Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp interrogative:

rwp@1Corinthians:1:13 @{Is Christ divided?} (\memeristai ho Christos;\). Perfect passive indicative, Does Christ stand divided? It is not certain, though probable, that this is interrogative like the following clauses. Hofmann calls the assertory form a "rhetorical impossibility." The absence of \m\ here merely allows an affirmative answer which is true. The fourth or Christ party claimed to possess Christ in a sense not true of the others. Perhaps the leaders of this Christ party with their arrogant assumptions of superiority are the false apostles, ministers of Satan posing as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:12-15|). {Was Paul crucified for you?} (\M Paulos estaurth huper humn;\). An indignant "No" is demanded by \m\. Paul shows his tact by employing himself as the illustration, rather than Apollos or Cephas. Probably \huper\, over, in behalf of, rather than \peri\ (concerning, around) is genuine, though either makes good sense here. In the _Koin_ \huper\ encroaches on \peri\ as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1|. {Were ye baptized into the name of Paul?} (\eis to onoma Paulou ebaptisthte;\). It is unnecessary to say {into} for \eis\ rather than {in} since \eis\ is the same preposition originally as \en\ and both are used with \baptiz\ as in strkjv@Acts:8:16; strkjv@10:48| with no difference in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). Paul evidently knows the idea in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and scouts the notion of being put on a par with Christ or the Trinity. He is no rival of Christ. This use of \onoma\ for the person is not only in the LXX, but the papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions give numerous examples of the name of the king or the god for the power and authority of the king or god (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 146ff., 196ff.; _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 121).

rwp@1Corinthians:3:5 @{What then?} (\ti oun;\). He does not say \tis\ (who), but \ti\ (what), neuter singular interrogative pronoun. {Ministers} (\diakonoi\). Not leaders of parties or sects, but merely servants through whom ye believed. The etymology of the word Thayer gives as \dia\ and \konis\ "raising dust by hastening." In the Gospels it is the servant (Matthew:20:26|) or waiter (John:2:5|). Paul so describes himself as a minister (Colossians:1:23,25|). The technical sense of deacon comes later (Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@1Timothy:3:8,12|). {As the Lord gave to him} (\hs ho Kurios edken\). Hence no minister of the Lord like Apollos and Paul has any basis for pride or conceit nor should be made the occasion for faction and strife. This idea Paul enlarges upon through chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:3; 4| and it is made plain in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:12|.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:8 @{Are one} (\hen eisin\). The neuter singular again (\hen\, not \heis\) as with the interrogative \ti\ and the indefinite \ti\. By this bold metaphor which Paul expands he shows how the planter and the waterer work together. If no one planted, the watering would be useless. If no one watered, the planting would come to naught as the dreadful drouth of 1930 testifies while these words are written. {According to his own labour} (\kata ton idion kopon\). God will bestow to each the reward that his labour deserves. That is the pay that the preacher is sure to receive. He may get too little or too much here from men. But the due reward from God is certain and it will be adequate however ungrateful men may be.

rwp@1Corinthians:6:4 @{If then ye have to judge things pertaining to this life} (\bitika men oun kritria ean echte\). Note emphatic position (proleptic) of \bitika kritria\ (tribunals pertaining to this life, as above). "If ye have tribunals pertaining to this life" (condition of third class, \ean echte\). If \kathizete\ (do ye set) is indicative and interrogative, then by "who are of no account in the church" (\tous exouthenmenous en ti ekklsii\) Paul means the heathen as in verse 1|. If \kathizete\ be imperative, then Paul means the least esteemed members of the church for such unwished for work. It is a harsh term for the heathen, but one of indignation toward Christians.

rwp@1John:3:1 @{What manner of love} (\potapn agapn\). Qualitative interrogative as in strkjv@2Peter:3:11; strkjv@Matthew:8:27|. Only here in John's writings. Originally of what country or race. {Hath bestowed} (\dedken\). Perfect active indicative of \didmi\, state of completion, "the endowment of the receiver" (Vincent). {That we should be called} (\hina klthmen\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with the first aorist passive subjunctive of \kale\, to call or name, as in strkjv@Matthew:2:23|. {Children} (\tekna\). As in strkjv@John:1:12| and with an allusion to \gegenntai\ in strkjv@2:29| in an effort "to restore the waning enthusiasm of his readers, and to recall them to their first love" (Brooke). {And such we are} (\kai esmen\). "And we are." A parenthetical reflection characteristic of John (\kai nun estin\ in strkjv@John:5:25| and \kai ouk eisin\ in strkjv@Revelation:2:2; strkjv@3:9|) omitted by Textus Receptus, though, in the old MSS. {Because it knew him not} (\hoti ouk egn auton\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\, precisely the argument in strkjv@John:15:18f|.

