CONCORD Can



rwp@Info @ There is no doubt of the need of a new series of volumes today in the light of the new knowledge. Many ministers have urged me to undertake such a task and finally I have agreed to do it at the solicitation of my publishers. The readers of these volumes (six are planned) are expected to be primarily those who know no Greek or comparatively little and yet who are anxious to get fresh help from the study of words and phrases in the New Testament, men who do not have access to the technical books required, like Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary of the New Testament_. The critical student will appreciate the more delicate distinctions in words. But it is a sad fact that many ministers, laymen, and women, who took courses in Greek at college, university, or seminary, have allowed the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches to choke off the Greek that they once knew. Some, strangely enough, have done it even in the supposed interest of the very gospel whose vivid messages they have thus allowed to grow dim and faint. If some of these vast numbers can have their interest in the Greek New Testament revived, these volumes will be worth while. Some may be incited, as many have been by my volume, _The Minister and His Greek New Testament_, to begin the study of the Greek New Testament under the guidance of a book like Davis's _Beginner's Grammar of the Greek New Testament_. Others who are without a turn for Greek or without any opportunity to start the study will be able to follow the drift of the remarks and be able to use it all to profit in sermons, in Sunday school lessons, or for private edification.

rwp@Info @...The words of the Canterbury Version...

rwp@Info @ The six volumes will follow this order; Volume I, The Gospel according to Matthew and Mark; Vol. II, The Gospel according to Luke; Vol. III, The Acts of the Apostles; Vol. IV, The Pauline Epistles; Vol. V, The Gospel according to John and the Epistle to the Hebrews; Vol. VI, the general Epistles and the Revelation of John. For purely exegetical and expository development a more chronological order would be required. These volumes do not claim to be formal commentary. Nowhere is the whole text discussed, but everywhere those words are selected for discussion which seem to be richest for the needs of the reader in the light of present-day knowledge. A great deal of the personal equation is thus inevitable. My own remarks will be now lexical, now grammatical, now archaeological, now exegetical, now illustrative, anything that the mood of the moment may move me to write that may throw light here and there on the New Testament words and idioms. Another writer might feel disposed to enlarge upon items not touched upon here. But that is to be expected even in the more formal commentaries, useful as they are. To some extent it is true of lexicons. No one man knows everything, even in his chosen specialty, or has the wisdom to pick out what every reader wishes explained. But even diamonds in the rough are diamonds. It is for the reader to polish them as he will. He can turn the light this way and that. There is a certain amount of repetition at some points, part of it on purpose to save time and to emphasize the point.

rwp@Info @ I have called these volumes _Word Pictures_ for the obvious reason that language was originally purely pictographic. Children love to read by pictures either where it is all picture or where pictures are interspersed with simple words. The Rosetta Stone is a famous illustration. The Egyptian hieroglyphics come at the top of the stone, followed by the Demotic Egyptian language with the Greek translation at the bottom. By means of this stone the secret of the hieroglyphs or pictographs was unravelled. Chinese characters are also pictographic. The pictures were first for ideas, then for words, then for syllables, then for letters. Today in Alaska there are Indians who still use pictures alone for communicating their ideas. "Most words have been originally metaphors, and metaphors are continually falling into the rank of words" (Professor Campbell). Rather is it not true that words are metaphors, sometimes with the pictured flower still blooming, sometimes with the blossom blurred? Words have never gotten wholly away from the picture stage. These old Greek words in the New Testament are rich with meaning. They speak to us out of the past and with lively images to those who have eyes to see. It is impossible to translate all of one language into another. Much can be carried over, but not all. Delicate shades of meaning defy the translator. But some of the very words of Jesus we have still as he said: "The words that I have spoken unto you are spirit and are life" (John:6:63|). We must never forget that in dealing with the words of Jesus we are dealing with things that have life and breath. That is true of all the New Testament, the most wonderful of all books of all time. One can feel the very throb of the heart of Almighty God in the New Testament if the eyes of his own heart have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit. May the Spirit of God take of the things of Christ and make them ours as we muse over the words of life that speak to us out of the New Covenant that we call the New Testament. A.T. ROBERTSON. LOUISVILLE, KY. strkjv@Info:1Corinthians @ FIRST CORINTHIANS FROM EPHESUS A.D. 54 OR 55 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It would be a hard-boiled critic today who would dare deny the genuineness of I Corinthians. The Dutch wild man, Van Manen, did indeed argue that Paul wrote no epistles if indeed he ever lived. Such intellectual banality is well answered by Whateley's _Historic Doubts about Napolean Bonaparte_ which was so cleverly done that some readers were actually convinced that no such man ever existed, but is the product of myth and legend. Even Baur was compelled to acknowledge the genuineness of I and II Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (the Big Four of Pauline criticism). It is a waste of time now to prove what all admit to be true. Paul of Tarsus, the Apostle to the Gentiles, wrote I Corinthians.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:7 @{Songs:that ye come behind in no gift} (\h“ste humas mˆ hustereisthai en mˆdeni charismati\). Consecutive clause with \h“ste\ and the infinitive and the double negative. Come behind (\hustereisthai\) is to be late (\husteros\), old verb seen already in strkjv@Mark:10:21; strkjv@Matthew:19:20|. It is a wonderful record here recorded. But in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:7-11; strkjv@9:1-7| Paul will have to complain that they have not paid their pledges for the collection, pledges made over a year before, a very modern complaint. {Waiting for the revelation} (\apekdechomenous tˆn apokalupsin\). This double compound is late and rare outside of Paul (1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@Galatians:5:5; strkjv@Romans:8:19,23,25; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20|), strkjv@1Peter:3:20; strkjv@Hebrews:9:28|. It is an eager expectancy of the second coming of Christ here termed revelation like the eagerness in \prosdechomenoi\ in strkjv@Titus:2:13| for the same event. "As if that attitude of expectation were the highest posture that can be attained here by the Christian" (F.W. Robertson).

rwp@1Corinthians:1:18 @{For the word of the cross} (\ho logos gar ho tou staurou\). Literally, "for the preaching (with which I am concerned as the opposite of {wisdom of word} in verse 17|) that (repeated article \ho\, almost demonstrative) of the cross." "Through this incidental allusion to preaching St. Paul passes to a new subject. The discussions in the Corinthian Church are for a time forgotten, and he takes the opportunity of correcting his converts for their undue exaltation of human eloquence and wisdom" (Lightfoot). {To them that are perishing} (\tois men apollumenois\). Dative of disadvantage (personal interest). Present middle participle is here timeless, those in the path to destruction (not annihilation. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:10|). Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:4:3|. {Foolishness} (\m“ria\). Folly. Old word from \m“ros\, foolish. In N.T. only in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:18,21,23; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@3:19|. {But unto us which are being saved} (\tois s“zomenois hˆmin\). Sharp contrast to those that are perishing and same construction with the articular participle. No reason for the change of pronouns in English. This present passive participle is again timeless. Salvation is described by Paul as a thing done in the past, "we were saved" (Romans:8:24|), as a present state, "ye have been saved" (Ep strkjv@2:5|), as a process, "ye are being saved" (1Corinthians:15:2|), as a future result, "thou shalt be saved" (Romans:10:9|). {The power of God} (\dunamis theou\). Songs:in strkjv@Romans:1:16|. No other message has this dynamite of God (1Corinthians:4:20|). God's power is shown in the preaching of the Cross of Christ through all the ages, now as always. No other preaching wins men and women from sin to holiness or can save them. The judgment of Paul here is the verdict of every soul winner through all time.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:4 @{Not in persuasive words of wisdom} (\ouk en pithois sophias logois\). This looks like a false disclaimer or mock modesty, for surely the preacher desires to be persuasive. This adjective \pithos\ (MSS. \peithos\) has not yet been found elsewhere. It seems to be formed directly from \peith“\, to persuade, as \pheidos\ (\phidos\) is from \pheidomai\, to spare. The old Greek form \pithanos\ is common enough and is used by Josephus (_Ant_. VIII. 9. 1) of "the plausible words of the lying prophet" in strkjv@1Kings:13|. The kindred word \pithanologia\ occurs in strkjv@Colossians:2:4| for the specious and plausible Gnostic philosophers. And gullible people are easy marks for these plausible pulpiteers. Corinth put a premium on the veneer of false rhetoric and thin thinking. {But in demonstration} (\all' en apodeixei\). In contrast with the {plausibility} just mentioned. This word, though an old one from \apodeiknumi\, to show forth, occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. {Spirit} (\pneuma\) here can be the Holy Spirit or inward spirit as opposed to superficial expression and {power} (\dunamis\) is moral power rather than intellectual acuteness (cf. strkjv@1:18|).

rwp@1Corinthians:2:5 @{That your faith should not stand} (\hina hˆ pistis hum“n mˆ ˆi\). Purpose of God, but \mˆ ˆi\ is "not be" merely. The only secure place for faith to find a rest is in God's power, not in the wisdom of men. One has only to instance the changing theories of men about science, philosophy, religion, politics to see this. A sure word from God can be depended on.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:9 @{But as it is written} (\alla kath“s gegraptai\). Elliptical sentence like Rom strkjv@15:3| where \gegonen\ (it has happened) can be supplied. It is not certain where Paul derives this quotation as Scripture. Origen thought it a quotation from the _Apocalypse of Elias_ and Jerome finds it also in the _Ascension of Isaiah_. But these books appear to be post-Pauline, and Jerome denies that Paul obtained it from these late apocryphal books. Clement of Rome finds it in the LXX text of strkjv@Isaiah:64:4| and cites it as a Christian saying. It is likely that Paul here combines freely strkjv@Isaiah:64:4; strkjv@65:17; strkjv@52:15| in a sort of catena or free chain of quotations as he does in strkjv@Romans:3:10-18|. There is also an anacoluthon for \ha\ (which things) occurs as the direct object (accusative) with \eiden\ (saw) and \ˆkousan\ (heard), but as the subject (nominative) with \anebˆ\ (entered, second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\, to go up). {Whatsoever} (\hosa\). A climax to the preceding relative clause (Findlay). {Prepared} (\hˆtoimasen\). First aorist active indicative of \hetoimaz“\. The only instance where Paul uses this verb of God, though it occurs of final glory (Luke:2:31; strkjv@Matthew:20:23; strkjv@25:34; strkjv@Mark:10:40; strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|) and of final misery (Matthew:25:41|). But here undoubtedly the dominant idea is the present blessing to these who love God (1Corinthians:1:5-7|). {Heart} (\kardian\) here as in strkjv@Romans:1:21| is more than emotion. The Gnostics used this passage to support their teaching of esoteric doctrine as Hegesippus shows. Lightfoot thinks that probably the apocryphal _Ascension of Isaiah_ and _Apocalypse of Elias_ were Gnostic and so quoted this passage of Paul to support their position. But the next verse shows that Paul uses it of what is now {revealed} and made plain, not of mysteries still unknown.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:10 @{But unto us God revealed them} (\hˆmin gar apekalupsen ho theos\). Songs:with \gar\ B 37 Sah Cop read instead of \de\ of Aleph A C D. "\De\ is superficially easier; \gar\ intrinsically better" (Findlay). Paul explains why this is no longer hidden, "for God revealed unto us" the wonders of grace pictured in verse 9|. We do not have to wait for heaven to see them. Hence we can utter those things hidden from the eye, the ear, the heart of man. This revelation (\apekalupsen\, first aorist active indicative) took place, at "the entry of the Gospel into the world," not "when we were admitted into the Church, when we were baptized" as Lightfoot interprets it. {Through the Spirit} (\dia tou pneumatos\). The Holy Spirit is the agent of this definite revelation of grace, a revelation with a definite beginning or advent (constative aorist), an unveiling by the Spirit where "human ability and research would not have sufficed" (Robertson and Plummer), "according to the revelation of the mystery" (Romans:16:25|), "the revelation given to Christians as an event that began a new epoch in the world's history" (Edwards). {Searcheth all things} (\panta eraunƒi\). This is the usual form from A.D. 1 on rather than the old \ereuna“\. The word occurs (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) for a professional searcher's report and \eraunˆtai\, searchers for customs officials. "The Spirit is the organ of understanding between man and God" (Findlay). Songs:in strkjv@Romans:8:27| we have this very verb \erauna“\ again of God's searching our hearts. The Holy Spirit not merely investigates us, but he searches "even the deep things of God" (\kai ta bathˆ tou theou\). _Profunda Dei_ (Vulgate). Cf. "the deep things of Satan" (Revelation:2:24|) and Paul's language in strkjv@Romans:11:33| "Oh the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God." Paul's point is simply that the Holy Spirit fully comprehends the depth of God's nature and his plans of grace and so is fully competent to make the revelation here claimed.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:16 @{For who hath known the mind of the Lord} (\Tis gar egn“ noun Kuriou;\). Quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:40:13|. {That he should instruct him} (\hos sunbibasei auton\). This use of \hos\ (relative {who}) is almost consecutive (result). The \pneumatikos\ man is superior to others who attempt even to instruct God himself. See on ¯Acts:9:22; strkjv@16:10| for \sunbibaz“\, to make go together. {But we have the mind of Christ} (\hˆmeis de noun Christou echomen\). As he has already shown (verses 6-13|). Thus with the mind (\nous\. Cf. strkjv@Phillipians:2:5; strkjv@Romans:8:9,27|). Hence Paul and all \pneumatikoi\ men are superior to those who try to shake their faith in Christ, the mystery of God. Paul can say, "I know him whom I have believed." "I believe; therefore I have spoken."

