We find numerous relations between the authors of the “Common Dialect” and the New Testament writers. These relations are not found so much to hold of special classes of words. They rather belong to the language as a whole, though perhaps they are most prominently seen in connection with new compounds and words formed in various ways from elements which already exist in the ancient tongue. The New Testament vocabulary is about equally related to the vocabularies of Polybius, Diodorus, Philo, and Josephus. It must be said, however, that the resemblance to Philo is more important, as it is repeatedly found in the case of words which appear nowhere else in literature…
Perhaps Plutarch stands nearest of all to the New Testament vocabulary, though this comes out especially in the case of certain books. In 2 Corinthians, as has been noted, 31% of the words occur in him as well. In the more narrative parts of the New Testament the proportion would be certainly far smaller. A good many of the coincidences in words are due, no doubt, to the subject-matter of Plutarch’s works, and to their semi-philosophical colouring, which finds a parallel in the theological portions of the New Testament. But it often happens that, besides the resemblances in vocabulary, Plutarch’s use of words already found in classical authors sheds striking light on their significations in the New Testament.
The remarks made up to this point have only dealt with one side of the New Testament language, what may be termed the “literary” side. The point we have wished to emphasise is that the vocabulary of this collection of books cannot, with accuracy, be denominated “vulgar,” seeing it possesses so many elements in common with the rest of Greek literature, four-fifths of it being pre-Aristotelian, and a considerable part of the remaining fifth belonging to the literary dialect of the time. These characteristics give it a distinct tone, which marks it as the property of educated men. They elevate it above the usual average of the Septuagint.