rwp@1Peter:1:11 @{Searching} (\eraunntes\). Present active participle of \erauna\, late form for older \ereuna\ (both in the papyri), uncompounded verb (John:7:52|), the compound occurring in verse 10| above. {What time or what manner of time} (\eis tina poion kairon\). Proper sense of \poios\ (qualitative interrogative) kept here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:35, strkjv@Romans:3:27|, though it is losing its distinctive sense from \tis\ (Acts:23:34|). The prophets knew what they prophesied, but not at what time the Messianic prophecies would be fulfilled. {The Spirit of Christ which was in them} (\to en autois pneuma Christou\). Peter definitely asserts here that the Spirit of Jesus Christ (the Messiah) was in the Old Testament prophets, the Holy Spirit called the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God (Romans:8:9|), who spoke to the prophets as he would speak to the apostles (John:16:14|). {Did point unto} (\edlou\). Imperfect active of \dlo\, to make plain, "did keep on pointing to," though they did not clearly perceive the time. {When it testified beforehand} (\promarturomenon\). Present middle participle of \promarturomai\, a late compound unknown elsewhere save in a writer of the fourteenth century (Theodorus Mech.) and now in a papyrus of the eighth. It is neuter here because \pneuma\ is neuter, but this grammatical gender should not be retained as "it" in English, but should be rendered "he" (and so as to strkjv@Acts:8:15|). Here we have predictive prophecy concerning the Messiah, though some modern critics fail to find predictions of the Messiah in the Old Testament. {The sufferings of Christ} (\ta eis Christon pathmata\). "The sufferings for (destined for) Christ" like the use of \eis\ in verse 10| (\eis humas\ for you). {The glories that should follow them} (\tas meta tauta doxas\). "The after these things (sufferings) glories." The plural of \doxa\ is rare, but occurs in strkjv@Exodus:15:11; strkjv@Hosea:9:11|. The glories of Christ followed the sufferings as in strkjv@4:13; strkjv@5:1,6|.

rwp@1Peter:2:20 @{For what glory} (\poion gar kleos\). Qualitative interrogative (what kind of glory). "What price glory?" \Kleos\ is old word from \kle\ (\kale\, to call), report, praise, glory, here only in N.T. {If ye shall take it patiently} (\ei hupomeneite\). First-class condition with \ei\ and future active indicative of \hupomen\, for which see strkjv@James:1:12|. Same condition also in next sentence (\all' ei\, etc.). {When ye sin} (\hamartanontes\). Present active participle of \hamartan\ (continued repetition). {And are buffeted for it} (\kai kolaphizomenoi\). Present passive participle of \kolaphiz\, late word (from \kolaphos\ fist), only in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:67|) and ecclesiastical writers. Repeated action again. No posing as a martyr allowed here. Christians do sometimes deserve persecution, as Jesus implied (Matthew:5:10-12|). {When ye do well} (\agathopoiountes\). Present active participle of \agathopoie\ as in verse 15|. {And suffer for it} (\kai paschontes\). Present active participle of \pasch\ (verse 19|). No "for it" in the Greek here or in the previous sentence. {This is acceptable with God} (\touto charis para thei\). "This thing (neuter) is thanks (verse 19|) by the side of (\para\) God (as God looks at it)."

rwp@1Peter:5:8 @{Be watchful} (\grgorsate\). First aorist active imperative of \grgore\, late present imperative from perfect \egrgora\ (to be awake) from \egeir\ (to arouse), as in strkjv@Matthew:24:42|. For \npsate\ see strkjv@1:13; strkjv@4:7|. {Your adversary} (\ho antidikos humn\). Old word for opponent in a lawsuit (Matthew:5:25|). {The devil} (\diabolos\). Slanderer. See on ¯Matthew:4:1|. {As a roaring lion} (\hs ruomenos len\). But Jesus is also pictured as the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Revelation:5:5|). But Satan {roars} at the saints. Present middle participle \ruomai\, old verb, here only in N.T., to howl like a wolf, dog, or lion, of men to sing loud (Pindar). See strkjv@Psalms:22:13|. {Whom he may devour} (\katapiein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \katapin\, to drink down. B does not have \tina\, Aleph has \tina\ (somebody), "to devour some one," while A has interrogative \tina\, "whom he may devour" (very rare idiom). But the devil's purpose is the ruin of men. He is a "peripatetic" (\peripatei\) like the peripatetic philosophers who walked as they talked. Satan wants all of us and sifts us all (Luke:22:31|).