rwp@1Corinthians:3:11 @{Other foundation} (\themelion allon\). The gender of the adjective is here masculine as is shown by \allon\. If neuter, it would be \allo\. It is masculine because Paul has Christ in mind. It is not here \heteron\ a different kind of gospel (\heteron euaggelion\, strkjv@Galatians:1:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4|) which is not another (\allo\, strkjv@Galatians:1:7|) in reality. But another Jesus (2Corinthians:11:4|, \allon Iˆsoun\) is a reflection on the one Lord Jesus. Hence there is no room on the platform with Jesus for another Saviour, whether Buddha, Mahomet, Dowie, Eddy, or what not. Jesus Christ is the one foundation and it is gratuitous impudence for another to assume the role of Foundation. {Than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus} (\para ton keimenon, hos estin Iˆsous Christos\). Literally, "alongside (\para\) the one laid (\keimenon\)," already laid (present middle participle of \keimai\, used here as often as the perfect passive of \tithˆmi\ in place of \tetheimenon\). Paul scouts the suggestion that one even in the interest of so-called "new thought" will dare to lay beside Jesus another foundation for religion. And yet I have seen an article by a professor in a theological seminary in which he advocates regarding Jesus as a landmark, not as a goal, not as a foundation. Clearly Paul means that on this one true foundation, Jesus Christ, one must build only what is in full harmony with the Foundation which is Jesus Christ. If one accuses Paul of narrowness, it can be replied that the architect has to be narrow in the sense of building here and not there. A broad foundation will be too thin and unstable for a solid and abiding structure. It can be said also that Paul is here merely repeating the claim of Jesus himself on this very subject when he quoted strkjv@Psalms:118:22f.| to the members of the Sanhedrin who challenged his authority (Mark:11:10f.; strkjv@Matthew:21:42-45; strkjv@Luke:20:17f.|). Apostles and prophets go into this temple of God, but Christ Jesus is the chief corner stone (\akrog“naios\, strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|). All believers are living stones in this temple (1Peter:2:5|). But there is only one foundation possible.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:18 @{Let no man deceive himself} (\Mˆdeis heauton exapat“\). A warning that implied that some of them were guilty of doing it (\mˆ\ and the present imperative). Excited partisans can easily excite themselves to a pious phrenzy, hypnotize themselves with their own supposed devotion to truth. {Thinketh that he is wise} (\dokei sophos einai\). Condition of first class and assumed to be true. Predicate nominative \sophos\ with the infinitive to agree with subject of \dokei\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1038). Paul claimed to be "wise" himself in verse 10| and he desires that the claimant to wisdom may become wise (\hina genˆtai sophos\, purpose clause with \hina\ and subjunctive) by becoming a fool (\m“ros genesth“\, second aorist middle imperative of \ginomai\) as this age looks at him. This false wisdom of the world (1:18-20,23; strkjv@2:14|), this self-conceit, has led to strife and wrangling. Cut it out.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:21 @{With a rod} (\en rabd“i\). The so-called instrumental use of \en\ like the Hebrew (1Samuel:17:43|). The shepherd leaned on his rod, staff, walking stick. The paedagogue had his rod also. {Shall I come?} (\elth“;\). Deliberative subjunctive. Paul gives them the choice. They can have him as their spiritual father or as their paedagogue with a rod.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:3 @{For I verily} (\eg“ men gar\). Emphatic statement of Paul's own attitude of indignation, \eg“\ in contrast with \humeis\. He justifies his demand for the expulsion of the man. {Being absent} (\ap“n\) Although absent (concessive participle) and so of \par“n\ though present. Each with locative case (\t“i s“mati, t“i pneumati\). {Have already judged} (\ˆdˆ kekrika\). Perfect active indicative of \krin“\. I have already decided or judged, as though present (\h“s par“n\). Paul felt compelled to reach a conclusion about the case and in a sentence of much difficulty seems to conceive an imaginary church court where the culprit has been tried and condemned. There are various ways of punctuating the clauses in this sentence in verses 3-5|. It is not merely Paul's individual judgment. The genitive absolute clause in verse 4|, {ye being gathered together} (\sunachthent“n hum“n\, first aorist passive participle of \sunag“\, in regular assembly) {and my spirit} (\kai tou emou pneumatos\) with the assembly (he means) {and meeting in the name of our Lord Jesus} (\en t“i onomati tou Kuriou [hˆm“n] Iˆsou\) with the power of the Lord Jesus (\sun tˆi dunamei tou Kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou\), though this clause can be taken with the infinitive to deliver (\paradounai\). It makes good syntax and sense taken either way. The chief difference is that, if taken with "gathered together" (\sunachthent“n\) Paul assumes less apostolic prerogative to himself. But he did have such power and used it against Elymas (Acts:13:8ff.|) as Peter did against Ananias and Sapphira (Acts:5:1ff.|).

rwp@1Corinthians:6:3 @{How much more, things that pertain to this life?} (\Mˆti ge bi“tika;\). The question expects the answer no and \ge\ adds sharp point to Paul's surprised tone, "Need I so much as say?" It can be understood also as ellipsis, "let me not say" (\mˆtige leg“\), not to say. \Bi“tika\ occurs first in Aristotle, but is common afterwards. In the papyri it is used of business matters. It is from \bios\ (manner of life in contrast to \z“ˆ\, life principle).

rwp@1Corinthians:6:15 @{Members of Christ} (\melˆ Christou\). Old word for limbs, members. Even the Stoics held the body to be common with the animals (Epictetus, _Diss_. l. iii. 1) and only the reason like the gods. Without doubt some forms of modern evolution have contributed to the licentious views of animalistic sex indulgence, though the best teachers of biology show that in the higher animals monogamy is the rule. The body is not only adapted for Christ (verse 13|), but it is a part of Christ, in vital union with him. Paul will make much use of this figure further on (12:12-31; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11-16; strkjv@5:30|). {Shall I then take away?} (\aras oun;\). First aorist active participle of \air“\, old verb to snatch, carry off like Latin _rapio_ (our rape). {Make} (\poiˆs“\). Can be either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive (deliberative). Either makes good sense. The horror of deliberately taking "members of Christ" and making them "members of a harlot" in an actual union staggers Paul and should stagger us. {God forbid} (\mˆ genoito\). Optative second aorist in a negative wish for the future. {May it not happen!} The word "God" is not here. The idiom is common in Epictetus though rare in the LXX. Paul has it thirteen times and Luke once (Luke:20:16|).

rwp@1Corinthians:7:5 @{Except it be by consent for a season} (\ei mˆti [an] ek sumph“nou pros kairon\). If \an\ is genuine, it can either be regarded as like \ean\ though without a verb or as loosely added after \ei mˆti\ and construed with it. {That ye may give yourselves unto prayer} (\hina scholasˆte tˆi proseuchˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive of \scholaz“\, late verb from \scholˆ\, leisure (our "school"), and so to have leisure (punctiliar act and not permanent) for prayer. Note private devotions here. {That Satan tempt you not} (\hina mˆ peirazˆi\). Present subjunctive, that Satan may not keep on tempting you. {Because of your incontinency} (\dia tˆn akrasian [hum“n]\). A late word from Aristotle on for \akrateia\ from \akratˆs\ (without self-control, \a\ privative and \krate“\, to control, common old word). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:23:25| which see.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:24 @{With God} (\para the“i\). There is comfort in that. Even a slave can have God at his side by remaining at God's side.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:4 @{No idol is anything in the world} (\ouden eid“lon en kosm“i\). Probably correct translation, though no copula is expressed. On \eid“lon\ (from \eidos\), old word, see on ¯Acts:7:41; strkjv@15:20; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9|. The idol was a mere picture or symbol of a god. If the god has no existence, the idol is a non-entity. This Gentile Christians had come to know as Jews and Jewish Christians already knew. {No God but one} (\oudeis theos ei mˆ heis\). This Christians held as firmly as Jews. The worship of Jesus as God's Son and the Holy Spirit does not recognize three Gods, but one God in three Persons. It was the worship of Mary the Mother of Jesus that gave Mahomet his cry: "Allah is One." The cosmos, the ordered universe, can only be ruled by one God (Romans:1:20|).

