[εἰ, ἰ: εἰ and ἰ are frequent interchanged in N. T. spelling. This is due partly to itacism, partly to the endeavor to mark the iota sound as long or short. See the remarks on this subject in WHs Appendix, p. 152f (cf. Introductory § 399); Tdf Proleg., p. 83f; Sophocles' Lexicon, under the word εἰ. The use of iota ἰ for εἰ is noticed under the word Iota; instances in which εἰ is substituted for iota ἰ are the folling: Ἀβειληνη WH; Ἀδδει T Tr WH; Ἀντειπας T; Ἀρεοπαγειτης T; Βενιάμειν L T Tr WH; Δαυειδ L T Tr WH; Ἐζεκειας L; Ἐλαμειτης T WH; Ἐλεισαβετ WH; Ἐσλει T Tr WH; Ἐυνεικη Rec.st; ἡλει T Tr WH; ἠλειας T WH; ἱερείχω T WH; ἱεροσολυμειτης T WH; Ἰσραηλειτης T WH, so Tr in Joh_1:47 (48); Ἰωσείας L T Tr WH; κεἰς L T Tr WH; Κυρεῖνος Tr marginal reading WH marginal reading; Λευεις T WH, so Tr except in Mar_2:14; Λευειτης T WH, so Tr except in Act_4:36; Λευειτικος T WH; Μελχει T Tr WH; Νηρει T Tr WH; Νινευειτης T WH, so Tr in Mat_12:41; Ὀζείας L T Tr WH; Πειλᾶτος T WH; Σεμηιν T Tr WH; Ταβειθα WH; Χερούβειν L T Tr WH (χερουβιμ R G); Χοράζειν T Tr WH; ἀφειδεια L; ἐιδεια T Tr WH; ἐπαρχεία T WH; ἐπιποθεια WH; ἡλει T; πανοικεί T WH; ῥαββει T WH; ῥαββουνει WH; σαβαχθανε T Tr WH; ταλειθα WH; τάχειον WH; τραπεζειτης T WH.) εἰ, is first a conditional particle, if (Latinsi); secondly, an interrogative particle, whether, (Latinan, num, ne). I. εἰ Conditional (on the difference between it and ἐάν, see ἐάν, I. 1 b.) is connected, according to the variety of conditions, with various tenses and moods; viz. 1. with the indicative of all tenses, when anything is simply and generally assumed to be, or to be done, or to have been done, or to be about to be, (Winers Grammar, § 41 b., 2; cf. 42, 2; (Buttmann, 220 (190))). a. with the present indicative α. following in the apodosis by the present indicative: Mat_19:10 (εἰ οὕτως ἐστιν ἡ αἰτία ... οὐ συμφέρει γαμῆσαι); ; Rom_7:16; Rom_7:20; Rom_8:25; Rom_14:15; 1Co_9:17; Gal_2:18; Gal_5:18; Heb_12:8; Jas_2:8 f, etc. β. followed by an imperative in the apodosis either the present, as (Mat_19:17 L Tr text WH text); Mar_4:23; Mar_7:16 R G L; Joh_15:18; Act_13:15; Act_25:5; 1Co_7:12; 1Co_7:15; Jas_3:14, etc.; or the aorist, as Mat_5:29-30; Mat_8:31; Mat_19:17 (R G T Tr marginal reading WH marginal reading); Mar_9:22 (cf. Buttmann, 55 (48)); Luk_22:67 (); 1Co_7:9. γ. followed by the future in the apodosis: ; Act_5:39 L T Tr WH; ; Rom_8:11; Rom_8:13; 2Co_11:30, etc. δ. followed by the perfect or the aorist in the apodosis, where it is declared that, if this or that is, something else has or has not occurred: Mat_12:26; Mat_12:28; Luk_11:20; 1Co_15:16; Gal_2:21; Rom_4:14; 2Pe_2:20. ε. followed by the imperfect, either with or without ἄν, where in the protasis something is simply assumed to be, but the apodosis shows that what has been assumed cannot be the case. Three passages falling under this head have a doubtful or disputed text: εἰ ἔχετε (T Tr WH, for the R G L εἴχετε) ἐλέγετε ἄν, etc. Luk_17:6; εἰ ... μνημονεύουσιν (T Tr, for R G L WH ἐμνημόνευον) ... εἶχον ἄν, Heb_11:15 (where by the present tense the writer refers to the language of the Jewish Fathers as at present corded in the sacred Scriptures; cf. τοιαῦτα λέγοντες Luk_17:14); εἰ τέκνα τοῦ Ἀβραάμ ἐστε (G L T Tr WH, for R ἦτε) ... ἐποιεῖτε ((WH text ποιεῖτε.) R L add ἄν), Joh_8:39; Alexander Buttmann (1873) in Studien und Kritiken for 1858, p. 474ff (N. T. Gram. § 139, 26; but cf. Meyer on Luke, the passage cited). But 2Co_11:4 εἰ ... κηρύσσει ... ἀνείχεσθέ G T Tr WH marginal reading (ἀνέχεσθε L WH text) must not be referred to this head; here Paul in the protasis supposes something which actually occurred, in the apodosis censures a thing which actually occurred viz. the readiness with which his readers gave ear continually (this is indicated by the imperfect) to false teachers. On the difficulty of the passage cf. Holsten in the Zeitschr. f. wissensch. Theol. for 1874, p. 1ff; (cf. also Buttmann, 226 (195); but Winer's Grammar, 306 (287) and Meyer at the passage). ζ. with a question as the apodosis: Mat_6:23; Joh_5:47; Joh_7:23; Joh_8:46; 1Pe_2:20. b. with the future indicative: Mat_26:33; Jas_2:11 R G; 1Pe_2:20. c. with the perfect indicative: Joh_11:12; Act_16:15; Rom_6:5; Rom_11:6 (where after εἰ supply λεῖμμα γέγονεν from what precedes), 2Co_2:5; 2Co_5:16; 2Co_7:14. d. with the aorist indicative followed by the present in the apodosis, Luk_19:8; Rom_4:2; Rom_15:27; followed by a question in the apodosis, Luk_16:11-12; Joh_18:23; 1Co_4:7; 1Co_9:11; followed by the aorist in the apodosis, Rev_20:15; by the Impv. in the apodosis, Joh_18:23; Joh_20:15; Rom_11:17; 1Ti_5:9-10; Phm_1:18; by the future in the apodosis, Joh_13:32; Joh_15:20; Heb_12:25 (where supply οὐκ ἐκφευξόμεθα in the apodosis). 