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:9 @{They themselves} (\autoi\). The men of Macedonia, voluntarily. {Report} (\apaggellousin\). Linear present active indicative, keep on reporting. {What manner of entering in} (\hopoian eisodon\). What sort of entrance, qualitative relative in an indirect question. {We had} (\eschomen\). Second aorist active (ingressive) indicative of the common verb \ech\. {And how} (\kai ps\). Here the interrogative adverb \ps\ in this part of the indirect question. This part about "them" (you) as the first part about Paul. The verb \epistreph\ is an old verb for turning and is common in the Acts for Gentiles turning to God, as here from idols, though not by Paul again in this sense. In strkjv@Galatians:4:9| Paul uses it for turning to the weak and beggarly elements of Judaism. {From idols} (\apo tn eidoln\). Old word from \eidos\ (figure) for image or likeness and then for the image of a heathen god (our _idol_). Common in the LXX in this sense. In strkjv@Acts:14:15| Paul at Lystra urged the people {to turn from these vain things to the living God} (\apo toutn tn matain epistrephein epi theon znta\), using the same verb \epistrephein\. Here also Paul has a like idea, {to serve a living and true God} (\douleuein thei znti kai althini\). No article, it is true, but should be translated "the living and true God" (cf. strkjv@Acts:14:15|). Not "dead" like the idols from which they turned, but alive and genuine (\althinos\, not \alths\).

rwp@1Timothy:1:7 @{Teachers of the law} (\nomodidaskaloi\). Compound only in N.T. (here, strkjv@Luke:5:17; strkjv@Acts:5:34|) and ecclesiastical writers. {Though they understand} (\noountes\). Concessive participle of \noe\, old verb (Ephesians:3:4,20|). {Neither what} (\mte ha\). Relative \ha\ (which things). {Nor whereof} (\mte peri tinn\). Here the interrogative \tinn\ used in sense of relative \hn\. It may be regarded as the use of an indirect question for variety (Parry). {They confidently affirm} (\diabebaiountai\). Present middle indicative of the common _Koin_ compound, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Titus:3:8|.

rwp@Acts:7:49 @{What manner of house} (\Poion oikon\). What sort of a house? This interrogative is sometimes scornful as in strkjv@4:7; strkjv@Luke:6:32ff.| (Page). Songs:Stephen shows by Isaiah that Solomon was right that the temple was not meant to "confine" God's presence and that Jesus had rightly shown that God is a spirit and can be worshipped anywhere by any individual of any race or land. It is a tremendous argument for the universality and spirituality of Christianity free from the shackles of Jewish racial and national limitations, but its very strength only angered the Sanhedrin to desperation.

rwp@Acts:8:30 @{Understandest thou what thou readest?} (\Ara ge ginskeis ha anaginskeis?\) The interrogative particle \ara\ and the intensive particle \ge\ indicate doubt on Philip's part. The play (\paranomasia\) upon the words in the Greek is very neat: {Do you know what you know again (read)?} The verb for read (\anaginsko\) means to know the letters again, recognize, read. The famous comment of Julian about the Christian writings is often quoted: \Anegnn, egnn, kategnn\ (I read, I understood, I condemned). The keen retort was: \Anegns, all'ouk egns, ei gar egns, ouk an kategns\ (You read, but did not understand; for if you had understood, you would not have condemned).