rwp@1Corinthians:8:13 @{Meat} (\br“ma\). Food it should be, not flesh (\krea\). {Maketh my brother to stumble} (\skandalizei ton adelphon mou\). Late verb (LXX and N.T.) to set a trap-stick (Matthew:5:29|) or stumbling-block like \proskomma\ in verse 9| (cf. strkjv@Romans:14:13,21|). Small boys sometimes set snares for other boys, not merely for animals to see them caught. {I will eat no flesh for evermore} (\ou mˆ phag“ krea eis ton ai“na\). The strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with the second aorist subjunctive. Here Paul has {flesh} (\krea\) with direct reference to the flesh offered to idols. Old word, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:14:21|. This is Paul's principle of love (verse 2|) applied to the matter of eating meats offered to idols. Paul had rather be a vegetarian than to lead his weak brother to do what he considered sin. There are many questions of casuistry today that can only be handled wisely by Paul's ideal of love.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:13 @{Hath taken} (\eilˆphen\). Perfect active indicative of \lamban“\. {But such as man can bear} (\ei mˆ anthr“pinos\). Except a human one. Old adjective meaning falling to the lot of man. {Above that ye are able} (\huper ho dunasthe\). Ellipsis, but plain. There is comfort in that God is faithful, trustworthy (\pistos\). {The way of escape} (\tˆn ekbasin\). "The way out" is always there right along with (\sun\) the temptation. This old word only here in N.T. and strkjv@Hebrews:13:7| about death. It is cowardly to yield to temptation and distrustful of God.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:16 @{The cup of blessing} (\to potˆrion tˆs eulogias\). The cup over which we pronounce a blessing as by Christ at the institution of the ordinance. {A communion of the blood of Christ} (\koin“nia tou haimatos tou Christou\). Literally, a participation in (objective genitive) the blood of Christ. The word \koin“nia\ is an old one from \koin“nos\, partner, and so here and strkjv@Phillipians:2:1; strkjv@3:10|. It can mean also fellowship (Galatians:2:9|) or contribution (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:5|). It is, of course, a spiritual participation in the blood of Christ which is symbolized by the cup. Same meaning for \koin“nia\ in reference to "the body of Christ." {The bread which we break} (\ton arton hon kl“men\). The loaf. Inverse attraction of the antecedent (\arton\) to the case (accusative) of the relative (\hon\) according to classic idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 488). \Artos\ probably from \ar“\, to join or fit (flour mixed with water and baked). The mention of the cup here before the bread does not mean that this order was observed for see the regular order of bread and then cup in strkjv@11:24-27|.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:25 @{In the shambles} (\en makell“i\). Only here in N.T. A transliterated Latin word _macellum_, possibly akin to \maceria\ and the Hebrew word for enclosure, though occurring in Ionic and Laconian and more frequent in the Latin. It occurs in Dio Cassius and Plutarch and in the papyri and inscriptions for "the provision market." Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 276) says: "In the Macellum at Pompeii we can imagine to ourselves the poor Christians buying their modest pound of meat in the Corinthian Macellum (1Corinthians:10:25|), with the same life-like reality with which the Diocletian maximum tariff called up the picture of the Galilean woman purchasing her five sparrows." {Asking no questions for conscience sake} (\mˆden anakrinontes dia tˆn suneidˆsin\). As to whether a particular piece of meat had been offered to idols before put in the market. Only a part was consumed in the sacrifices to heathen gods. The rest was sold in the market. Do not be over-scrupulous. Paul here champions liberty in the matter as he had done in strkjv@8:4|.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:32 @{Ye are chastened of the Lord} (\hupo tou Kuriou paideuometha\). On this sense of \paideu“\, from \pais\, child, to train a child (Acts:7:22|), to discipline with words (2Timothy:2:25|), to chastise with scourges see on ¯Luke:23:16| (Hebrews:12:7|), and so by afflictions as here (Hebrews:12:6|). \Hupo tou Kuriou\ can be construed with \krinomenoi\ instead of with \paideuometha\. {With the world} (\sun t“i kosm“i\). Along with the world. Afflictions are meant to separate us from the doom of the wicked world. Final use of \hina mˆ\ here with \katakrith“men\ (first aorist passive subjunctive).

rwp@1Corinthians:11:34 @{At home} (\en oik“i\). If so hungry as all that (verse 22|). {The rest} (\ta loipa\). He has found much fault with this church, but he has not told all. {I will set in order} (\diataxomai\). Not even Timothy and Titus can do it all. {Whensoever I come} (\h“s an elth“\). Common idiom for temporal clause of future time (conjunction like \h“s\ with \an\ and aorist subjunctive \elth“\).

rwp@1Corinthians:12:3 @{Wherefore I give you to understand} (\dio gn“riz“ humin\). Causative idea (only in Aeschylus in old Greek) in papyri (also in sense of recognize) and N.T., from root \gn“\ in \gin“sk“\, to know. {Speaking in the Spirit of God} (\en pneumati theou lal“n\). Either sphere or instrumentality. No great distinction here between \lale“\ (utter sounds) and \leg“\ (to say). {Jesus is anathema} (\anathema Iˆsous\). On distinction between \anathema\ (curse) and \anathˆma\ (offering strkjv@Luke:21:5|) see discussion there. In LXX \anathˆma\ means a thing devoted to God without being redeemed, doomed to destruction (Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@Joshua:6:17; strkjv@7:12|). See strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:8f.; strkjv@Romans:9:3|. This blasphemous language against Jesus was mainly by the Jews (Acts:13:45; strkjv@18:6|). It is even possible that Paul had once tried to make Christians say \Anathema Iˆsous\ (Acts:26:11|). {Jesus is Lord} (\Kurios Iˆsous\). The term \Kurios\, as we have seen, is common in the LXX for God. The Romans used it freely for the emperor in the emperor worship. "Most important of all is the early establishment of a polemical parallelism between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \Kurios\, 'lord.' The new texts have here furnished quite astonishing revelations" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 349). Inscriptions, ostraca, papyri apply the term to Roman emperors, particularly to Nero when Paul wrote this very letter (_ib._, p. 353f.): "One with 'Nero Kurios' quite in the manner of a formula (without article, like the 'Kurios Jesus' in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|." "The battle-cries of the spirits of error and of truth contending at Corinth" (Findlay). One is reminded of the demand made by Polycarp that he say \Kurios Caesar\ and how each time he replied \Kurios Iˆsous\. He paid the penalty for his loyalty with his life. Lighthearted men today can say "Lord Jesus" in a flippant or even in an irreverent way, but no Jew or Gentile then said it who did not mean it.

rwp@1Corinthians:13:1 @{With the tongues} (\tais gl“ssais\). Instrumental case. Mentioned first because really least and because the Corinthians put undue emphasis on this gift. Plato (_Symposium_, 197) and many others have written on love, but Paul has here surpassed them all in this marvellous prose-poem. It comes like a sweet bell right between the jangling noise of the gifts in chapters 12 and 14. It is a pity to dissect this gem or to pull to pieces this fragrant rose, petal by petal. Fortunately Paul's language here calls for little comment, for it is the language of the heart. "The greatest, strongest, deepest thing Paul ever wrote" (Harnack). The condition (\ean\ and present subjunctive, \lal“ kai mˆ ech“\, though the form is identical with present indicative) is of the third class, a supposable case. {But have not love} (\agapˆn de mˆ ech“\). This is the _crux_ of the chapter. Love is the way _par excellence_ of strkjv@12:31|. It is not yet clearly certain that \agapˆ\ (a back-formation from \agapa“\) occurs before the LXX and the N.T. Plutarch used \agapˆsis\. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 198) once suspected it on an inscription in Pisidia. It is still possible that it occurs in the papyri (Prayer to Isis). See _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 75 for details. The rarity of \agapˆ\ made it easier for Christians to use this word for Christian love as opposed to \er“s\ (sexual love). See also Moffatt's Love in the N.T. for further data. The word is rare in the Gospels, but common in Paul, John, Peter, Jude. Paul does not limit \agapˆ\ at all (both toward God and man). Charity (Latin _caritas_) is wholly inadequate. "Intellect was worshipped in Greece, and power in Rome; but where did St. Paul learn the surpassing beauty of love?" (Robertson and Plummer). Whether Paul had ever seen Jesus in the flesh, he knows him in the spirit. One can substitute Jesus for love all through this panegyric. {I am become} (\gegona\). Second perfect indicative in the conclusion rather than the usual future indicative. It is put vividly, "I am already become." Sounding brass (\chalchos ˆch“n\). Old words. Brass was the earliest metal that men learned to use. Our word _echoing_ is \ˆch“n\, present active participle. Used in strkjv@Luke:21:25| of the roaring of the sea. Only two examples in N.T. {Clanging cymbal} (\kumbalon alalazon\). Cymbal old word, a hollow basin of brass. \Alalaz“\, old onomatopoetic word to ring loudly, in lament (Mark:5:38|), for any cause as here. Only two N.T. examples.

rwp@1Corinthians:14:28 @{But if there be no interpreter} (\ean de mˆ ˆi diermˆneutˆs\). Third class condition. Earliest known instance and possibly made by Paul from verb in verse 27|. Reappears in Byzantine grammarians. {Keep silence in church} (\sigat“ en ekklˆsiƒi\). Linear action (present active imperative). He is not even to speak in a tongue once. He can indulge his private ecstasy with God.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:15 @{False witnesses of God} (\pseudomartures tou theou\). Late word, but \pseudomarture“\, to bear false witness, old and common. The genitive (\tou theou\) can be either subjective (in God's service) or objective (concerning God). Either makes good sense. {Because we witnessed of God} (\hoti emarturˆsamen kata tou theou\). Vulgate has _adversus Deum_. This is the more natural way to take \kata\ and genitive, {against God} not as equal to \peri\ (concerning). He would indeed make God play false in that case, {if so be that the dead are not raised} (\eiper ara nekroi ouk egeirontai\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. Note both \per\ intensive particle {indeed} and \ara\ inferential particle {therefore}.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:23 @{Order} (\tagmati\). Old military term from \tass“\, to arrange, here only in N.T. Each in his own division, troop, rank. {At his coming} (\en tˆi parousiƒi\). The word \parousia\ was the technical word "for the arrival or visit of the king or emperor" and can be traced from the Ptolemaic period into the second century A.D. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 368). "Advent-coins were struck after a parousia of the emperor." Paul is only discussing "those that are Christ's" (3:23; strkjv@Galatians:5:24|) and so says nothing about judgment (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:19; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@4:15; strkjv@5:23|).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:43 @{In weakness} (\en astheneiƒi\). Lack of strength as shown in the victory of death. {In power} (\en dunamei\). Death can never conquer this new body, "conformed to the body of His glory" (Phillipians:3:21|).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:44 @{A natural body} (\s“ma psuchikon\). See on ¯2:14| for this word, a difficult one to translate since \psuchˆ\ has so many meanings. Natural is probably as good a rendering as can be made, but it is not adequate, for the body here is not all \psuchˆ\ either as soul or life. The same difficulty exists as to a spiritual body (\s“ma pneumatikon\). The resurrection body is not wholly \pneuma\. Caution is needed here in filling out details concerning the \psuchˆ\ and the \pneuma\. But certainly he means to say that the "spiritual body" has some kind of germinal connection with the "natural body," though the development is glorious beyond our comprehension though not beyond the power of Christ to perform (Phillipians:3:21|). The force of the argument remains unimpaired though we cannot follow fully into the thought beyond us. {If there is} (\ei estin\). "If there exists" (\estin\ means this with accent on first syllable), a condition of first class assumed as true. {There is also} (\estin kai\). There exists also.

rwp@1Corinthians:16:2 @{Upon the first day of the week} (\kata mian sabbatou\). For the singular \sabbatou\ (sabbath) for week see strkjv@Luke:18:12; strkjv@Mark:16:9|. For the use of the cardinal \mian\ in sense of ordinal \pr“tˆn\ after Hebrew fashion in LXX (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 672) as in strkjv@Mark:16:2; strkjv@Luke:24:1; strkjv@Acts:20:7|. Distributive use of \kata\ also. {Lay by him in store} (\par' heaut“i tithet“ thˆsauriz“n\). By himself, in his home. Treasuring it (cf. strkjv@Matthew:6:19f|. for \thˆsauriz“\). Have the habit of doing it, \tithet“\ (present imperative). {As he may prosper} (\hoti ean euod“tai\). Old verb from \eu\, well, and \hodos\, way or journey, to have a good journey, to prosper in general, common in LXX. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:1:10; strkjv@3John:1:2|. It is uncertain what form \euod“tai\ is, present passive subjunctive, perfect passive indicative, or even perfect passive subjunctive (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 54). The old MSS. had no accents. Some MSS. even have \euod“thˆi\ (first aorist passive subjunctive). But the sense is not altered. \Hoti\ is accusative of general reference and \ean\ can occur either with the subjunctive or indicative. This rule for giving occurs also in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:12|. Paul wishes the collections to be made before he comes.

