κρύπτω w/acc of Who/What is hidden from

[Stirling Bartholomew]

Athanasius On The Incarnation
§ 22.1 Ἀλλ' ἔδει, φήσειεν ἄν τις, κρυβῆναι τὴν ἐπιβουλὴν τῶν Ἰουδαίων, ἵνα καθόλου τὸ ἑαυτοῦ σῶμα ἀθάνατον φυλάξῃ.

§ 22 But it were better, one might say, to have hidden from the designs of the Jews, that He might guard His body altogether from death.

A. Robertson 1891

Slightly different, the LSJ shows κρύπτω with double accusative. What is hidden and Who it is hidden form.

5. c. dupl. acc., conceal something from one, μή με κρύψῃ τοῦτο A.Pr. 625, cf. S.El.957, E.Hec.570, Ar.Pl.26, Lys.32.7, etc.; so κ. τι πρός τινα S.Ph.588.

I couldn't find any NT examples.

This is what you might expect:

Rev. 6:15 ... πέσετε ἐφ᾿ ἡμᾶς καὶ κρύψατε ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ καθημένου ἐπὶ τοῦ θρόνου καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς ὀργῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου

[Tony Pope]

Interesting. I found a comment on the construction with ἀπό in Winer, 246 (small print near the bottom of the page), citing examples from LXX, also 284.
https://archive.org/stream/atreatiseong ... 9/mode/2up and
https://archive.org/stream/atreatiseong ... 7/mode/2up

Also BDF §155.3.

In Chariton's novel, there is an example of the double accusative at 6.3.1. The Babylonian emperor has fallen in love with Callirhoe, and being deeply troubled calls on his most trusted slave for help. As he is embarrassed to talk about it, the slave asks,
‘τί κρύπτεις’ ἔφη ‘δέσποτα, δοῦλον σόν, εὔνουν σοι καὶ σιωπᾶν δυνάμενον;
"What are you hiding, master, from your slave? I am loyal to you and able to keep a secret.

Chariton is claimed to be written in a "literary koiné", so I wonder whether the NT and LXX construction is widespread hellenistic as Winer says. But I suppose it would not be beyond Chariton to use a classical construction in a conversation between the emperor and his slave to give a more formal flavour (higher register).

[Stirling Bartholomew]

Interesting. I found a comment on the construction with ἀπό in Winer, 246 (small print near the bottom of the page), citing examples from LXX, also 284.
https://archive.org/stream/atreatiseong ... 9/mode/2up and
https://archive.org/stream/atreatiseong ... 7/mode/2up

Also BDF §155.3.

In Chariton's novel, there is an example of the double accusative at 6.3.1. The Babylonian emperor has fallen in love with Callirhoe, and being deeply troubled calls on his most trusted slave for help. As he is embarrassed to talk about it, the slave asks,
‘τί κρύπτεις’ ἔφη ‘δέσποτα, δοῦλον σόν, εὔνουν σοι καὶ σιωπᾶν δυνάμενον;
"What are you hiding, master, from your slave? I am loyal to you and able to keep a secret.

Chariton is claimed to be written in a "literary koiné", so I wonder whether the NT and LXX construction is widespread hellenistic as Winer says. But I suppose it would not be beyond Chariton to use a classical construction in a conversation between the emperor and his slave to give a more formal flavour (higher register).

Thanks Tony, an interesting example. For more discussions of the double accusative with κρύπτω in 19th century grammars, the literal search string "θυγατέρα ἔκρυπτε τὸν θάνατον" from Lysias unearths several now obscure authors talking about this. [found in Google Books]

Chariton is claimed to be written in a "literary koiné"

I am also curious about the "register" of Athanasius. His syntax is somewhat predicable. He uses hyperbaton to "package" complex constituents, a pattern that isn't used nearly that often in any NT author. Outside of biblical citations he seems to be free of Semitisms.

[Tony Pope]

I am also curious about the "register" of Athanasius. His syntax is somewhat predicable. He uses hyperbaton to "package" complex constituents, a pattern that isn't used nearly that often in any NT author. Outside of biblical citations he seems to be free of Semitisms.

I have no expertise in this area but have read in more than one place that Christian writers in the centuries after the NT who were writing for an intellectual audience wrote in an atticized style. For example, Caragounis in his The Development of Greek and the New Testament page 249 lists Athanasius with several other Greek Fathers, characterizing them as "Atticizing Christian authors" who "had received classical training and aimed at literary excellence."

[Stirling Bartholomew]

I have no expertise in this area but have read in more than one place that Christian writers in the centuries after the NT who were writing for an intellectual audience wrote in an atticized style. For example, Caragounis in his The Development of Greek and the New Testament page 249 lists Athanasius with several other Greek Fathers, characterizing them as "Atticizing Christian authors" who "had received classical training and aimed at literary excellence."

Tony,

I distinctly recall recently reading comments[1] buy a 19th century scholar, Archibald Robertson or perhaps John Henry Newman, which compared Athanasius favorably to another church father. Athanasius' style was characterized as direct, lacking artificial qualities supposedly found in the imitators of Attic authors. Reading these comments caused some cognitive dissonance. Not sure what "Atticizing" looks like.

[1] Unfortunately I was unable to track down the source.
********

Sample text:

§ 23.1 Εἰ δὲ καὶ χωρίς τινος νόσου καὶ χωρίς τινος ἀλγηδόνος, ἰδίᾳ που καὶ καθ' ἑαυτὸν ἐν γωνίᾳ, ἢ ἐν ἐρήμῳ τόπῳ, ἢ κατ' οἰκίαν, ἢ ὅπου δήποτε τὸ σῶμα κρύψας ἦν, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα πάλιν ἐξαίφνης φανείς, ἔλεγεν ἑαυτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν ἐγηγέρθαι· μύθους μὲν ἂν ἔδοξε λέγειν παρὰ πᾶσιν, ἠπιστήθη δὲ πολλῷ πλέον καὶ περὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως λέγων, οὐκ ὄντος ὅλως τοῦ μαρτυροῦντος περὶ τοῦ θανάτου αὐτοῦ.

But even if, without any disease and without any pain, He had hidden His body away privily and by Himself "in a corner," or in a desert place, or in a house, or anywhere, and afterwards suddenly appeared and said that He had been raised from the dead, He would have seemed on all hands to be telling idle tales, and what He said about the Resurrection would have been all the more discredited, as there was no one at all to witness to His death.

Archibald Robertson 1891

Note the length and complexity of the conditional clause. The condition runs on lacking a finite verb until we reach τὸ σῶμα κρύψας ἦν followed by a second condition καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ... ἐγηγέρθαι. While the structure is relatively straight forward it isn't simple.