περι ἁμαρτιας or περι ἁμαρτιων and ὑπερ ἁμαρτιων the same thing: περι may be to God, according to the exigency of His righteousness and glory, ὑπερ ἁμαρτιων is always, I apprehend, in view of some one in whose favor, to whose advantage, it is done. The cases are 1 Cor. 15:3, Gal. 1:4, our in both cases. Heb. 5:1,3; 7:27, 9:7, where the connection of the two, persons and errors, is most complete; 10:12, the most abstract of all and like περι, but I do not apprehend ὑπερ ἁμαρτιας, is to be found in the N. T. nor would be put. In general it is the object of interest, favor, or action, not merely a subject, but an object, and in the heart of' the agent, or purpose of the instrument, and hence different from περι or δια.
'Υπο, under, genitive and accusative. The meaning, where not physical, as ὑπο της γης (in Rev. 5:3,13, it is ὑποκατω), is under the influence or effect of,' under the power of,' and so the effect of a cause. The accusative, as usual, introducing motion towards an object, at least of thought; thus 1 Cor. 10:9, ὑπο των οφεων απολεσθαι; Acts 15:4, αποδεχεσθαι ὑπο της εκκλησιας; John 14:21, αγαπασθαι ὑπο του πατρος. The reception, the love (flowed from Him), was the effect of an influence corning out from Him; πασχειν ὑπο, which gives its essential force, for it is used with the passive, as we say, suffer under' a thing or person; Mark 5:25, 1 Thess. 2:14. 2 Cor. 11:24, the sense is this with ελαβον. So Heb. 12:3, with ὑπομεινω). 2 Peter 1:17 is more peculiar; it is the principal thing under the effect or influence of which the other happened, though not absolutely a cause or instrument, which directly is not, the force of ὑπο, though it amounts to it in common parlance, as 'spoken ὑπο των προφητων,' the person ὑπο whom being the agent or vessel, which is its very common use; but it is the effect of their action on, or it is under their hand or mind in it, in its being done. There is a receptive passive condition in the person or thing which is ὑπο. Whereas with δια,the person or thing which acts δια is viewed actively: a man is baptized ὑπο John, tempted ὑπο Satan, loved ὑπο του Πατρος, surnamed ὑπο the apostles, and hence it is so constantly used with the passive. The most peculiar use in this respect is Rev. 6:8, εν till you come to the beasts; these being distinct agents, it is ὑπο as to them under which men suffer. It may be said of its use in the N. T. that when the sense is passive, when another thing is acted on by what is governed by ὑπο, the word governed is in the genitive: where the sense is active, that is, when the word governed by ὑπο-is that under which something is placed or set-; and even with the verb substantive, when the sense is being placed there, or no verb of the sense be such, the governed noun is in the accusative. A man set under authority, who is under authority, not acted on by it, but so placed under heaven, that is, when the subject of the sentence is referred to it objectively, then it is the accusative, and it signifies under. When it is acted on by the word governed by ὑπο the genitive is used, and it signifies by, of, or with, in the same sense as 'loved of the Father,' delivered to me of my Father,' 'vexed with the conversation'. The accusative is the relative position towards the governed word (the universal force of the accusative); the genitive a subjected or receptive condition to or from the action of the governed word. The subject of the sentence is the object of the governed word's action. I am set under authority;' authority would be accusative, it is my relationship to it. So Matt. 8:9, I am oppressed by authority;' authority would be in the genitive, because I am subjected to its action. Generally, therefore, with the genitive the sentence is passive in form, always in sense. If the governed word be that towards which the subject is in relationship the form is immaterial. As, ye are under the law," under sin.' It is accusative. It may be expressed thus-when the subject which is ὑπο is referred to that ὑπο which it is objectively, this latter is in the accusative; when the former is passively under the effect of this latter, this is in the genitive. One is ὑπο τον νομον την καταραν. It is his position towards the law, the curse destroyed. ὑπο των οφεων, the destruction is the effect of this latter.
Χωρις. Genitive, without, apart from, wholly unconnected with,' as not in relationship, so as that, as to the subject, it is the same as if it did not exist. But there is no case requiring any particular notice. Compare ανευ.