rwp@Info_1John @ THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION RELATION TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL There are few scholars who deny that the Epistles of John and the Fourth Gospel are by the same writer. As a matter of fact "in the whole of the First Epistle there is hardly a single thought that is not found in the Gospel" (Schulze). H. J. Holtzmann (_Jahrbuch fur Protestantische Theologie_, 1882, P. 128) in a series of articles on the "Problem of the First Epistle of St. John in its Relation to the Gospel" thinks that the similarities are closer than those between Luke's Gospel and the Acts. Baur argued that this fact was explained by conscious imitation on the part of one or the other, probably by the author of the Epistle. The solution lies either in identity of authorship or in imitation. If there is identity of authorship, Holtzmann argues that the Epistle is earlier, as seems to me to be true, while Brooke holds that the Gospel is the earlier and that the First Epistle represents the more complete ideas of the author. Both Holtzmann and Brooke give a detailed comparison of likenesses between the First Epistle and the Fourth Gospel in vocabulary, syntax, style, ideas. The arguments are not conclusive as to the priority of Epistle or Gospel, but they are as to identity of authorship. One who accepts, as I do, the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel for the reasons given in Volume V of this series, does not feel called upon to prove the Johannine authorship of the three Epistles that pass under the Apostle's name. Westcott suggests that one compare strkjv@John:1:1-18| with strkjv@1John:1:1-4| to see how the same mind deals with the same ideas in different connections. "No theory of conscious imitation can reasonably explain the subtle coincidences and differences in these two short crucial passages."

rwp@1John:2:18 @{It is the last hour} (\eschatˆ h“ra estin\). This phrase only here in N.T., though John often uses \h“ra\ for a crisis (John:2:4; strkjv@4:21,23; strkjv@5:25,28|, etc.). It is anarthrous here and marks the character of the "hour." John has seven times "the last day" in the Gospel. Certainly in verse 28| John makes it plain that the \parousia\ might come in the life of those then living, but it is not clear that here he definitely asserts it as a fact. It was his hope beyond a doubt. We are left in doubt about this "last hour" whether it covers a period, a series, or the final climax of all just at hand. {As ye heard} (\kath“s ˆkousate\). First aorist active indicative of \akou“\. {Antichrist cometh} (\antichristos erchetai\). "Is coming." Present futuristic or prophetic middle indicative retained in indirect assertion. Songs:Jesus taught (Mark:13:6,22; strkjv@Matthew:24:5,15,24|) and so Paul taught (Acts:20:30; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3|). These false Christs (Matthew:24:24; strkjv@Mark:13:22|) are necessarily antichrists, for there can be only one. \Anti\ can mean substitution or opposition, but both ideas are identical in the word \antichristos\ (in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7|). Westcott rightly observes that John's use of the word is determined by the Christian conception, not by the Jewish apocalypses. {Have there arisen} (\gegonasin\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. {Many antichrists} (\antichristoi polloi\). Not just one, but the exponents of the Gnostic teaching are really antichrists, just as some modern deceivers deserve this title. {Whereby} (\hothen\). By the fact that these many antichrists have come.

rwp@1John:3:3 @{Set on him} (\ep' aut“i\). Resting upon (\epi\) with locative rather than \eis\, looking to, strkjv@Acts:24:15|. That is upon Christ (Brooke), upon God (D. Smith), upon God in Christ (Westcott). {Purifieth himself} (\hagnizei heauton\). Present active indicative of \hagniz“\, old verb, from \hagnos\ (pure from contamination), used of ceremonial purifications (John:11:55; strkjv@Acts:21:24,26| as in strkjv@Exodus:19:10|) and then of personal internal cleansing of heart (James:4:8|), soul (1Peter:1:22|), self (here). Cf. strkjv@Phillipians:2:12f.| the work of both God and man. {As he is pure} (\kath“s ekeinos hagnos estin\). As in strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:9| \ekeinos\ (emphatic demonstrative) refers to Christ. Christ can be termed \hagnos\ "in virtue of the perfection of his humanity" (Westcott). Our destiny is to be conformed to the image of God in Christ (Romans:8:29|).

rwp@1John:3:9 @{Doeth no sin} (\hamartian ou poiei\). Linear present active indicative as in verse 4| like \hamartanei\ in verse 8|. The child of God does not have the habit of sin. {His seed} (\sperma autou\). God's seed, "the divine principle of life" (Vincent). Cf. strkjv@John:1|. {And he cannot sin} (\kai ou dunatai hamartanein\). This is a wrong translation, for this English naturally means "and he cannot commit sin" as if it were \kai ou dunatai hamartein\ or \hamartˆsai\ (second aorist or first aorist active infinitive). The present active infinitive \hamartanein\ can only mean "and he cannot go on sinning," as is true of \hamartanei\ in verse 8| and \hamartan“n\ in verse 6|. For the aorist subjunctive to commit a sin see \hamartˆte\ and \hamartˆi\ in strkjv@2:1|. A great deal of false theology has grown out of a misunderstanding of the tense of \hamartanein\ here. Paul has precisely John's idea in strkjv@Romans:6:1| \epimen“men tˆi hamartiƒi\ (shall we continue in sin, present active linear subjunctive) in contrast with \hamartˆs“men\ in strkjv@Romans:6:15| (shall we commit a sin, first aorist active subjunctive).

rwp@1John:5:9 @{If we receive} (\ei lambanomen\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and the present active indicative, assumed as true. The conditions for a legally valid witness are laid down in strkjv@Deuteronomy:19:15| (cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:16; strkjv@John:8:17f.; strkjv@10:25; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:1|). {Greater} (\meiz“n\). Comparative of \megas\, because God is always true. {For} (\hoti\). Songs:it applies to this case. {That} (\hoti\). Thus taken in the declarative sense (the fact that) as in strkjv@John:3:19|, though it can be causal (because) or indefinite relative with \memarturˆken\ (what he hath testified, perfect active indicative of \marture“\, as in strkjv@John:1:32; strkjv@4:44|, etc.), a harsh construction here because of \marturia\, though some MSS. do read \hen\ to agree with it (cf. verse 10|). See \hoti ean\ in strkjv@3:20| for that idiom. Westcott notes the Trinity in verses 6-9|: the Son comes, the Spirit witnesses, the Father has witnessed.

rwp@1John:5:17 @{All unrighteousness is sin} (\pƒsa adikia hamartia estin\). Unrighteousness is one manifestation of sin as lawlessness (3:4|) is another (Brooke). The world today takes sin too lightly, even jokingly as a mere animal inheritance. Sin is a terrible reality, but there is no cause for despair. Sin not unto death can be overcome in Christ.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE DATE This question is tied up with that of the genuineness of the Epistle, the time of Peter's death, the use of Paul's Epistles, the persecution referred to in the Epistle. Assuming the genuineness of the Epistle and the death of Peter about A.D. 67 or 68 and the persecution to be not that under Domitian or Trajan, but under Nero, the date can be assumed to be about A.D. 65.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE USE OF PAUL'S EPISTLES There are two extremes about the relation of Peter to Paul. One is that of violent antithesis, with Peter and Paul opposing one another by exaggerating and prolonging Paul's denunciation of Peter's cowardice in Antioch (Galatians:2:11-21|) and making Peter also the exponent of a Jewish type of Christianity (practically a Judaizing type). This view of Baur once had quite a following, but it has nearly disappeared. Under its influence Acts and Peter's Epistles were considered not genuine, but documents designed to patch up the disagreement between Peter and Paul. The other extreme is to deny any Pauline influence on Peter or of Peter on Paul. Paul was friendly to Peter (Galatians:1:18|), but was independent of his ecclesiastical authority (Galatians:2:1-10|) and Peter championed Paul's cause in the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:7-13|). Peter was certainly not a Judaizer (Acts:11:1-18|), in spite of his temporary defection in Antioch. Undoubtedly Peter was won back to cordial relations with Paul if any confidence can be placed in strkjv@2Peter:3:15f|. There is no reason for doubting that Peter was familiar with some of Paul's Epistles as there indicated. There is some indication of Peter's use of Romans and Ephesians in this Epistle. It is not always conclusive to find the same words and even ideas which are not formally quoted, because there was a Christian vocabulary and a body of doctrinal ideas in common though with personal variations in expression. Peter may have read James, but not the Pastoral Epistles. There are points of contact with Hebrews which Von Soden considers sufficiently accounted for by the fact that Peter and the author of Hebrews were contemporaries.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE PERSECUTION PICTURED IN THE EPISTLE Peter himself knew what persecution was at the hands of the Sanhedrin and of Herod Agrippa I (both church and state). If First Peter was written A.D. 65, there was time enough for the persecution of Nero in Rome in A.D. 64 to spread to Asia Minor. The province easily imitated the capital city. Paul's life in the Acts and his Epistles abundantly show how early persecution arose in Asia Minor. The Apocalypse, written during the reign of Domitian, shows that persecution from the state had been on hand long before and was an old burden. We know too little of the history of Christianity in Asia Minor from A.D. 60 to 70 to deny that the fiery trials and suffering as a Christian (1Peter:4:16|) can be true of this period. Songs:we locate the persecution at this time as an echo from Rome.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE PLACE OF WRITING Peter states that he is in Babylon (1Peter:5:13|), apparently with his wife (1Corinthians:9:5|). It is not certain whether he means actual Babylon, where Jews had been numerous, or mystical Babylon (Rome) as in the Apocalypse. We do not know when Rome began to be called Babylon. It may have started as a result of Nero's persecution of the Christians after the burning of Rome. The Christians were called "evil-doers" (1Peter:2:12|) in the time of Nero (Tacitus, _Ann_. XV. 44). Songs:we can think of Rome as the place of writing and that Peter uses "Babylon" to hide his actual location from Nero. Whether Peter came to Rome while Paul was still there we do not know, though John Mark was there with Paul (Colossians:4:10|). "At the time when it was written Babylon had not yet unmasked all its terrors, and the ordinary Christian was not in immediate danger of the _tunica ardens_, or the red-hot iron chair, or the wild beasts, or the stake" (Bigg).

