Friedrich Blass Greek Studies Collection (3 vols.)

Though genetically related, Grammar of New Testament Greek is a distinct work from the later incarnation of A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Recognizing that the Hellenistic Greek in the New Testament has its own system of regular grammatical laws which needed description independent of Classical Greek, Blass determined to present the structure of New Testament Greek on its own terms rather than on the expectations of Attic Greek. The result is a New Testament grammar that both takes into account the development of the Greek language from the Classical period into the Koine, but also respects the Greek of the New Testament for its own genius and regular structure.

Beyond the pure grammatical strengths, Blass’ work as a textual critic add an additional strength to this volume. Grammarians preceding or contemporary to Blass merely used the critical editions of the New Testament available to them: Tischendorf, Tregelles, or Westcott & Hort. Blass broke this trend by going back to the manuscripts, allowing his readers to draw their own conclusions about the true text of a given passage themselves. Thus, Blass’ grammar not only provides students and scholars a description of New Testament Greek, but also provides a sort of text critical commentary on passages cited in light of the grammatical issues involved. For this reason, this volume is extremely valuable not only for grasping the grammar of New Testament Greek, but also for determining and understanding the text of the New Testament as well.

How does this edition of Blass’ Grammar differ from BDF?

With the publication of Thackeray’s translation of Blass’ Grammar, there are now two different editions of Blass available for Logos Bible Software: Grammar of New Testament Greek available in this collection and also Grammar of the Greek New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature revised by Albert Debrunner and translated by Robert W. Funk (BDF). In a technical sense, the edition of Blass, as translated by Thackeray, can be viewed as the precursor to the edition translated by Funk. For instance, BDF builds and expands on Blass’ original emphasis in directly using manuscript evidence and regularly referring to extra-Biblical works such as the Apostolic Fathers. Yet at the same time, BDF should in no way be considered a replacement for the work of Blass and Thackeray. This is because in order to keep the grammar concise, while still adding more and more data, Albert Debrunner was forced to reorganize the entire volume, while also removing extended discussions to make room for more references and analysis. Logos Bible Software’s Scholar-in-Residence, Steve Runge, helpfully explains the situation:

If you are doing thorough research in Greek, Thackeray's translation of Blass is essential. Why? Because it is a translation rather than an updated redaction like BDF. Anyone writing in English prior to the publication of BDF will be citing Thackeray’s translation, including A.T. Robertson. For example, in reading Robertson’s discussion of the historical present he commends Blass for an important insight, one which did not survive the editing process in BDF. A quick comparison of the works by page count (excluding front matter and indices) shows an almost 15% reduction in content. If the editors added new data, then even more content from the original edition had been eliminated. Some of the most helpful insights I have found in Blass are his rabbit trails. These side notes are what moved Debrunner to reorganize the volume in both second and fourth editions, based on the limitations of working in print. Thankfully, as Logos resources, neither edition suffers from the limits of print. Thus, finding relevant discussion, whether it is on topic or not, is just a simple search away using keywords in both. If you want the vast references, you want BDF, but if you want the details, then you want the original. I’d highly recommend both resources for anyone doing serious study in Greek grammar.

With the publication of Pronunciation of Ancient Greek, Blass entered into a debate that continues to this day: what is the correct historical pronunciation of Ancient Greek. Here Blass presents what he terms the true “Erasmian” pronunciation, not refer to the traditional pronunciation in universities and seminaries, used merely for convenience and practicality, but instead, his proposed historical reconstructed pronunciation based on cross-linguistic and historical evidence culled from transliteration of Greek into other languages such as Latin and the spelling errors of the transcriptions and papyri.

While the practice of the traditional pronunciation based on the language of the learners continues to be maintained in the classroom, gaining a grasp of how the pronunciation of Greek developed from the Classical period through the time of the New Testament all the way through Modern Greek is crucial for understanding grammatical developments of the language and also textual criticism. Many of the changes in pronunciation directly influenced changes in grammar such as the loss of the optative mood. Moreover, the development of Greek pronunciation is of critical importance to textual criticism. In many cases, knowledge of pronunciation is a sort of prerequisite for understanding how various textual variants developed in New Testament manuscripts. In sum, for both grammar and textual criticism, Blass’ Pronunciation is an essential volume for the student of the New Testament.

Building on his critical editions of the Gospels and Acts, Blass presents his theory of the history background and text of Luke’s two volume Gospel and Acts in Philology of the Gospels. He deals with issues of the Gospel’s literary character, the location and date of writing and the condition of its text. The variety of issues examined and the quality of the discussion caused Alfred Plummer to write, “The interesting work on the Philology of the Gospels, by F. Blass, is chiefly occupied with the Gospel of S. Luke, and should be read side by side with the sections of the Introduction to this volume which treat of the same topics” in the preface to his International Critical Commentary on Luke.