[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 àÄí, 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 àÄí and the interrogative he (ä), 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