rwp@Info_1Peter @ SOME BOOKS Alford, H., Vol. IV. 1 of his _Greek Testament_. Baldwin, _The Fisherman of Galilee_. Barnes, _St. Peter in Rome and His Tomb on the Vatican Hill_. Beck, J. T., _Erklarung der Briefe Petri_. Bennett, W. H., _New-Century Bible_. Bigg, C., _Intern. Crit. Comm_.. Birks, _Studies in the Life and Character of St. Peter_. Blenkin, _The First Ep. General of St. Peter_. Camerlinck, _Commentarius in epistolas catholicas_. Cooke and Lumby, _Speaker's Comm_.. Couard, _Commentaire_. Couard, _Simon Petrus der Apostel des Herrn_. Davidson, _St. Peter and His Training_. Elert, _Die Religiositat des Petrus_. Erbes, _Die Todestage der Apostels Paulus and Petrus_. Foakes-Jackson, F. J., _Peter Prince of Apostles_. Foster, Ora D., _The Literary Relations of the First Epistle of Peter_. Fouard, C., _St. Peter and the First Years of Christianity_. Gallagher, M., _Was the Apostle Peter Ever at Rome?_. Goutard, _Essai critique et historique sur la prem. e'pitre de S. Pierre_. Green, S. G., _The Apostle Peter: His Life and Letters_. Guignebert, _Lamentations:Primaute' de Pierre et la Venue de Pierre a Rome_. Gunkel, H., _Die Schriften d. N.T_. 3 Aufl.. Hart, J. H. A., _Expos. Greek Test_.. Henriott, _Saint Pierre_. Hort, F. J. A., _The First Epistle of St. Peter strkjv@1:1-2:17_. Howson, J., _Horae Petrinae_. Jenkins, R. C., _The Apostle Peter. Claims of Catholics_. Johnstone, _The First Epistle of Peter_. Kasteren, Van, _Deuteronomy:Eerste Brief Van d. Ap. Petrus_. Keil, C. F., _Comm. uber die Briefe des Petrus und Juda_. Knopf, R., _Die Briefe Petri und Juda_. Kogel, J., _Die Gedankenheit des Ersten Briefes Petri_. Kuhl, E., _Die Briefe Petri und Judae_ (Meyer Komm., 6 Aufl., 1897). Lietzmann, _Petrus and Paulus in Rom_. Lumby, J. R., _Expositor's Bible_. Masterman, J. H. B., _Epistles of St. Peter_. McInnis, J.M., _Simon Peter Fisherman and Philosopher_. Meyer, F. B., _Peter: Fisherman, Disciple, Apostle_. Moffatt, James, _Moffatt Comm. on N.T._. Monneir, J., _Lamentations:premiere e'pitre de l'apotre Pierre_. Perdelwitz, _Die Mysterienreligion und das Problem des ersten Petrusbriefes_. Plumptre, _Cambridge Bible_. Reagan, _The Preaching of Peter, the Beginning of Christian Apologetics_. Robinson, C. G., _Simon Peter: His Life and Times_. Ross, J. M. E., _The First Epistle of Peter_. Salmond, A. D. F., _Schaff's Comm_.. Scharfe, _Die petrinische Stromung der neut. Literatur_. Schmid, _Petrus in Rome_. Seeley, _The Life and Writings of St. Peter_. Soden, Von, H., _Hand-Komm_. (3 Aufl., 1899). Taylor, W. M., _Peter the Apostle_. Thomas, W. H., Griffith, _The Apostle Peter_ (2nd ed., 1905). Thompson, _Life-Work of Peter the Apostle_. Upham, _Simon Peter Shepherd_. Usteri, J. M., _Wiss. und prakt. Komm. uber den I Petrus- brief_. Volter, D., _Der I Petrusbrief_. Weiss, B., _Die erste Petrusbrief und die Kritik_. _Der petrinische Lehrbegriff_. Williams, N. M., _American Comm_. Windisch, H., _Die Katholische Briefe. Handbuch zum N.T._ (2 Aufl., 1930). Wohlenberg, G., _Der erste und zweite Petrusbrief und der Judasbrief_. (Zahn Komm., 2 Aufl., 1915.) strkjv@1Peter:1:1 @{Peter} (\Petros\). Greek form for the Aramaic (Chaldaic) \Cˆphƒs\, the nickname given Simon by Jesus when he first saw him (John:1:42|) and reaffirmed in the Greek form on his great confession (Matthew:16:18|), with an allusion to \petra\, another form for a rock, ledge, or cliff. In strkjv@2Peter:1:1| we have both \Sim“n\ and \Petros\. Paul in his Epistles always terms himself Paul, not Saul. Songs:Peter uses this name, not Cephas or Simon, because he is writing to Christians scattered over Asia Minor. The nominative absolute occurs here as in strkjv@James:1:1|, but without \chairein\ as there, the usual form of greeting in letters (Acts:23:26|) so common in the papyri. {An apostle of Jesus Christ} (\apostolos Iˆsou Christou\). This is his official title, but in strkjv@2Peter:1:1| \doulos\ is added, which occurs alone in strkjv@James:1:1|. In II and III John we have only \ho presbuteros\ (the elder), as Peter terms himself \sunpresbuteros\ in strkjv@1Peter:5:1|. Paul's usage varies greatly: only the names in I and II Thessalonians, the title \apostolos\ added and defended in Galatians and Romans as also in I and II Corinthians and Colossians and Ephesians and II Timothy with "by the will of God" added, and in I Timothy with the addition of "according to the command of God." In Philippians Paul has only "\doulos\ (slave) \Christou Iˆsou\," like James and Jude. In Romans and Titus Paul has both \doulos\ and \apostolos\, like II Peter, while in Philemon he uses only \desmios\ (prisoner) \Iˆsou Christou\. {To the elect} (\eklektois\). Without article (with the article in strkjv@Matthew:24:22,24,31|) and dative case, "to elect persons" (viewed as a group). Bigg takes \eklektois\ (old, but rare verbal adjective from \ekleg“\, to pick out, to select) as an adjective describing the next word, "to elect sojourners." That is possible and is like \genos eklekton\ in strkjv@2:9|. See the distinction between \klˆtoi\ (called) and \eklektoi\ (chosen) in strkjv@Matthew:22:14|. {Who are sojourners} (\parepidˆmois\). Late double compound adjective (\para, epidˆmountes\, strkjv@Acts:2:10|, to sojourn by the side of natives), strangers sojourning for a while in a particular place. Songs:in Polybius, papyri, in LXX only twice (Genesis:23:4|; 38 or 39 12), in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:11; strkjv@Hebrews:11:13|. The picture in the metaphor here is that heaven is our native country and we are only temporary sojourners here on earth. {Of the Dispersion} (\diasporƒs\). See strkjv@John:7:35| for literal sense of the word for scattered (from \diaspeir“\, to scatter abroad, strkjv@Acts:8:1|) Jews outside of Palestine, and strkjv@James:1:1| for the sense here to Jewish Christians, including Gentile Christians (only N T. examples). Note absence of the article, though a definite conception (of the Dispersion). The Christian is a pilgrim on his way to the homeland. These five Roman provinces include what we call Asia Minor north and west of the Taurus mountain range (Hort). Hort suggests that the order here suggests that Silvanus (bearer of the Epistle) was to land in Pontus from the Euxine Sea, proceed through Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, to Bithynia, where he would re-embark for Rome. This, he holds, explains the separation of Pontus and Bithynia, though the same province. Only Galatia and Asia are mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. as having Christian converts, but the N.T. by no means gives a full account of the spread of the Gospel, as can be judged from strkjv@Colossians:1:6,23|.

rwp@1Peter:1:4 @{Unto an inheritance} (\eis klˆronomian\). Old word (from \klˆronomos\, heir) for the property received by the heir (Matthew:21:38|), here a picture of the blessedness in store for us pilgrims (Galatians:3:18|). {Incorruptible} (\aphtharton\). Old compound adjective (alpha privative and \phtheir“\, to corrupt), imperishable. Songs:many inheritances vanish away before they are obtained. {Undefiled} (\amianton\). Old verbal adjective (note alliteration) from alpha privative and \miain“\, to defile, without defect or flaw in the title, in N.T. only here, strkjv@James:1:27; strkjv@Hebrews:13:4|. {That fadeth not away} (\amaranton\). Alliterative and verbal adjective again from alpha privative and \marain“\ (to dry up, to wither, as in strkjv@James:1:11|), late and rare word in several inscriptions on tombs, here only in N.T. These inscriptions will fade away, but not this inheritance in Christ. It will not be like a faded rose. {Reserved} (\tetˆrˆmenˆn\). Perfect passive participle of \tˆre“\, old verb, to take care of, to guard. No burglars or bandits can break through where this inheritance is kept (Matthew:6:19f.; strkjv@John:17:11f.|). Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:5|, where laid away" (\apokeimenˆn\) occurs. {For you} (\eis humas\). More graphic than the mere dative.

rwp@1Peter:1:6 @{Wherein} (\en h“i\). This translation refers the relative \h“i\ to \kair“i\, but it is possible to see a reference to \Christou\ (verse 3|) or to \theou\ (verse 5|) or even to the entire content of verses 3-5|. Either makes sense, though possibly \kair“i\ is correct. {Ye greatly rejoice} (\agalliƒsthe\). Present middle indicative (rather than imperative) of \agalliaomai\, late verb from \agallomai\, to rejoice, only in LXX, N.T., and ecclesiastical literature as in strkjv@Matthew:5:12|. {Now for a little while} (\oligon arti\). Accusative case of time (\oligon\) probably as in strkjv@Mark:6:31|, though it can be used of space (to a small extent) as in strkjv@Luke:5:3|. {If need be} (\ei deon\). Present active neuter singular participle of \dei\ (it is necessary). Some MSS. have \estin\ after \deon\ (periphrastic construction). Condition of first class. {Though ye have been put to grief} (\lupˆthentes\). First aorist passive participle (concessive circumstantial use) of \lupe“\, to make sorrowful (from \lupˆ\, sorrow), old and common verb. See strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10|. {In manifold temptations} (\en poikilois peirasmois\). Just the phrase in strkjv@James:1:2|, which see for discussion. "Trials" clearly right here as there. Seven N.T. writers use \poikilos\ (varied).

rwp@1Peter:1:12 @{To whom} (\hois\). Dative plural of the relative pronoun. To the prophets who were seeking to understand. Bigg observes that "the connexion between study and inspiration is a great mystery." Surely, but that is no argument for ignorance or obscurantism. We do the best that we can and only skirt the shore of knowledge, as Newton said. {It was revealed} (\apekaluphthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \apokalupt“\, old verb, to reveal, to unveil. Here is revelation about the revelation already received, revelation after research. {Did they minister} (\diˆkonoun\). Imperfect active of \diakone“\, old verb, to minister, "were they ministering." {Have been announced} (\anˆggelˆ\). Second aorist passive indicative of {anaggell“}, to report, to bring back tidings (John:4:25|). {Through them} (\dia t“n\). Intermediate agent (\dia\), "the gospelizers" (\t“n euaggelisamen“n\, articular first aorist middle participle of \euaggeliz“\, to preach the gospel). {By the Holy Ghost} (\pneumati hagi“i\). Instrumental case of the personal agent, "by the Holy Spirit" (without article). {Sent forth from heaven} (\apostalenti\). Second aorist passive participle of \apostell“\ in instrumental case agreeing with \pneumati hagi“i\ (the Spirit of Christ of verse 11|. {Desire} (\epithumousin\). Eagerly desire (present active indicative of \epithume“\, to long for). {To look into} (\parakupsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \parakupt“\, old compound to peer into as in strkjv@Luke:24:12; strkjv@John:20:5,11; strkjv@James:1:25|, which see. For the interest of angels in the Incarnation see strkjv@Luke:2:13f|.