rwp@James:3:5 @{A little member} (\mikron melos\). \Melos\ is old and common word for members of the human body (1Corinthians:12:12, etc.; strkjv@Romans:6:13|, etc.). {Boasteth great things} (\megala auchei\). Present active indicative of \auche\, old verb, here only in N.T. The best MSS. here separate \megala\ from \auche\, though \megalauche\ does occur in Aeschylus, Plato, etc. \Megala\ is in contrast with \mikron\. {How much--how small} (\hlikon--hlikn\). The same relative form for two indirect questions together, "What-sized fire kindles what-sized forest?" For double interrogatives see strkjv@Mark:15:24|. The verb \anaptei\ is present active indicative of \anapt\, to set fire to, to kindle (Luke:12:49|, only other N.T. example except some MSS. in strkjv@Acts:28:2|). \Huln\ is accusative case, object of \anaptei\, and occurs here only in N.T., though old word for forest, wood. Forest fires were common in ancient times as now, and were usually caused by small sparks carelessly thrown.

rwp@James:4:1 @{Whence} (\pothen\). This old interrogative adverb (here twice) asks for the origin of wars and fights. James is full of interrogatives, like all diatribes. {Wars} (\polemoi\) {--fightings} (\machai\). {War} (\polemos\, old word, strkjv@Matthew:24:6|) pictures the chronic state or campaign, while \mach\ (also old word, strkjv@2Corinthians:7:5|) presents the separate conflicts or battles in the war. Songs:James covers the whole ground by using both words. The origin of a war or of any quarrel is sometimes hard to find, but James touches the sore spot here. {Of your pleasures} (\ek tn hdonn humn\). Old word from \hdomai\. Ablative case here after \ek\, "out of your sinful, sensual lusts," the desire to get what one does not have and greatly desires. {That war} (\tn strateuomenn\). Present middle articular participle (ablative case agreeing with \hdonn\) of \strateu\, to carry on a campaign, here as in strkjv@1Peter:2:11| of the passions in the human body. James seems to be addressing nominal Christians, "among you" (\en humin\). Modern church disturbances are old enough in practice.

rwp@James:4:14 @{Whereas ye know not} (\hoitines ouk epistasthe\). The longer relative \hostis\ defines here more precisely (like Latin _qui_) \hoi legontes\ (ye who say) of verse 13| in a causal sense, as in strkjv@Acts:10:47|, "who indeed do not know" (present middle indicative of \epistamai\). {What shall be on the morrow} (\ts aurion\). Supply \hmeras\ (day) after \aurion\. This is the reading of B (Westcott) "on the morrow" (genitive of time), but Aleph K L cursives have \to ts aurion\ ("the matter of tomorrow"), while A P cursives have \ta ts aurion\ ("the things of tomorrow"). The sense is practically the same, though \to ts aurion\ is likely correct. {What is your life?} (\poia h z humn\). Thus Westcott and Hort punctuate it as an indirect question, not direct. \Poia\ is a qualitative interrogative (of what character). {As vapour} (\atmis\). This is the answer. Old word for mist (like \atmos\, from which our "atmosphere"), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:2:19| with \kapnou\ (vapour of smoke (from strkjv@Joel:2:30|). {For a little time} (\pros oligon\). See same phrase in strkjv@1Timothy:4:8|, \pros kairon\ in strkjv@Luke:8:13|, \pros hran\ in strkjv@John:5:35|. {That appeareth and then vanisheth away} (\phainomen epeita kai aphanizomen\). Present middle participles agreeing with \atmis\, "appearing, then also disappearing," with play on the two verbs (\phainomai, aphaniz\ as in strkjv@Matthew:6:19|, from \aphans\ hidden strkjv@Hebrews:4:13|) with the same root \phan\ (\phain, a-phan-s\).

rwp@James:5:13 @{Is any suffering?} (\kakopathei tis;\). See verse 10| for \kakopathia\. The verb in N.T. occurs only here and in strkjv@2Timothy:2:3,9; strkjv@4:5|. The lively interrogative is common in the diatribe and suits the style of James. {Among you} (\en humin\). As in strkjv@3:13|. {Let him pray} (\proseuchesth\). Present middle imperative, "let him keep on praying" (instead of cursing as in verse 12|). {Is any cheerful} (\euthumei;\). Present active indicative of \euthume\, old verb from \euthumos\ (Acts:27:36|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:27:22,25|. {Let him sing praise} (\psallet\). Present active imperative of \psall\, originally to twang a chord as on a harp, to sing praise to God whether with instrument or without, in N.T. only here, strkjv@1Corinthians:14:15; strkjv@Romans:15:9; strkjv@Ephesians:5:19|. "Let him keep on making melody."