2. Not infrequently, when a conclusion is drawn from something that is quite certain, εἰ with the indicative is used argumentatively so as to be equivalent in sense to ἐπεί (cf. the use of German wenn) (cf. Winer's Grammar, 448 (418)): Mat_12:28; Luk_23:31; Joh_7:4; Rom_5:17; Rom_6:5; Rom_8:31; Rom_11:6; Rom_11:12; Col_2:20; Col_3:1, etc. 3. When it is said what would have been, or what would be now or in the future, if something else were or had been, εἰ is used with the imperfect, pluperfect, and aorist indicative; in the apodosis it is followed in direct discourse by ἄν with the imperfect or the pluperfect or the aorist; sometimes ἄν is omitted, (on the causes of the omission, see Buttmann, § 139, 27); sometimes the apodosis is made a question (cf. Winers Grammar, 304f (285f)). a. εἰ with the imperfect, followed in the apodosis by ἄν with the imperfect: Mat_23:30; Luk_7:39 (εἰ οὗτος ἦν προφήτης, ἐγίνωσκεν ἄν, if this man were a prophet, he would know); Joh_5:46; Joh_8:42; Joh_9:41; Joh_15:19; 1Co_11:31; Gal_1:10; Heb_8:4; Heb_8:7 (if ... were, etc., there would not be sought, etc., viz. in the O. T. passage quoted Heb_8:8); by a question in the apodosis: 1Co_12:19; Heb_7:11; by ἄν with the aorist, where the Latin uses the pluperfect subjunctive: Joh_11:32 if thou hadst been here, οὐκ ἄν ἀπέθανε μου ὁ ἀδελφός, my brother would not have died (when he did (cf. below); Buttmann, § 139, 25 regards the imperfect in protasis as expressing duration)); Joh_4:10; Joh_18:30 (εἰ μή ἦν οὗτος κακοποιός, οὐκ ἄν σοι παρεδώκαμεν αὐτόν, we would not have delivered him to thee); Act_18:14; by ἄν with the pluperfect: Joh_11:21 (εἰ ἦς ὧδε ... οὐκ ἄν ἐτεθνήκει, would not have died (and be now dead; cf. Winers Grammar, 304 (285) and see above; but L T Tr text WH read the aorist here also)); 1Jn_2:19. b. εἰ with the pluperfect, followed in the apodosis by ἄν with the pluperfect or the aorist, in the sense of the Latin pluperfect subjunctive: Mat_12:7 (εἰ ἐγνώκειτε, if ye had understood, i. e., if ye knew, οὐκ ἄν κατεδικάσατε τούς ἀναιτίους, ye would not have condemned the guiltless); Mat_24:43 and Luk_12:39 (εἰ ᾔδει, if he had perceived, i. e., if he knew, ἐγρηγόρησεν ἄν, he would have watched, namely, before the thief had approached (Tr text WH omit ἄν in Luke, the passage cited)); Joh_4:10; Joh_8:19; Joh_14:7 (R G L). c:. with the aorist in the same sense as the Latin pluperfect subjunctive: εἰ ἐδόθη νόμος ... ὄντως ἄν ἐκ νόμου ἦν ἡ δικαιοσύνη, if a law had been given, righteousness would in truth come from the law, Gal_3:21; εἰ αὐτούς Ἰησοῦς κατέπαυσεν, if Joshua had given them rest, οὐκ ἄν περί ἄλλης ἐλάλει, he would not be speaking, namely, in the passage quoted, Heb_4:8; apodosis without ἄν, Joh_15:22, see ἄν I. 3, p. 33f. 4. As in classic Greek, εἰ with the indicative is often joined to verbs expressing wonder, surprise, or other strong emotion (where ὅτι might have been expected), when the thing spoken of is either not quite certain, or, although certain, yet in accordance with the well-known Greek urbanity is represented as not quite free from doubt (Matthiae, ii., p. 1474f; Kühner, ii., p. 887f; (Jelf, § 804, 9); Winers Grammar, § 60, 6; (Buttmann, § 139, 52]). Thus, it is joined to the verb, θαυμάζω: ἐθαύμαζεν, εἰ ἤδη τέθνηκε, for the matter had not yet been investigated; hence, it is added ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτόν, εἰ ἤδη (R G T Tr marginal reading WH marginal reading πάλαι) ἀπέθανεν, Mar_15:44; μή θαυμάζετε, εἰ μισεῖ ὑμᾶς ὁ κόσμος (the thing is certain) 1Jn_3:13; to the phrase ἄπιστον κρίνεται: Act_26:8 (with παράδοξον preceding, Lucian, dial. mort. 13, 1); to καλόν ἐστιν and λυσιτελεῖ: Mar_9:42 and Luk_17:2 (Mat_18:6 has συμφέρει, ἵνα); Mat_26:24 and Mar_14:21; to μέγα ἐστι: 1Co_9:11 (on which see 8 below); 2Co_11:15; τί θέλω, εἰ ἤδη ἀνήφθη (τό πῦρ), how would I if (i. e., that) it were already kindled (but it has not yet been kindled), Luk_12:49 (others besides, but cf. Meyer at the passage; (so B. 1. e.; cf. Winers Grammar, 448 (418); see τίς, 1 e. γ. at the end); Sir_23:14 θελήσεις, εἰ μή ἐγεννήθης; (in addition to the other interpretations noticed by Winer's and Meyer the passages cited mention may be made of that which takes θέλω as subjunctive: what am I to choose if (as I may well assume) it has already been kindled; cf. Green, 'Critical Notes' at the passage)). 