rwp@1Peter:1:23 @{Having been begotten again} (\anagegennˆmenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \anagenna“\, which see in verse 2|. {Not of corruptible seed} (\ouk ek sporƒs phthartˆs\). Ablative with \ek\ as the source, for \phthartos\ see verse 18|, and \sporƒs\ (from \speir“\ to sow), old word (sowing, seed) here only in N.T., though \sporos\ in strkjv@Mark:4:26f.|, etc. For "incorruptible" (\aphthartou\) see verse 4; strkjv@3:4|. {Through the word of God} (\dia logou theou\). See strkjv@James:1:18| for "by the word of truth," verse 25| here, and Peter's use of \logos\ in strkjv@Acts:10:36|. It is the gospel message. {Which liveth and abideth} (\z“ntos kai menontos\). These present active participles (from \za“\ and \men“\) can be taken with \theou\ (God) or with \logou\ (word). In verse 25| \menei\ is used with \rˆma\ (word). Still in strkjv@Daniel:6:26| both \men“n\ and \z“n\ are used with \theos\. Either construction makes sense here.

rwp@1Peter:2:5 @{Ye also as living stones} (\kai autoi h“s lithoi z“ntes\). Peter applies the metaphor about Christ as the living stone to the readers, "ye yourselves also." {Are built up a spiritual house} (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). Present passive indicative second person plural of \oikodome“\, the very verb used by Jesus to Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| (\oikodomˆs“\) of building his church on the rock. If the metaphor of a house of living stones seems "violent" (Vincent), it should be remembered that Jesus employed the figure of a house of believers. Peter just carried it a bit farther and Paul uses a temple for believers in one place (1Corinthians:3:16|) and for the kingdom of God in general (Ephesians:2:22|), as does the author of Hebrews (Hebrews:3:6|). This "spiritual house" includes believers in the five Roman provinces of strkjv@1:1| and shows clearly how Peter understood the metaphor of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| to be not a local church, but the church general (the kingdom of Christ). {To be a holy priesthood} (\eis hierateuma hagion\). Late word (from \hierateu“\, to serve as priest, strkjv@Luke:1:8| alone in N.T.), in LXX (Exodus:19:6|), in N.T. only here and verse 9|, either the office of priest (Hort) or an order or body of priests. At any rate, Peter has the same idea of Rev strkjv@1:6| (\hiereis\, priests) that all believers are priests (Hebrews:4:16|) and can approach God directly. {To offer up} (\anenegkai\). First aorist active infinitive (of purpose here) of \anapher“\, the usual word for offering sacrifices (Hebrews:7:27|). Only these are "spiritual" (\pneumatikas\) as pictured also in strkjv@Hebrews:13:15f|. {Acceptable} (\euprosdektous\). Late (Plutarch) double compound verbal adjective (\eu, pros, dechomai\) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:6:2|.

rwp@1Peter:2:8 @{And} (\kai\). Peter now quotes strkjv@Isaiah:8:14| and gives a new turn to the previous quotation. To the disbelieving, Christ was indeed "a stone of stumbling (\lithos proskommatos\) and rock of offence (\petra skandalou\)," quoted also by Paul in strkjv@Romans:9:32f.|, which see for discussion. \Proskomma\ (from \proskopt“\, to cut against) is an obstacle against which one strikes by accident, while \skandalon\ is a trap set to trip one, but both make one fall. Too much distinction need not be made between \lithos\ (a loose stone in the path) and \petra\ (a ledge rising out of the ground). {For they} (\hoi\). Causal use of the relative pronoun. {Stumble at the word, being disobedient} (\proskoptousin t“i log“i apeithountes\). Present active indicative of \proskopt“\ with dative case, \log“i\, and present active participle of \apeithe“\ (cf. \apistousin\ in strkjv@2:7|) as in strkjv@3:1|. \T“i log“i\ can be construed with \apeithountes\ (stumble, being disobedient to the word). {Whereunto also they were appointed} (\eis ho kai etethˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \tithˆmi\. See this idiom in strkjv@1Timothy:2:7|. "Their disobedience is not ordained, the penalty of their disobedience is" (Bigg). They rebelled against God and paid the penalty.

rwp@1Peter:2:19 @{For this is acceptable} (\touto gar charis\). "For this thing (neuter singular \touto\, obedience to crooked masters) is grace" (\charis\ is feminine, here "thanks" as in strkjv@Romans:7:25|). "Acceptable" calls for \euprosdekton\ (2:5|), which is not the text here. {If a man endureth griefs} (\ei huopherei tis lupas\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and present active indicative of \hupopher“\, old verb, to bear up under, in N.T. only here, strkjv@1Corinthians:10:13; strkjv@2Timothy:3:11|. Note plural of \lupˆ\ (grief). {For conscience toward God} (\dia suneidˆsin theou\). Suffering is not a blessing in and of itself, but, if one's duty to God is involved (Acts:4:20|), then one can meet it with gladness of heart. \Theou\ (God) is objective genitive. For \suneidˆsis\ (conscience) see on ¯Acts:23:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:8:7|. It occurs again in strkjv@1Peter:3:16|. {Suffering wrongfully} (\pasch“n adik“s\). Present active participle of \pasch“\ and the common adverb \adik“s\, unjustly, here alone in N.T. This is the whole point, made clear already by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:10-12|, where Jesus has also "falsely" (\pseudomenoi\). See also strkjv@Luke:6:32-34|.

rwp@1Peter:2:25 @{For ye were going astray like sheep} (\ˆte gar h“s probata plan“menoi\). Brought from strkjv@Isaiah:53:6|, but changed to periphrastic imperfect indicative with \ˆte\ and present middle participle of \plana“\, to wander away. Recall the words of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:15:4-7|. {But are now returned} (\alla epestraphˆte\). Second aorist passive indicative of \epistreph“\, old verb, to turn, to return (Matthew:10:13|). {Unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls} (\epi ton poimena kai episkopon t“n psuch“n hum“n\). Jesus called himself the Good Shepherd (John:10:11|, and see also strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|). Here alone is Christ called our "Bishop" (overseer). See both ideas combined in strkjv@Ezekiel:34:11|. Philo calls God \Episcopos\. Jesus is also \Apostolos\ strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|) and he deserves all other titles of dignity that we can give him.

rwp@1Peter:3:10 @{For} (\gar\). Reason for the entire exhortation in verses 8,9| and introducing in verses 10-12| a quotation from strkjv@Psalms:34:13-17| with some slight changes. {Would love life} (\thel“n z“ˆn agapƒin\). "Wishing to love life." This present life. The LXX expressions are obscure Hebraisms. The LXX has \agap“n\ (participle present active of \agapa“\, not the infinitive \agapƒin\. {Let him refrain} (\pausat“\). Third person singular first aorist active imperative of \pau“\ to make stop, whereas the LXX has \pauson\ (second person singular). {His tongue} (\tˆn gl“ssan\). See strkjv@James:3:1-12|. {That they speak no guile} (\tou mˆ lalˆsai dolon\). Purpose clause with genitive article \tou\ (negative \mˆ\) and the first aorist active infinitive of \lale“\. But it can also be explained as the ablative case with the redundant negative \mˆ\ after a verb of hindering (\pausat“\) like strkjv@Luke:4:42|. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1061. "Let him refrain his lips from speaking guile."

rwp@1Peter:3:13 @{That will harm you} (\ho kak“s“n humas\). Future active articular participle of \kako“\, old verb (from \kakos\, bad) as in strkjv@Acts:7:6,19|. Any real hurt, either that wishes to harm you or that can harm. See the words in strkjv@Isaiah:50:9|. {If ye be} (\ean genˆsthe\). Rather, "if ye become" (condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\). {Zealous of that which is good} (\tou agathou zˆl“tai\). "Zealots for the good" (objective genitive after \zˆl“tai\ (zealots, not zealous), old word from \zˆlo“\ (1Corinthians:12:12|).

rwp@1Peter:3:19 @{In which also} (\en h“i kai\). That is, in spirit (relative referring to \pneumati\). But, a number of modern scholars have followed Griesbach's conjecture that the original text was either \N“e kai\ (Noah also), or \En“ch kai\ (Enoch also), or \en h“i kai En“ch\ (in which Enoch also) which an early scribe misunderstood or omitted \En“ch kai\ in copying (\homoioteleuton\). It is allowed in Stier and Theile's _Polyglott_. It is advocated by J. Cramer in 1891, by J. Rendel Harris in _The Expositor_, and _Sidelights on N.T. Research_ (p. 208), by Nestle in 1902, by Moffatt's New Translation of the New Testament. Windisch rejects it as inconsistent with the context. There is no manuscript for the conjecture, though it would relieve the difficulty greatly. Luther admits that he does not know what Peter means. Bigg has no doubt that the event recorded took place between Christ's death and his resurrection and holds that Peter is alluding to Christ's _Descensus ad Inferos_ in strkjv@Acts:2:27| (with which he compares strkjv@Matthew:27:52f.; strkjv@Luke:23:34; strkjv@Ephesians:4:9|). With this Windisch agrees. But Wohlenberg holds that Peter means that Christ in his preexistent state preached to those who rejected the preaching of Noah who are now in prison. Augustine held that Christ was in Noah when he preached. Bigg argues strongly that Christ during the time between his death and resurrection preached to those who once heard Noah (but are now in prison) and offered them another chance and not mere condemnation. If so, why did Jesus confine his preaching to this one group? Songs:the theories run on about this passage. One can only say that it is a slim hope for those who neglect or reject Christ in this life to gamble with a possible second chance after death which rests on very precarious exegesis of a most difficult passage in Peter's Epistle. Accepting the text as we have, what can we make of it? {He went and preached} (\poreutheis ekˆruxen\). First aorist passive (deponent) participle of \poreuomai\ and first aorist active indicative of \kˆruss“\, the verb commonly used of the preaching of Jesus. Naturally the words mean personal action by Christ "in spirit" as illustration of his "quickening" (verse 18|) whether done before his death or afterwards. It is interesting to observe that, just as the relative \en h“i\ here tells something suggested by the word \pneumati\ (in spirit) just before, so in verse 21| the relative \ho\ (which) tells another illustration of the words \di' hudatos\ (by water) just before. Peter jumps from the flood in Noah's time to baptism in Peter's time, just as he jumped backwards from Christ's time to Noah's time. He easily goes off at a word. What does he mean here by the story that illustrates Christ's quickening in spirit? {Unto the spirits in prison} (\tois en phulakˆi pneumasin\). The language is plain enough except that it does not make it clear whether Jesus did the preaching to spirits in prison at the time or to people whose spirits are now in prison, the point of doubt already discussed. The metaphorical use of \en phulakˆi\ can be illustrated by strkjv@2Peter:2:4; strkjv@Jude:1:6; strkjv@Revelation:20:7| (the final abode of the lost). See strkjv@Hebrews:12:23| for the use of \pneumata\ for disembodied spirits.

rwp@1Peter:4:2 @{That ye no longer should live} (\eis to mˆketi bi“sai\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ (negative \mˆ\) and the first aorist (for the Attic second aorist \bi“nai\) active infinitive of \bio“\, old verb, to spend a life (from \bios\, course of life, strkjv@Luke:8:14|), here only in N.T. {The rest of your time in the flesh} (\ton epiloipon en sarki chronon\). Accusative of time (\chronon\, period of time). \Epiloipon\ is old adjective (\epi, loipos\, remaining in addition), here only in N.T. But \eis to\ here can be result (so that) as in strkjv@Romans:1:20; strkjv@4:18|.