rwp@John:8:25 @{Who art thou?} (\Su tis ei;\). Proleptic use of \su\ before \tis\, "Thou, who art thou?" Cf. strkjv@1:19|. He had virtually claimed to be the Messiah and on a par with God as in strkjv@5:15|. They wish to pin him down and to charge him with blasphemy. {Even that which I have also spoken unto you from the beginning} (\tn archn hoti kai lal humin\). A difficult sentence. It is not clear whether it is an affirmation or a question. The Latin and Syriac versions treat it as affirmative. Westcott and Hort follow Meyer and take it as interrogative. The Greek fathers take it as an exclamation. It seems clear that the adverbial accusative \tn archn\ cannot mean "from the beginning" like \ap' archs\ (15:27|) or \ex archs\ (16:4|). The LXX has \tn archn\ for "at the beginning" or "at the first" (Genesis:43:20|). There are examples in Greek, chiefly negative, where \tn archn\ means "at all," "essentially," "primarily." Vincent and Bernard so take it here, "Primarily what I am telling you." Jesus avoids the term Messiah with its political connotations. He stands by his high claims already made.

rwp@John:10:6 @{This parable} (\tautn tn paroimian\). Old word for proverb from \para\ (beside) and \oimos\, way, a wayside saying or saying by the way. As a proverb in N.T. in strkjv@2Peter:2:22| (quotation from strkjv@Proverbs:26:11|), as a symbolic or figurative saying in strkjv@John:16:25,29|, as an allegory in strkjv@John:10:6|. Nowhere else in the N.T. Curiously enough in the N.T. \parabol\ occurs only in the Synoptics outside of strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. Both are in the LXX. \Parabol\ is used as a proverb (Luke:4:23|) just as \paroimia\ is in strkjv@2Peter:2:22|. Here clearly \paroimia\ means an allegory which is one form of the parable. Songs:there you are. Jesus spoke this \paroimia\ to the Pharisees, "but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them" (\ekeinoi de ouk egnsan tina n ha elalei autois\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\ and note \n\ in indirect question as in strkjv@2:25| and both the interrogative \tina\ and the relative \ha\. "Spake" (imperfect \elalei\) should be "Was speaking or had been speaking."

rwp@John:10:32 @{From the Father} (\ek tou patros\). Proceeding out of the Father as in strkjv@6:65; strkjv@16:28| (cf. strkjv@7:17; strkjv@8:42,47|) rather than \para\ as in strkjv@1:14; strkjv@6:46; strkjv@7:29; strkjv@17:7|. {For which of those works} (\dia poion autn ergon\). Literally, "For what kind of work of them" (referring to the "many good works" \polla erga kala\). Noble and beautiful deeds Jesus had done in Jerusalem like healing the impotent man (chapter 5) and the blind man (chapter 9). \Poion\ is a qualitative interrogative pronoun pointing to \kala\ (good). {Do ye stone me} (\lithazete\). Conative present active indicative, "are ye trying to stone me." They had the stones in their hands stretched back to fling at him, a threatening attitude.

rwp@John:11:57 @{The chief priests and the Pharisees} (\hoi archiereis kai hoi Pharisaioi\). The Sanhedrin. {Had given commandment} (\dedkeisan entolas\). Past perfect active of \didmi\. {That he should shew it} (\hina mnusi\). Sub-final \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \mnu\, old verb to disclose, to report formally (Acts:23:30|). {If any man knew} (\ean tis gni\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \ginsk\. {Where he was} (\pou estin\). Indirect question with interrogative adverb and present indicative \estin\ retained like \gni\ and \mnusi\ after the secondary tense \dedkeisan\. {That they might take him} (\hops piassin auton\). Purpose clause with \hops\ instead of \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \piaz\ so often used before (7:44|, etc.).

rwp@John:18:32 @{By what manner of death} (\poii thanati\). Instrumental case of the qualitative interrogative \poios\ in an indirect question, the very idiom used in strkjv@John:12:32| concerning the Cross and here treated as prophecy (Scripture) with \hina plrthi\ like the saying of Jesus in verse 9| which see.

rwp@John:20:29 @{Thou hast believed} (\pepisteukas\). Perfect active indicative. Probably interrogative, but "it was _sight_, not _touch_ that convinced Thomas" (Bernard). {And yet} (\kai\). Clear use of \kai\ in the adversative sense. Thomas made a noble confession, but he missed the highest form of faith without the evidence of the senses. Peter (1Peter:1:8|) uses language that seems like a reminiscence of the words of Jesus to Thomas which Peter heard.