5. Contrary to Greek usage, in imitation of the Hebrew ΰΔν, εἰ, with the indicative is so used in oaths and asseverations that by aposiopesis the formula of imprecation (constituting the apodosis) is suppressed (Winers Grammar, § 55 at the end; Buttmann, § 149, 4): ἀμήν λέγω ὑμῖν, εἰ δοθήσεται ... σημεῖον (fully expressed, 'may God punish me, if it shall be given,' i. e. it shall by no means be given), Mar_8:12; ὤμοσα, εἰ εἰσελεύσονται εἰς τήν κατάπαυσιν μου (fully, 'let my name no longer be Jehovah, if they shall enter,' etc.), Heb_3:11; Heb_4:3, from Psa_94:11 () the Sept. (Hebrew ΰΔν, Gen_14:23; Num_14:30; 1Sa_14:45, etc.; we have the full expression in 1Sa_3:17; Son_2:7, etc.). 6. Sometimes, as in classic Greek, after a protasis with εἰ and the indicative, the apodosis is suppressed on account of mental agitation and left to be supplied by the reader or the hearer from the context (cf. Winer's Grammar, 599f (557)): εἰ βούλει παρενεγκεῖν τό ποτήριον τοῦτο (namely, παρένεγκε (but here L Tr WH adopt the imperative in place of the infinitive; yet cf. Buttmann, 396 (339))), Luk_22:42; εἰ δέ πνεῦμα ἐλάλησεν αὐτῷ ἤ ἄγγελος, supply in place of an apodosis the question what then? Act_23:9 (the apodosis added in Rec., μή θεομαχωμεν is spurious); εἰ ἔγνως ... τά πρός εἰρήνην σου, namely, ἐπιστευες ἄν ἐμοί, Luk_19:42 (Buttmann, 396 (339)]. 7. The conditional εἰ is joined with the optative, to indicate that the condition is merely thought of or stated as a possibility (cf. Klotz ad Devar. ii. 2, p. 491ff; Winers Grammar, 293f (275f); Buttmann, § 139, 24). No example of this construction is found in the Gospels; very few in the rest of the N. T. a. universally, in short intercalated clauses: εἰ τύχοι, if it so chance, it may be (see τυγχάνω 2), 1Co_14:10; 1Co_15:37; εἰ θέλοι τό θέλημα τοῦ Θεοῦ, 1Pe_3:17 (Rec. θέλει. b. where it indicates that something may occur repeatedly (cf. Klotz, the passage cited, p. 492f): εἰ καί πάσχοιτε, 1Pe_3:14 (cf. Winers Grammar, as above). c. where the condition represents the mind and judgment of others: εἰς ὁ ἐβουλεύοντο (R G ἐβουλεύσαντο), εἰ δύναιντο ἐξῶσαι (WH text ἐκσωσαι (which see)) τό πλοῖον, into which bay (or rather 'upon which beach'; see ἐξωθέω) they determined to run the ship, if they could; as though the navigators had said among themselves, ἐξώσομεν, εἰ δυνάμεθα, Act_27:39; so also εἰ τί ἔχοιεν πρός με, if they think they have anything against me, Act_24:19. 8. with the subjunctive, when it is assumed that something may take place, but whether it will in reality is unknown before the event, in order to make the event seem to be more certain than if ἐάν were used (Klotz, the passage cited, p. 500ff; Winers Grammar, 294f (276f); Buttmann, § 139, 22): εἰ ... θερισωμεν, 1Co_9:11 Tdf. editions 2, 7 (Lachmann marginal reading; others, θερίσομεν); (the Sept. Gen_43:3 f; Sir_22:26; 4Ma_6:20). But see III. below, under εἰ μή, εἰ μήτι, εἰ πῶς, εἴτε ... εἴτε, εἰ τίς. II. εἰ Interrogative, whether. "The conditional particle gets this force if a question is asked about anything, whether it is or is not so, and that about which the question is put is uttered as it were conditionally" (Klotz, the passage cited, p. 508; (Winers Grammar, § 57, I; Alexander Buttmann (1873) 248ff (214ff); 254f (218f)). 1. As in Greek writings in an indirect question after verbs of seeing, asking, deliberating, knowing, saying, etc. a. with the present indicative: as ὀυδ' εἰ πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἐστιν, ἠκούσαμεν (properly, according to the conditional force of the particle, 'if there is (i. e. has appeared, been given; cf. εἰμί, I. 2) a Holy Spirit, we did not even hear'), Act_19:2; ἴδωμεν, εἰ ἔρχεται, Mat_27:49; Mar_15:36; βουλεύεται (T WH L marginal reading βουλήσεται), εἰ δυνατός ἐστιν, Luk_14:31; ἵνα εἴπῃς, εἰ σύ εἰ, Mat_26:63; (ἵνα γνῷ τήν δοκιμήν ὑμῶν εἰ (WH marginal reading ἡ) ... ὑπηκωι ἐστε, 2Co_2:9 (see WH. Introductory § 404)); after οὐκ οἶδα, Joh_9:25; after κρίνατε, Act_4:19; δοκιμάζετε ((?), πειράζετε), 2Co_13:5. b. with the future indicative (cf. Winers Grammar, 300 (282); Buttmann, § 139, 61 b.): δεήθητι, εἰ ἄρα ἀφεθήσεται σοι, Act_8:22; τί οἶδας, εἰ ... σώσεις, 1Co_7:16; παρετήρουν, εἰ θεραπεύσει (Tdf. θεραπεύει), Mar_3:2 and in Luk_6:7 (R G WH marginal reading); ἦλθεν (namely, to see), εἰ ἄρα τί εὑρήσει, Mar_11:13. c. with the aorist indicative: οὐκ οἶδα, εἰ τινα ἄλλον ἐβάπτισα, whether I baptized, 1Co_1:16; ἐπηρώτησαν, εἰ πάλαι (L Tr text WH text ἤδη) ἀπέθανεν, whether he were long dead, Mar_15:44; εἶπε μοι, εἰ ... ἀπέδοσθε, Act_5:8. d. with the subjunctive aorist (cf. Buttmann, 255f (220); Winer's Grammar, 298f (280f)): διώκω, εἰ καί καταλάβω, I press on (namely, πειρωμενος or σκοπῶν, trying to see), whether I may also lay hold, Php_3:12. Sosi is used in Latin, e. g. Nepos, vit. Hann. 8 Hannibal ...African accessit in finibus Cyrenaeorum (namely,experturus),si forte Carthaginienses ad bellum possent induci Caesar b. g. 1, 8, 4si perrumpere possent, conati; add Caesar b. g. 2, 9, 1. Cf. Kühner, ii., p. 1032f; (Jelf, § 877 b.). 2. Contrary to the usage of Greek authors, like the Hebrew ΰΔν and the interrogative he (δ), it is used in the Sept. and the N. T. (especially by Luke) also in direct questions (cf. the colloquial use of the German ob; e. g.ob icb wohl thun soll?); cf. Winers Grammar, § 57, 1; Buttmann, 248 (214), and, in opposition to those who have striven to absolve the sacred writers from this misuse of the particle (especially Fritzsche and Meyer (see the latter's note on Mat_12:10 and Luk_13:23; he quotes with approval the language of Ast (Platonic Lexicon, vol. i. 601), 'dubitanter interrogat, ita ut interrogatio videatur directa esse)), cf. Lipsius, Paulin. Rechtfertigungslehre, p. 30ff: εἶπε τίς αὐτῷ, κύριε, εἰ ὀλογοι οἱ σῳζόμενοι; Luk_13:23; κύριε, εἰ πατάξομεν ἐν μάχαιρα (μαχαίρῃ T Tr WH); Luk_22:49; κύριε, εἰ ... ἀποκαθιστάνεις τήν βασιλείαν; Act_1:6; cf. besides, Mat_12:10; Mat_19:3; Mar_8:23 (according to the reading of (Tdf. 2, 7) Tr (marginal reading WH text) εἰ τί βλέπεις for R G L T Tr text WH marginal reading βλέπει); Act_19:2, etc. (Gen_17:17; Gen_43:6; 1Sa_10:24, etc.; in the O. T. Apocrypha, 2Ma_7:7 2Ma_15:3; 4Ma_18:17 from Eze_37:3 the Sept.; Tob_5:5). III. εἰ with other particles and with the indefinite pronoun τίς, τί. 1. εἰ ἄρα, see ἄρα, 1. 2. εἴγε, see γέ, 3 c. 3. εἰ δέ καί, a. but if also, so that καί belongs to some word that follows: Luk_11:18 (but if Satan also). b. but though, but even if, so that καί belongs to εἰ: 1Co_4:7; 2Co_4:3; 2Co_5:16 (R G; others omit δέ); 2Co_11:6; see 6 below. 4. εἰ δέ μή, but if not; if it is or were otherwise, (Buttmann, 393 (336f), cf. 345 (297); Winer's Grammar, as below): Joh_14:2 (εἰ δέ μή, namely, οὕτως ἦν), Joh_14:11 (εἰ δέ μή namely, ἐμοί πιστεύετε, i. e. my words). As in these passages so generally the phrase stands where a word or clause must be repeated in thought from what immediately precedes; it thus has the force of the Latinalioquin, otherwise, or else, (Winer's Grammar, 583 (543)): Rev_2:5; Rev_2:16; also after negative declarations, Mar_2:21 f; cf. Matthiae, § 617 b. 5. εἰ δέ μήγε, see γέ, 3 d. 6. εἰ καί, a. iif even, if also, (cf. εἰ δέ καί, 3 a., (and 7 below)): 1Co_7:21 (cf. Meyer at the passage; Lightfoot on Philemon, p. 324); 2Co_11:15. b. though, although: Luk_11:8; 2Co_4:16; 2Co_7:8; 2Co_7:12; Php_2:17; Col_2:5 (εἰ γάρ καί); Heb_6:9; with the optative, 1Pe_3:14; see I. 7 b. above. 7. καί εἰ, even if: Mar_14:29 (T Tr WH εἰ καί); 1Pe_3:1; cf. Klotz, the passage cited, p. 519 (who says, "In εἰ καί the conditional particle εἰ has the greater force; in καί εἰ the conjunctive particle καί. Hence, καί εἰ is used of what is only assumed to be true; εἰ καί, on the other hand, of what is as it is said to be." Bäumlein (Griech. Partikeln, p. 151) says, "In εἰ καί the καί naturally belongs to the conditional clause and is taken up into it, if even; in the combination καί εἰ the καί belongs to the consequent clause, even if. Sometimes however the difference disappears." Krüger (sec. 65, 5, 15): "with καί εἰ, the leading clause is regarded as holding under every condition, even the one stated, which appears to be the most extreme; with εἰ καί the condition, which may also come to pass, is regarded as a matter of indifference in reference to the leading clause;" Sauppe (on Demosthenes, Ol. 2 § 20) is very explicit: "καί εἰ and εἰ καί both indicate that something conflicts with what is expressed in the leading clause, but that that is (or is done) notwithstanding. καί εἰ, however, represents the thing adduced in the conditional sentence to be the only thing conflicting; but when the conditional particle precedes (εἰ καί), the representation is that something which is (or may be) accompanied by many others (καί) conflicts ineffectually. Accordingly, the phrase καί αἱ greatly augments the force of what follows, εἰ καί lays less emphasis upon it; although it is evident that εἰ καί can often be substituted for καί εἰ." Cf. Herm. Vig., p. 829f; Winer's Grammar, 444 (413); Ellicott on Php_2:17; Schmalfeld, Griech. Syntax, § 41; Paley, Greek Particles, p. 31). 