rwp@1Peter:4:11 @{If any man speaketh} (\ei tis lalei\). Condition of first class, assumed as a fact. {Speaking as it were oracles of God} (\h“s logia theou\). No predicate in this conclusion of the condition. For \logia theou\ see strkjv@Acts:7:38| (Mosaic law); strkjv@Romans:3:2| (the Old Testament); strkjv@Hebrews:5:12| (the substance of Christian teaching), here of the utterances of God through Christian teachers. \Logion\ (old word) is a diminutive of \logos\ (speech, word). It can be construed here as nominative or as accusative. The verb has to be supplied. {If any one ministereth} (\ei tis diakonei\). First-class condition again. See strkjv@Acts:6:2-4| for the twofold division of service involved here. {Which God supplieth} (\hˆs chorˆgei ho theos\). Ablative case (\hˆs\) of the relative attracted from the accusative \hˆn\, object of \chorˆgei\ (present active indicative of \chorˆge“\, old verb, to supply from \chorˆgos\, chorus leader, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:9:10|). Peter has the compound \epichorˆge“\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:5,11|. God is the supplier of strength. {That God may be glorified} (\hina doxazˆtai ho theos\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present passive subjunctive of \doxaz“\. See strkjv@John:15:8|. {Whose is} (\h“i estin\). "To whom (dative) is," that is to Jesus Christ the immediate antecedent, but in strkjv@Romans:16:27; strkjv@Jude:1:25| the doxology is to God through Christ. For other doxologies see strkjv@1Peter:5:11; strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@Galatians:1:5; strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@11:36; strkjv@Phillipians:4:20; strkjv@Ephesians:3:21; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17; strkjv@6:16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18; strkjv@Hebrews:13:21; strkjv@Revelation:1:6; strkjv@5:13; strkjv@7:12|. The others addressed to Christ are strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18; strkjv@Revelation:1:6|.

rwp@1Peter:4:17 @{For the time is come} (\hoti ho kairos\). No predicate, probably \estin\ (is) to be supplied. The phrase that follows comes from the vision of Ezekiel (chapter strkjv@Ezekiel:9|). The construction is unusual with \tou arxasthai\ (genitive articular aorist middle infinitive of \arch“\), not exactly purpose or result, and almost in apposition (epexegetic), but note \tou elthein\ used as subject in strkjv@Luke:17:1|. The persecution on hand (1:7|) was a foretaste of more to come. By "house of God" he can mean the same as the "spiritual house" of strkjv@2:5| or a local church. Biggs even takes it to refer to the family. {And if it begin first at us} (\ei de pr“ton aph'hˆm“n\). Condition of first class again, with the verb \archetai\ understood. "From us" (\aph' hˆm“n\) more exactly. {End} (\telos\). Final fate. {Of them that obey not the gospel of God} (\t“n apeithount“n t“i tou theou euaggeli“i\). "Of those disobeying the gospel of God." See the same idea in strkjv@Romans:2:8|. See strkjv@Mark:1:14| for believing in the gospel.

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:4 @{Knowing} (\eidotes\). Second perfect active participle of \oida\ (\eidon\), a so-called causal participle=since we know, the third participle with the principal verb \eucharistoumen\, the Greek being fond of the circumstantial participle and lengthening sentences thereby (Robertson, _Grammar_, P. 1128). {Beloved by God} (\ˆgapˆmenoi hupo [tou] theou\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa“\, the verb so common in the N.T. for the highest kind of love. Paul is not content with the use of \adelphoi\ here (often in this Epistle as strkjv@2:1,14,17; strkjv@3:7; strkjv@4:1,10|), but adds this affectionate phrase nowhere else in the N.T. in this form (cf. strkjv@Jude:1:3|) though in Sirach strkjv@45:1 and on the Rosetta Stone. But in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:13| he quotes "beloved by the Lord" from strkjv@Deuteronomy:33:12|. The use of \adelphoi\ for members of the same brotherhood can be derived from the Jewish custom (Acts:2:29,37|) and the habit of Jesus (Matthew:12:48|) and is amply illustrated in the papyri for burial clubs and other orders and guilds (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {Your election} (\tˆn eklogˆn hum“n\). That is the election of you by God. It is an old word from \eklegomai\ used by Jesus of his choice of the twelve disciples (John:15:16|) and by Paul of God's eternal selection (Ephesians:1:4|). The word \eklogˆ\ is not in the LXX and only seven times in the N.T. and always of God's choice of men (Acts:9:15; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:9:11; strkjv@11:5,7,58; strkjv@2Peter:1:10|). The divine \eklogˆ\ was manifested in the Christian qualities of verse 3| (Moffatt).

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:13 @{And for this cause we also} (\kai dia touto kai hˆmeis\). Note \kai\ twice. We as well as you are grateful for the way the gospel was received in Thessalonica. {Without ceasing} (\adialeipt“s\). Late adverb for which see on strkjv@1:2| and for \eucharistoumen\ see on ¯1:2|. {The word of the message} (\logon akoˆs\). Literally, {the word of} hearing, as in Sir. strkjv@42:1 and strkjv@Hebrews:4:2| \ho logos tˆs akoˆs\, the word marked by hearing (genitive case), the word which you heard. Here with \tou theou\ (of God) added as a second descriptive genitive which Paul expands and justifies. {Ye received it so} (\paralabontes\) and {accepted or welcomed it} (\edexasthe\) so, {not as the word of men} (\ou logou anthr“p“n\), {but as the word of God} (\alla logon theou\), {as it is in truth} (\kath“s alˆth“s estin\). This last clause is literally, {as it truly is}. Paul had not a doubt that he was proclaiming God's message. Should any preacher preach his doubts if he has any? God's message can be found and Paul found it. {Worketh in you} (\energeitai en humin\). Perhaps middle voice of \energe“\ (\en, ergon\, work) late verb, not in ancient Greek or LXX, but in papyri and late writers (Polybius, etc.) and in N.T. only by Paul and James. If it is passive, as Milligan thinks, it means "is set in operation," as Polybius has it. The idea then is that the word of God is set in operation in you that believe.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:15 @{Who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets} (\t“n kai ton Kurion apokteinant“n Iˆsoun kai tous prophˆtas\). First aorist active participle of \apoktein“\. Vivid justification of his praise of the churches in Judea. The Jews killed the prophets before the Lord Jesus who reminded them of their guilt (Matthew:23:29|). Paul, as Peter (Acts:2:23|), lays the guilt of the death of Christ on the Jews. {And drove us out} (\kai hˆmƒs ekdi“xant“n\). An old verb to drive out or banish, to chase out as if a wild beast. Only here in N.T. It is Paul's vivid description of the scene told in strkjv@Acts:17:5ff.| when the rabbis and the hoodlums from the agora chased him out of Thessalonica by the help of the politarchs. {Please not God} (\The“i mˆ areskont“n\). The rabbis and Jews thought that they were pleasing God by so doing as Paul did when he ravaged the young church in Jerusalem. But Paul knows better now. {And are contrary to all men} (\kai pasin anthr“pois enanti“n\). Dative case with the adjective \enanti“n\ (old and common word, face to face, opposite). It seems like a bitter word about Paul's countrymen whom he really loved (Romans:9:1-5; strkjv@10:1-6|), but Paul knew only too well the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile as he shows in strkjv@Ephesians:2| and which only the Cross of Christ can break down. Tacitus (_Hist_. V. 5) says that the Jews are _adversus omnes alios hostile odium_.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:4 @{That each one of you know how} (\eidenai hekaston hum“n\). Further epexegetic infinitive (second perfect active), learn how and so know how (learn the habit of purity). {To possess himself of his own vessel} (\to heautou skeuos ktasthai\). Present middle infinitive of \ktaomai\, to acquire, not \kektˆsthai\, to possess. But what does Paul mean by "his own vessel"? It can only mean his own body or his own wife. Objections are raised against either view, but perhaps he means that the man shall acquire his own wife "in sanctification and honour," words that elevate the wife and make it plain that Paul demands sexual purity on the part of men (married as well as unmarried). There is no double standard here. When the husband comes to the marriage bed, he should come as a chaste man to a chaste wife.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:14 @{For if we believe} (\ei gar pisteuomen\). Condition of first class, assuming the death and resurrection of Jesus to be true. {In Jesus} (\dia tou Iˆsou\). Literally, through or by means of Jesus. It is amphibolous in position and can be taken either with \tous koimˆthentas\ (that are fallen asleep in or through Jesus) like \hoi koimˆthentes en Christ“i\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:18| and probably correct or with \axei\ (through Jesus with God). {With him} (\sun aut“i\). Together with Jesus. Jesus is the connecting link (\dia\) for those that sleep (\koimˆthentas\ first aorist passive, but with middle sense) and their resurrection.

rwp@1Timothy:2:4 @{Willeth} (\thelei\). God's wish and will in so far as he can influence men. {That all men should be saved} (\pantas anthr“pous s“thˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \s“z“\ with accusative of general reference. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:33; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:18f|. {To the knowledge} (\eis epign“sin\). "The full knowledge" as in strkjv@Colossians:1:6; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13| (ten times in Paul). See strkjv@2Timothy:3:7| for the whole phrase "full knowledge of the truth" (\alˆtheia\ 14 times in the Pastorals). Paul is anxious as in Colossians and Ephesians that the Gnostics may not lead the people astray. They need the full intellectual apprehension of Christianity.

rwp@1Timothy:2:8 @{I desire} (\boulomai\). Songs:Phillipians:1:12|. {The men} (\tous andras\). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive \proseuchesthai\. The men in contrast to "women" (\gunaikas\) in 9|. It is public worship, of course, and "in every place" (\en panti top“i\) for public worship. Many modern Christians feel that there were special conditions in Ephesus as in Corinth which called for strict regulations on the women that do not always apply now. {Lifting up holy hands} (\epairontas hosious cheiras\). Standing to pray. Note also \hosious\ used as feminine (so in Plato) with \cheiras\ instead of \hosias\. The point here is that only men should lead in public prayer who can lift up "clean hands" (morally and spiritually clean). See strkjv@Luke:24:50|. Adverb \hosi“s\ in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:10| and \hosiotˆs\ in strkjv@Ephesians:4:24|. {Without wrath and disputing} (\ch“ris orgˆs kai dialogismou\). See strkjv@Phillipians:2:14|.

rwp@1Timothy:6:11 @{O man of God} (\“ anthr“pe theou\). In N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:17|, there general and here personal appeal to Timothy. Cf. strkjv@Deuteronomy:33:1; strkjv@1Samuel:2:27|. {Flee} (\pheuge\), {follow after} (\di“ke\). Vivid verbs in present active imperative. The preacher can not afford to parley with such temptations. {Meekness} (\praupathian\). Late compound from \praupathˆs\, in Philo about Abraham, here only in N.T.

rwp@1Timothy:6:16 @{Who only hath immortality} (\ho monos ech“n athanasian\). "The one who alone has immortality." \Athanasia\ (\athanatos\, \a\ privative and \thanatos\), old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:15:53f|. Domitian demanded that he be addressed as "_Dominus et Deus noster_." Emperor worship may be behind the use of \monos\ (alone) here. {Unapproachable} (\aprositon\). See strkjv@Psalms:104:2|. Late compound verbal adjective (\a\ privative, \pros, ienai\, to go). Here only in N.T. Literary _Koin‚_ word. {Nor can see} (\oude idein dunatai\). See \aoraton\ in strkjv@Colossians:1:15| and also strkjv@John:1:18; strkjv@Matthew:11:27|. The "amen" marks the close of the doxology as in strkjv@1:17|.