rwp@Luke:11:11 @{Of which of you that is a father} (\tina de ex humn ton patera\). There is a decided anacoluthon here. The MSS. differ a great deal. The text of Westcott and Hort makes \ton patera\ (the father) in apposition with \tina\ (of whom) and in the accusative the object of \aitsei\ (shall ask) which has also another accusative (both person and thing) "a loaf." Songs:far so good. But the rest of the sentence is, {will ye give him a stone?} (\m lithon epidsei auti;\). \M\ shows that the answer No is expected, but the trouble is that the interrogative \tina\ in the first clause is in the accusative the object of \aitsei\ while here the same man (he) is the subject of \epidsei\. It is a very awkward piece of Greek and yet it is intelligible. Some of the old MSS. do not have the part about "loaf" and "stone," but only the two remaining parts about "fish" and "serpent," "egg" and "scorpion." The same difficult construction is carried over into these questions also.

rwp@Luke:12:36 @{When he shall return from the marriage feast} (\pote analusi ek tn gamn\). The interrogative conjunction \pote\ and the deliberative aorist subjunctive retained in the indirect question. The verb \analu\, very common Greek verb, but only twice in the N.T. (here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:23|). The figure is breaking up a camp or loosening the mooring of a ship, to depart. Perhaps here the figure is from the standpoint of the wedding feast (plural as used of a single wedding feast in strkjv@Luke:14:8|), departing from there. See on ¯Matthew:22:2|. {When he cometh and knocketh} (\elthontos kai krousantos\). Genitive absolute of the aorist active participle without \autou\ and in spite of \autoi\ (dative) being used after \anoixsin\ (first aorist active subjunctive of \anoig\).

rwp@Luke:13:23 @{Are they few that be saved?} (\ei oligoi hoi szomenoi;\). Note use of \ei\ as an interrogative which can be explained as ellipsis or as \ei=\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024). This was an academic theological problem with the rabbis, the number of the elect.

rwp@Luke:18:8 @{Howbeit} (\pln\). It is not clear whether this sentence is also a question or a positive statement. There is no way to decide. Either will make sense though not quite the same sense. The use of \ra\ before \heursei\ seems to indicate a question expecting a negative answer as in strkjv@Acts:8:30; strkjv@Romans:14:19|. But here \ra\ comes in the middle of the sentence instead of near the beginning, an unusual position for either inferential \ra\ or interrogative \ra\. On the whole the interrogative \ra\ is probably correct, meaning to question if the Son will find a persistence of faith like that of the widow.

rwp@Mark:9:28 @{Privately, saying} (\kat' idian hoti\). Indoors the nine disciples seek an explanation for their colossal failure. They had cast out demons and wrought cures before. The Revisers are here puzzled over Mark's use of \hoti\ as an interrogative particle meaning {why} where strkjv@Matthew:17:19| has \dia ti\. Some of the manuscripts have \dia ti\ here in strkjv@Mark:9:28| as all do in strkjv@Matthew:17:19|. See also strkjv@Mark:2:16| and strkjv@9:11|. It is probable that in these examples \hoti\ really means {why}. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 730. The use of \hos\ as interrogative "is by no means rare in the late Greek" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 126).

rwp@Mark:15:24 @{What each should take} (\tis ti ri\). Only in Mark. Note double interrogative, Who What? The verb \ari\ is first aorist active deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question. The details in strkjv@Mark:15:24-32| are followed closely by strkjv@Matthew:27:35-44|. See there for discussion of details.

rwp@Matthew:26:50 @{Do that for which thou art come} (\eph' ho parei\). Moffatt and Goodspeed take it: "Do your errand." There has been a deal of trouble over this phrase. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 125 to 131) has proven conclusively that it is a question, \eph' ho\ in late Greek having the interrogative sense of \epi ti\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 725). The use of \eph' ho\ for "why here" occurs on a Syrian tablet of the first century A.D. 50 that it "was current coin in the language of the people" (Deissmann). Most of the early translations (Old Latin, Old Syriac) took it as a question. Songs:the Vulgate has _ad quid venisti_. In this instance the Authorized Version is correct against the Revised. Jesus exposes the pretence of Judas and shows that he does not believe in his paraded affection (Bruce).