8. εἰ μή, a. in a conditional protasis, with the same sequence of moods and tenses as the simple εἰ see I. above, if not, unless, except, (Winers Grammar, 477ff (444ff); Buttmann, 345 (297)): Mat_24:22; Joh_9:33; Joh_15:22; Joh_15:24; Rom_7:7, etc. b. it serves, with the entire following sentence, to limit or correct what has just been said, only, save that, (Latinnisi quod) (Buttmann, 359 (308)): Mar_6:5; 1Co_7:17 (where Paul by the addition εἰ μή ἑκάστῳ κτλ. strives to prevent anyone in applying what had been said a little while before, viz. οὐ δεδούλωται ... ἐν τοιούτοις to his own case, from going too far); in ironical answers, unless perchance, save forsooth that, (Kühner, § 577, 7; (Jelf, § 860, 5 Obs.)): εἰ μή χρῄζομεν κτλ., 2Co_3:1 Rec. c. εἰ μή very often coalesce into one particle, as it were, which takes the same verb as the preceding negation: unless, equivalent to except, save, (Kühner, § 577, 8; Buttmann, 359 (308)); a. universally: Mat_11:27; Mat_12:39; Mar_2:26; Mar_8:14; Joh_3:13; Rom_7:7; Rom_13:1; Rom_13:8; 1Co_8:4; 1Co_12:3; 2Co_12:5, etc. as in classic Greek, μόνος, μόνον, is added pleonastically: Mat_17:8; Mat_21:19; Mat_24:36; Act_11:19; Php_4:15; Rev_13:17, etc. β. after negatives joined to nouns it is so used as to refer to the negative alone (hence, many have regarded it as used for ἀλλά (i. e. as being not exceptive but adversative)), and can be rendered in Latinsed tantum, but only: Mat_12:4 (οὐκ ἐξόν ἦν αὐτῷ φαγεῖν οὐδέ τοῖς μετ' αὐτοῦ, εἰ μή τοῖς ἱερεῦσι μόνοις, as if οὐκ ἐξόν ἦν φαγεῖν alone preceded); Luk_4:26; Rom_14:14; Rev_9:4; Rev_21:27 (ἐάν μή is so used in Gal_2:16; on Gal_1:19 see Ἰάκωβος, 3); cf. Fritzsche on Romans, vol. iii., p. 195; (see ἐάν, I. 3 c. and references). γ. when preceded by the interrogative τίς in questions having a negative force: Mar_2:7; Luk_5:21; Rom_11:15; 1Co_2:11; 2Co_2:2; 2Co_12:13; Heb_3:18; 1Jn_2:22; 1Jn_5:5; (Xenophon, oec. 9, 1; Aristophanes eqq. 615). δ. with other conjunctions: εἰ μή ἵνα Joh_10:10; εἰ μή ὅταν, Mar_9:9; εἰ μή ὅτι etc., 2Co_12:13; Eph_4:9. ε. it has its own verb, and makes a phrase by itself: ὁ οὐκ ἐστιν ἄλλο, εἰ μή τινες εἰσιν οἱ ταράσσοντες ὑμᾶς which means nothing else, save that there are some who trouble you, Gal_1:7 (so Winer (commentary at the passage) et al.; but see Meyer)) d. ἐκτός εἰ μή, arising from the blending of the two expressions εἰ μή and ἐκτός εἰ, like the Latinnisi si equivalent topraeterquam si, except in case, except: 1Ti_5:19; with the aorist indicative, 1Co_15:2; with the subjunctive present 1Co_14:5; (Lucian, de luctu c. 19; dial. meret. 1, 2, etc.). Cf. Lob. ad Phryn., p. 459; Winers Grammar, § 65, 3 c.; (Buttmann, index under the word ἐκτός εἰ μή). 9. εἰ μήν, assuredly, surely, in oaths: Heb_6:14 L T Tr WH (for R G ἤ μήν (which see)) and several times in the Sept. as Eze_33:27; Eze_34:8; (cf. ; 1Ki_21:23 ()), etc.; here, if εἰ did not come from ἤ by itacism, εἰ μήν must be explained as confusion of the Hebraisic εἰ μή (see I. 5 above) and the Greek formula of asseveration ἤ μήν; cf. Bleek on Heb. vol. 2:2, p. 248ff, and what Fritzsche says on the other side, commentary on Bar_2:29; Jdt_1:12; (cf. Kneucker on Baruch, the passage cited; Buttmann, 359 (308); Tdf. Proleg., p. 59; WHs Appendix, p. 151; B. D. under the word , I. 31). 10. εἰ μή τί or μήτι, unless in some respect, unless perchance, unless indeed: ironically, with the present indicative, 2Co_13:5; hesitatingly, with the subjunctive aorist Luk_9:13; Meyer at the passage (also Winers Grammar, 294 (276); Buttmann, 221 (191)); τί ἄν: 1Co_7:5, see ἄν, IV. 11. εἰ οὐ (fully discussed by Winers Grammar, § 55, 2 c. and Buttmann, 345ff (297ff)), if not; this combination is used much more frequently in the N. T. than in the more elegant Greek authors; it differs from εἰ μή in this, that in the latter μή belongs to the particle εἰ, while in εἰ οὐ the οὐ refers to some following word and denies it emphatically, not infrequently even coalescing with it into a