Matthew 5:21

The phrase ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις (Matt 5:21, 27, 33, 38, 43) is syntactically ambiguous. Grammatically, τοῖς ἀρχαίοις may function either as (1) a dative of the recipient (“to them of old”), or (2) a dative of the agent (“by them of old”). Both are legitimate and historically attested uses of the dative with passive verbs.

Classical and post-classical Greek allow the dative of agent after passives, particularly in earlier and elevated registers, before the periphrasis with ὑπό became dominant (cf. Kühner–Gerth, Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache II.1, §373.3; Winer, Grammar of the New Testament Diction, p. 277 [E.T.]; Robertson, Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, p. 530 f.). Numerous Koine examples demonstrate this persistence: e.g. ἐρρέθη Ἰωάννῃ (Matt 11:4 TR), ἐρρέθη αὐτῇ (Rom 9:12), ἐρρέθη αὐτοῖς (Rev 6:11), where the dative may be interpreted either as agent or addressee according to context. The form ἐρρέθη (aorist passive of ῥέω > λέγω) itself was often used impersonally, further blurring the distinction between “said by” and “said to.”

Consequently, the translator’s choice is settled more by knowledge of the truth than by grammar alone. The New Testament has a consistent use of ἐρρέθη + dative which is actually rare in Greek literature. Why? Contexts show it is used to introduce citations of divine or scriptural speech (“it was said…”) and this led most modern interpreters (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Meyer, Tholuck, de Wette, Ritschl, Bleek, among others) to prefer the dative of recipient. Yet an equally long interpretive tradition—from Beza, Erasmus, and Grotius to Fritzsche, Olshausen, and Ewald—understands the phrase in Matt. 5:21 as a dative of agent, i.e., speech attributed by the ancients.

The difference is therefore hermeneutical rather than grammatical: it depends on whether οἱ ἀρχαῖοι are conceived as (a) the ancient recipients of Mosaic revelation or (b) the ancient transmitters and interpreters of the Law. Both readings rest on valid Greek syntax; the decision for one over the other reflects theological or historical assumptions (and assumptions about history itself) so the direction of the dative here reveals the interpreter’s bias rather than the language’s constraint.