single idea. a. when the idea to which οὐ belongs is antithetic a. to a positive term, either preceding or following: εἰ δέ οὐ μοιχεύεις φονεύεις δέ, Jas_2:11 (in R G the future); εἰ γάρ ὁ Θεός ... οὐκ ἐφείσατο, ... ἀλλά ... παρέδωκεν εἰς κρίσιν, 2Pe_2:4 f; εἰ καί οὐ δώσει ... διά γέ ... δώσει, Luk_11:8; εἰ οὐ ποιῶ ... εἰ δέ ποιῶ, Joh_10:37 f; εἰ γάρ ἐπιστεύετε ..., εἰ δέ ... οὐ πιστεύετε, Joh_5:46 f; add, Mar_11:26 R G L; Rom_8:9; 1Co_9:2; 1Co_11:6; Jas_3:2. β. to some other idea which is negative (formally or virtually): εἰ ... οὐκ ἀκούουσιν, οὐδέ ... πεισθήσονται, Luk_16:31; εἰ ... οὐκ ἐφείσατο, οὐδέ σου φείσεται (Rec. φείσηται), Rom_11:21; add, 1Co_15:13; 1Co_15:15-17; 2Th_3:10; followed in the apodosis by a question having the force of a negative: Luk_16:11; Joh_3:12; 1Ti_3:5. γ. the οὐ denies with emphasis the idea to which it belongs: καλόν ἦν αὐτῷ εἰ οὐκ ἐγεννήθη, good were it for him not to have been born, Mat_26:24; Mar_14:21. δ. the whole emphasis is placed on the negative itself: εἰ σύ οὐκ εἰ ὁ Χριστός, Joh_1:25. b. the οὐ coalesces, as it were, with the word to which it belongs into a single idea: εἰ δέ οὐκ ἐγκρατεύονται if they are incontinent, 1Co_7:9; εἰ τίς τῶν ἰδίων οὐ προνοεῖ (or προνοειται T Tr text WH marginal reading), "neglects, 1Ti_5:8; add, Luk_14:26; 1Co_16:22; Rev_20:15, etc. 12. εἰ οὖν, if then: Mat_6:23; Mat_7:11; Luk_11:13; Luk_11:36; Joh_13:14; Joh_18:8; Act_11:1; Col_3:1; Phm_1:1. (On εἰ μέν οὖν see μέν II. 4.) 13. εἴπερ (so T WH (except in 2Co_5:3 marginal reading), but L Tr εἰ περ; cf. Winers Grammar, 45; Lipsius, Gram. Unters., p. 123) (εἰ and περ, and this apparently from περί), properly, if on the whole; if only, provided that, is used of a thing which is assumed to be, but whether rightly or wrongly is left in doubt (Herm. ad Vig., p. 831 (so Winers Grammar, 448 (417); but cf. Bäumlein, Griech. Partikeln, p. 202 (cf. 64 bottom); Klotz ad Devar. 2:2, p. 528, and especially under the word εἴγε (in γέ, 3 c.) and the references to Meyer, Lightfoot, Ellicott, there given)): Rom_8:9; Rom_8:17; 1Co_8:5; 1Co_15:15; 1Pe_2:3 (where L T Tr WH εἰ); by a species of rhetorical politeness it is used of that about which there is no doubt: 2Th_1:6; Rom_3:30 L T Tr WH; 2Co_5:3 L Tr WH marginal reading 14. εἰ πῶς (LTr WH) or εἴπως (G T), if in any way, if by any means, if possibly: with the optative present (see I. 7 above), Act_27:12; interrogatively, with the future indicative, Rom_1:10; with the subjunctive aorist, so that before εἰ the word σκοπῶν or πειρωμενος must be mentally supplied (see II. 1 d. above): Rom_11:14; Php_3:11. 15. εἴτε ... εἴτε, a. whether ... or (as disjunc. conjunc.,sive ... sive; cf. Winers Grammar, 440 (409f); Buttmann, 221 (191)), without a verb following: Rom_12:6-8; 1Co_3:22; 1Co_8:5; 2Co_5:9; Php_1:18; Php_1:20; Php_1:27; 2Th_2:15; Col_1:16; Col_1:20; 1Pe_2:13 f; εἴτε οὖν ... εἴτε, 1Co_15:11; followed by the present indicative, 1Co_12:26; 1Co_13:8; 2Co_1:6; followed by the subjunctive present 1Th_5:10, where the use of the subjunctive was occasioned by the subjunctive ζήσωμεν in the leading clause; cf. Winers Grammar, 294 (276); Buttmann, 221 (191). b. whether ... or (as indirect interrogatives,utrum ... an; cf. Buttmann, 250 (215)) (see examples from Greek authors in Matthiae, p. 1476f): after οὐκ οἶδα, 2Co_12:2 f. 16. εἰ τίς, εἰ τί: examples of this combination have already been given among the preceding; here may be added εἰ τίς ἕτερος, εἰ τί ἕτερον and if (there be) any other person or thing a phrase used as a conclusion after the mention or enumeration of several particulars belonging to the same class (in the classics εἰ τίς ἄλλος, εἰ καί τίς ἄλλος, καί εἰ τί ἄλλο, etc., in Herodotus, Xenophon, Plato, others): Rom_13:9; 1Ti_1:10; εἰ τίς with subjunctive present Rev_11:5 Rec.; with the subjunctive aorist, ibid. T Tr WH text

εἰ ei 502x if, Mat_4:3 ; Mat_4:6 ; Mat_12:7 ; Act_27:39 , freq.; since, Act_4:9 ; whether, Mar_9:23 ; Act_17:11 ; that, in certain expressions, Act_26:8 ; Act_26:23 ; Heb_7:15 ; by a suppression of the apodosis of a sentence, εἰ serves to express a wish; O if! O that! Luk_19:42 ; Luk_22:42 ; also a strong negation, Mar_8:12 ; Heb_3:11 ; Heb_4:3 ; εἰ καί , if even, though, although, Luk_18:4 ; εἰ μή , unless, except, Mat_11:27 ; also equivalent to ἀλλά , but, Mat_12:4 ; Mar_13:32 ; Luk_4:26-27 ; εἰ μήτι , unless perhaps, unless it be, Luk_9:13 ; εἴ τις , εἴ τι , pr. if any one; whosoever, whatsoever, Mat_18:28 . The syntax of this particle must be learned from the grammars. As an interrogative particle, whether, Act_17:11 ; in NT as a mere note of interrogation, Luk_22:49

εἰ , conjunctive particle, used in conditions and in indirect questions. I. Conditional, if; 1. c . indic ., expressing a general assumption; (a) pres.: seq . indic . pres., Mat_11:14 , Rom_8:25 , al. ; seq . imperat., Mar_4:23 ; Mar_9:22 , Joh_15:18 , 1Co_7:9 , al. ; seq . fut . indic ., Luk_16:31 , Rom_8:11 , al. ; seq . pf . or aor. , with negation in apodosis, Mat_12:26 , Rom_4:14 , al. ; similarly, seq . impf ., Luk_17:6 , Joh_8:39 ; seq . quζst., Mat_6:23 Joh_5:47 ; Joh_7:23 ; Joh_8:46 , 1Pe_2:20 ; (b) fut .: Mat_26:33 , 1Pe_2:20 ; ( c ) pf .: Joh_11:12 , Rom_6:5 , al. ; (d) aor. : Luk_16:11 ; Luk_19:8 , Joh_13:32 ; Joh_18:23 , Rev_20:15 , al. 2. Where the assumption is certain = ἐπεί : Mat_12:28 , Joh_7:4 , Rom_5:17 , al. 3. Of an unfulfilled condition, c . indic . impf ., aor. or plpf ., seq . ἄν , c . imp. or aor. ( see ἄν , I, i). 4. C . indic ., after verbs denoting wonder, etc., sometimes, but not always, coupled with an element of doubt: Mar_15:44 , 1Jn_3:13 , al. 5. C . indic ., as in LXX ( Num_14:30 , 1Sa_14:45 , al. = Heb . H518 ), in oaths, with the formula of imprecation understood in a suppressed apodosis ( WM , 627; Burton , § 272): Mar_8:12 , Heb_3:11 ( LXX ) Heb_4:3 ( LXX ), 6. Rarely ( cl .) c . optat ., to express a merely possible condition: Act_24:19 ; Act_27:39 , 1Co_14:10 ; 1Co_15:37 , 1Pe_3:14 ; 1Pe_3:17 II. Interrogative, if, whether. 1. As in cl ., in indir. questions after verbs of seeing, asking, knowing, saying, etc: c . indic . Pres ., Mat_26:63 , Mar_15:36 , Act_19:2 , 2Co_13:5 , al. ; fut ., Mar_3:2 , Act_8:22 , al. ; aor. , Mar_15:44 , 1Co_1:16 , al. ; c . subjc . aor. ( M , Pr., 194), Php_3:12 . 2. As in LXX ( = Heb . H518 and interrog. δΒ , Gen_17:17 , al. ; v. W M , 639 f .; Viteau , i, 22), in direct questions: Mar_8:23 (Tr., WH , txt .), Luk_13:23 ; Luk_22:49 , Act_19:2 , al. III. With other particles. 1. εἰ ἄρα , εἴγε , εἰ δὲ μήγ s, see ἄρα , γε . 2. εἰ δὲ καί , but if also : Luk_11:18 ; but even of, 1Co_4:7 , 2Co_4:3 ; 2Co_11:6 . 3. εἰ δὲ μή , but if not, but if otherwise: Mar_2:21-22 , Joh_14:2 , Rev_2:5 , al. 4. εἰ καί , if even, if also, although: Mar_14:29 , Luk_11:8 , 1Co_7:21 , 2Co_4:16 , Php_2:17 , al. 5. καί εἰ , even if see καί . 6. εἰ μή , if not, unless, except, but only: Mat_24:22 , Mar_2:26 ; Mar_6:5 , Joh_9:33 , 1Co_7:17 (only), Gal_1:19 ( cf. ἐὰν μή , 216; v. Hort ., Ja., xvi); ἐκτὸς εἰ μή , pleonastic (Bl., § 65, 6), 1Co_14:5 ; 1Co_15:2 , 1Ti_5:19 .. 7. εἰ μήν = cl . ἦ μήν ( M , Pr., 46), in oaths, surely ( Eze_33:27 , al. ): Heb_6:14 . 8. εἴ πως , if haply: Act_27:12 , Rom_1:10 . 9. εἴτε . . . εἴτε , whether . . . or: Rom_12:6-8 , 1Co_3:22 ; 1Co_13:8 , al. εἴ -περ , see εἰ εἴ -ιτως , see εἰ

εἰ / εἴπερ [pages 181, 185] The weakening of the distinction between εἰ and ἐάν in Hellenistic Greek is seen not only in the use of ἐάν with the indicative (see s.v. ἐάν ), but in the occasional use of εἰ with the subjunctive, as P Ryl II. 234 .12 (ii/A.D.) λέγοντος μὴ δύνασθαι ἀπο [χ ]ωρῆσαι , εἰ μὴ ἀντιφωνηθῇ , I stated that I could not leave without an answer (Edd.), and the inscr. of Mopsuestia in Cilicia in Waddington Inscriptions iii. 2, No. 1499 (Imperial) ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ (cf. 1Co_14:5 ) [ἐ ]ὰν Μάγνα μόνη θε [λή ]σῃ (cited by Deissmann BS p. 118). See further Proleg. p. 187 and for εἰ . . ἄν , as in 1Co_7:5 (om. ἄν B), see the exx. collected in ib. pp. 169, 239, e.g. P Tebt II. 391 .23 (A.D. 99) ἴ τις δὲ ἡμῶν τῶν τεσσάρων ἐὰν παραβῇ πρὸς τὰ προγεγραμμένα ἐκτίσι κτλ ., BGU I. 326 i. 10 (ii/A.D.) εἴ τι ἐὰν ἀν [θ ]ρώπιν [ο ]ν πά [θῃ ] Μαρκέλλ [α , ib. ii. 2 εἴ τι ἐὰν ἐγὼ μετὰ ταῦτα γεγραμμένον καταλίπω , P Fay 130 .18 (iii/A.D.) εἴ τινος ἠὰν χρία σοί ἐστιν , and from the inscrr. C. and B. ii. p. 380, No. 210 εἰ δέ τις ἂν φανείη μετὰ τὸ ἐμὲ τεθῆναι , JHS xxv. p. 63 ἴ τις δ᾽ ἂν τολμήσι , μετέλθῃ αὐτὸν ὁ θεός . For εἴ γε μή see the Imperial edict, P Fay 20 .5 , where the Emperor, now identified with Julian ( Archiv ii. p. 169), states εἴ γε μὴ τὸ τῆς π [α ]ρὰ τοῖς καὶ τοῖς δημοσίας ἀπορίας ἐμποδὼν ἦν , if the fact of the public embarrassment existing in various parts had not stood in my way (Edd.), I would have made a more conspicuous display of magnanimity, etc. Εἰ μή = ἀλλά , as in Gal_1:7 , may be illustrated from the vi/A.D. OGIS 201 .20 οὐκ ἀφῶ αὐτοὺς καθεσθῆναι εἰς τὴν σκιάν , εἰ μὴ ὑπὸ ἡλίου ἔξω (where see Dittenberger s note) : for the more regular usage cf. P Tebt II. 414 .9 (ii/A.D.) ἰ μὴ ὅτι ἠσθένηκα , πάλαι πεπόνφην σοι , had it not been for the fact that I was ill, I should have sent them to you long ago (Edd.), and P Ryl II. 163 .10 (A.D. 139) πλὴν εἰ μὴ . . . [ἀφισ ]τάνειν με αὐτὸν παραχρῆμα ἰδίοις μου ἀναλώμασι , otherwise I will repel him forthwith at my own expense (Edd.) : see also Proleg. p. 171. Instances of εἰ δὲ μή γε will be found s.v. γε . In the illiterate P Oxy I. 119 .8 (ii/iii A.D.) (= Selections , p. 103) ἂμ μὴ θέλῃς ἀπενέκαι μ [ε ], ταῦτα γε [ί ]νετε , ἂμ μή = εἰ οὐ (see Blass Hermes xxiv. p. 312). For the emphatic εἴπερ , if indeed, cf. P Hal I. 7 .6 (B.C. 232) Π ]τολεμαίωι δὲ διά [σ ]τειλαι , εἴπερ μὴ τὸν βυβλιαφόρον καὶ τὸν ἔφοδον ἐκπέπει [κα ]ς , P Lond 42 .80 (B.C. 168) (= I. p. 31, Selections , p. 11) κα [λῶ ]ς ποιήσεις . . . παραγ [εν ]όμενος εἰς τὴν πόλιν , εἴπερ μὴ ἀναγκαιότερόν σ [ε ] περισπᾶι , please return to the city, unless indeed something most pressing occupies you, P Fay 124 .14 (ii/A.D.) ε̣ἴπερ εἰ καὶ γράμματα̣ μ̣ὴ ἦν , ἀλλὰ τοῖ [ς ] θ̣[εο ]ῖ [ς ] ἐσ̣τ̣[ι ]ν̣ χ̣άρις ὅτι οὐδεμία ἐστὶν πρόλημψις ἡμεῖν γεγενημένη κτλ ., even if there were no documents, still, thank heaven, there is no preconceived principle on our part, etc. (Edd.) See also the late P Oxy VI. 942 .3 (vi/vii A.D.) καὶ ὁ θεὸς οἶδεν εἴπερ μὴ ἤμεθα ἀπολύσαντες τὰ ζῷα , εἰ δ̣᾽ αὐτὰ εἴχαμεν ἐπαναλῦσαι , God knows whether we had not released the animals, and whether we had any more to unloose (Edd.). With the construction in Luk_22:42 where εἰ βούλει forms the protasis followed by an apodosis introduced by the inf. = imperative προσένεγκαι , may be compared a iv/B.C. letter, reprinted by Deissmann LAE p. 149, στέγασμα εἴ τι βόλεστε ἀποπέμψαι , if ye be willing, send me some covering : see the translator s note.

εἰ, conjunctive particle, used in conditions and in indirect questions. __I. Conditional, if; __1. with indic, expressing a general assumption; __(a) pres.: before indic, pres., Mat.11:14, Rom.8:25, al.; before imperat., Mrk.4:23 9:22, Jhn.15:18, 1Co.7:9, al.; before fut. indic., Luk.16:31, Rom.8:11, al.; before pf. or aor., with negation in apodosis, Mat.12:26, Rom.4:14, al.; similarly, before impf., Luk.17:6, Jhn.8:39; before quæst., Mat.6:23, Jhn.5:47 7:23 8:46, 1Pe.2:20; __(b) fut.: Mat.26:33, 1Pe.2:20; __(with) pf.: Jhn.11:12, Rom.6:5, al.; __(d) aor.: Luk.16:11 19:8, Jhn.13:32, 18:23, Rev.20:15, al. __2. Where the assumption is certain = ἐπεί: Mat.12:28, Jhn.7:4, Rom.5:17, al. __3. Of an unfulfilled condition, with indic, impf., aor. or plpf., before ἄν, with imp. or aor. (see: ἄν, I, i). __4. C. indic., after verbs denoting wonder, etc., sometimes, but not always, coupled with an element of doubt: Mrk.15:44, 1Jn.3:13, al. __5. C. indic., as in LXX (Num.14:3o, 1Ki.14:45, al. = Heb. אִם), in oaths, with the formula of imprecation understood in a suppressed apodosis (WM, 627; Burton, §272): Mrk.8:12, Heb.3:11" (LXX) 4:3 (LXX). __6. Rarely (cl.) with optative, to express a merely possible condition: Act.24:19 27:39, 1Co.14:10 15:37, I Pe3:14, 17. __II. Interrogative, if, whether. __1. As in cl., in indir. questions after verbs of seeing, asking, knowing, saying, etc.: with indic. pres., Mat.26:63, Mrk.15:36, Act.19:2, 2Co.13:5, al.; fut., Mrk.3:2, Act.8:22, al.; aor., Mrk.15:44, 1Co.1:16, al.; with subjc. aor. (M, Pr., 194), Php.3:12. __2. As in LXX (= Heb. אִם and interrog. הֲ, Gen.17:17, al.; see WM, 639f.; Viteau, i, 22), in direct questions: Mrk.8:23 (Tr., WH, txt.), Luk.13:23, 22:49, Act.19:2, al. __III. With other particles. __1. εἰ ἄρα, εἴγε, εἰ δὲ μήγε, see: ἄρα, γε. __2. εἰ δὲ καί, but if also: Luk.11:18; but even if, 1Co.4:7, 2Co.4:3 11:16. __3. εἰ δὲ μή, but if not, but if otherwise: Mrk.2:21, 22 Jhn.14:2, Rev.2:5, al. __4. εἰ καί, if even, if also, although: Mrk.14:29, Luk.11:8, 1Co.7:21, 2Co.4:16, Php.2:17, al. __5. καὶ εἰ, even if, see: καί __6. εἰ μή, if not, unless, except, but only: Mat.24:22, Mrk.2:26 6:5, Jhn.9:33, 1Co.7:17 (only), Gal.1:19 (cf. ἐὰν μή, 2:16; see Hort., Ja., xvi); ἐκτὸς εἰ μή, pleonastic (Bl., §65, 6), 1Co.14:5 15:2, 1Ti.5:19. __7. εἰ μήν = cl. ἦ μήν (M, Pr., 46), in oaths, surely (Eze.33:27, al.): Heb.6:14. __8. εἴ πως, if haply: Act.27:12, Rom.1:10. __9. εἴτε . . . εἴτε, whether . . . or; Rom.12:6-8, 1Co.3:22 13:8, al. (AS)