rwp@2Corinthians:1:4 @{In all our affliction} (\epi pasˆi tˆi thlipsei hˆm“n\). \Thlipsis\ is from \thlib“\, to press, old and common word, as tribulation is from Latin _tribulum_ (roller). See on ¯Matthew:13:21| and strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:6|. The English affliction is Latin _afflictio_ from _ad-fligere_, to strike on. {That we may be able to comfort} (\eis to dunasthai hˆmas parakalein\). Purpose clause with \eis\ and the articular infinitive with the accusative of general reference, a common idiom. Paul here gives the purpose of affliction in the preacher's life, in any Christian's life, to qualify him for ministry to others. Otherwise it will be professional and perfunctory. {Wherewith} (\hˆs\). Genitive case of the relative attracted to that of the antecedent \paraklˆse“s\. The case of the relative here could have been either the accusative \hˆn\ with the passive verb retained as in strkjv@Mark:10:38| or the instrumental \hˆi\. Either is perfectly good Greek (cf. strkjv@Ephesians:1:6; strkjv@4:1|). Personal experience of God's comfort is necessary before we can pass it on to others.

rwp@2Corinthians:2:3 @{I wrote this very thing} (\egrapsa touto auto\). Is this (and \egrapsa\ in verses 4,9,12|) the epistolary aorist referring to the present letter? In itself that is possible as the epistolary aorist does occur in the N.T. as in strkjv@8:18; strkjv@9:3| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 854f.). If not epistolary aorist as seems improbable from the context and from strkjv@7:8-12|, to what Epistle does he refer? To strkjv@1Corinthians:5| or to a lost letter? It is possible, of course, that, when Paul decided not to come to Corinth, he sent a letter. The language that follows in verses 3,4; strkjv@7:8-12| can hardly apply to I Corinthians. {Should have sorrow} (\lupˆn sch“\). Second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \ech“\, should get sorrow, after \hina mˆ\ negative final particles. {From them of whom} (\aph' h“n\). Antecedent omitted, \apo tout“n aph' h“n\ (from those from whom). {I ought} (\edei me\). Imperfect for unrealized present obligation as often and like English. {Having confidence} (\pepoith“s\). Second perfect active participle of \peith“\ (1:9|).

rwp@2Corinthians:2:14 @{But thanks be unto God} (\t“i de the“i charis\). Sudden outburst of gratitude in contrast to the previous dejection in Troas. Surely a new paragraph should begin here. In point of fact Paul makes a long digression from here to strkjv@6:10| on the subject of the Glory of the Christian Ministry as Bachmann points out in his _Kommentar_ (p. 124), only he runs it from strkjv@2:12-7:1| (_Aus der Tiefe in die Hohe_, Out of the Depths to the Heights). We can be grateful for this emotional outburst, Paul's rebound of joy on meeting Titus in Macedonia, for it has given the world the finest exposition of all sides of the Christian ministry in existence, one that reveals the wealth of Paul's nature and his mature grasp of the great things in service for Christ. See my _The Glory of the Ministry (An Exposition of II Cor. strkjv@2:12-6:10_). {Always} (\pantote\). The sense of present triumph has blotted out the gloom at Troas. {Leadeth in triumph} (\thriambeuonti\). Late common _Koin‚_ word from \thriambos\ (Latin _triumphus_, a hymn sung in festal processions to Bacchus). Verbs in \-eu“\ (like \mathˆteu“\, to make disciples) may be causative, but no example of \thriambeu“\ has been found with this meaning. It is always to lead in triumph, in papyri sometimes to make a show of. Picture here is of Paul as captive in God's triumphal procession. {The savour} (\tˆn osmˆn\). In a Roman triumph garlands of flowers scattered sweet odour and incense bearers dispensed perfumes. The knowledge of God is here the aroma which Paul had scattered like an incense bearer.

rwp@2Corinthians:3:6 @{Who also made us sufficient for such confidence} (\hos kai hikan“sen hˆmas\). Late causative verb from \hikanos\ (verse 5|) first aorist active indicative, "who (God) rendered us fit." In N.T. only here and strkjv@Colossians:1:12|. {As ministers of a new covenant} (\diakonous kainˆs diathˆkˆs\). Predicate accusative with \hikan“sen\. For \diathˆkˆ\ see on ¯Matthew:26:28| and for \diakonos\ on ¯Matthew:20:26| and for \kainˆs\ (fresh and effective) on ¯Luke:5:38|. Only God can make us that.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:1 @{We faint not} (\ouk egkakoumen\). Present active indicative of \egkake“\, late verb (\en, kakos\) to behave badly in, to give in to evil, to lose courage. In Symmachus (LXX), Polybius, and papyri. It is the faint-hearted coward. Paul speaks of himself (literary plural). Can he not speak for all of us?

rwp@2Corinthians:4:5 @{For we preach not ourselves} (\ou gar heautous kˆrussomen\). Surely as poor and disgusting a topic as a preacher can find. {But Christ Jesus as Lord} (\alla Christon Iˆsoun Kurion\). \Kurion\ is predicate accusative in apposition. {As your servants for Jesus' sake} (\doulous hum“n dia Iˆsoun\). Your bond-slave for the sake of Jesus. This is the sufficient reason for any preacher's sacrifice, "for Jesus' sake."

rwp@2Corinthians:4:13 @{According to that which is written} (\kata to gegrammenon\). This formula in legal documents in the papyri (_Bible Studies_, p. 250). Paul makes adaptation of the words in strkjv@Psalms:95:1|. {We also believe} (\kai hˆmeis pisteuomen\). Like the Psalmist. And therefore can speak with effect. Otherwise useless. {Shall present us with you} (\kai parastˆsei sun hˆmin\). This shows that Paul was not certain that he would be alive when Jesus comes as has been wrongly inferred from strkjv@1Corinthians:7:29; strkjv@10:11; strkjv@15:51|.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:15 @{Being multiplied through the many} (\pleonasasa dia t“n pleion“n\). Late word \pleonaz“\ from \pleon\, more, "making more through the more," with play on \pleon\. One can think of Bunyan's _Grace Abounding_.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:21 @{Him who knew no sin} (\ton mˆ gnonta hamartian\). Definite claim by Paul that Jesus did not commit sin, had no personal acquaintance (\mˆ gnonta\, second aorist active participle of \gin“sk“\) with it. Jesus made this claim for himself (John:8:46|). This statement occurs also in strkjv@1Peter:2:22; strkjv@Hebrews:4:15; strkjv@7:26; strkjv@1John:3:5|. Christ was and is "a moral miracle" (Bernard) and so more than mere man. {He made to be sin} (\hamartian epoiˆsen\). The words "to be" are not in the Greek. "Sin" here is the substantive, not the verb. God "treated as sin" the one "who knew no sin." But he knew the contradiction of sinners (Hebrews:12:3|). We may not dare to probe too far into the mystery of Christ's suffering on the Cross, but this fact throws some light on the tragic cry of Jesus just before he died: "My God, My God, why didst thou forsake me?" (Matthew:27:46|). {That we might become} (\hina hˆmeis gen“metha\). Note "become." This is God's purpose (\hina\) in what he did and in what Christ did. Thus alone can we obtain God's righteousness (Romans:1:17|).

rwp@2Corinthians:6:3 @{Giving no occasion of stumbling in any thing} (\mˆdemian en mˆdeni didontes proskopˆn\). \Proskopˆ\, late word (Polybius, LXX), from \proskopt“\, to strike against, to stumble. Only here in N.T. Note double negative in the Greek. {That the ministry be not blamed} (\hina mˆ m“mˆthˆi hˆ diakonia\). Negative purpose (\hina mˆ\). First aorist passive subjunctive of old verb \m“maomai\ from \m“mos\, blot, blemish. One can read with profit J. A. Hutton's Warrack Lectures, _That the Ministry Be Not Blamed_.

rwp@2Corinthians:6:4 @{But in everything commending ourselves} (\all' en panti sunistanontes heautous\). Paul gives a marvellous summary of his argument about the dignity and glory of ministers of Christ as {ministers of God} (\h“s theou diakonoi\) under three aspects, the first with {in} (\en\) verses 3-7a|, the second with {by} (\dia\) verses 7b,8|, the third with {as} (\h“s\) verses 9-10|. The negative view with \en\ we have in verse 3|, then the positive in verses 4-7a|. Each word carries a story that can be filled in from Paul's own life as a preacher with an echo in that of us all. {In distresses} (\en stenoch“riais\). In tight places (12:10|). Late word from \stenoch“re“\ (see on strkjv@4:8|).

rwp@2Corinthians:7:1 @{These promises} (\tautas tas epaggelias\). Songs:many and so precious (2Peter:2:4| \epaggelmata\; strkjv@Hebrews:11:39f.|). {Let us cleanse ourselves} (\katharis“men heautous\). Old Greek used \kathair“\ (in N.T. only in strkjv@John:15:2|, to prune). In _Koin‚_ \kathariz“\ occurs in inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 216f.). Paul includes himself in this volitive aorist subjunctive. {From all defilement} (\apo pantos molusmou\). Ablative alone would have done, but with \apo\ it is plainer as in strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|. \Molusmos\ is a late word from \molun“\, to stain (see on ¯1Corinthians:8:7|), to pollute. In the LXX, Plutarch, Josephus. It includes all sorts of filthiness, physical, moral, mental, ceremonial, "of flesh and spirit." Missionaries in China and India can appreciate the atmosphere of pollution in Corinth, for instance. {Perfecting holiness} (\epitelountes hagiosunˆn\). Not merely negative goodness (cleansing), but aggressive and progressive (present tense of \epitele“\) holiness, not a sudden attainment of complete holiness, but a continuous process (1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@Romans:1:4; strkjv@1:6|).

rwp@2Corinthians:8:11 @{The readiness to will} (\hˆ prothumia tou thelein\). Old word from \prothumos\ (\pro, thumos\), forwardness, eagerness (Acts:17:11|). They were quick to pledge. {The completion also} (\kai to epitelesai\). The finishing also (articular first aorist active infinitive). {Out of your ability} (\ek tou echein\). "Out of the having," literally, and so, "out of what you can give" (verse 12|).

rwp@2Corinthians:8:21 @{We take thought} (\pronoumen\). Old verb, to plan beforehand (\pro-\) as in strkjv@Romans:12:17; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8|. {But also in the sight of men} (\alla kai en“pion anthr“p“n\). It is not enough for one's financial accounts to be honourable (\kala\) as God sees them, but they should be so kept that men can understand them also. A timely warning. Paul took the utmost pains that no suspicion could be attached to him in this collection.

rwp@2Corinthians:9:13 @{Seeing that they glorify God} (\doxazontes ton theon\). Anacoluthon again. The nominative participle used independently like \ploutizomenoi\ in verse 11|. {Obedience} (\hupotagˆi\). Late and rare word from \hupotass“\, to subject, middle to obey. Only in Paul in N.T. {Of your confession} (\tˆs homologias hum“n\). Old word from \homologe“\ (\homologos, homou, leg“\), to say together. It is either to profess (Latin _profiteor_, to declare openly) or to confess (Latin _confiteor_, to declare fully, to say the same thing as another). Both confess and profess are used to translate the verb and each idea is present in the substantive. Only the context can decide. Actions speak louder than words. The brethren in Jerusalem will know by this collection that Gentiles make as good Christians as Jews. {For the liberality of your contribution} (\haplotˆti tˆs koin“nias\). This is the point that matters just now. Paul drives it home. On this use of \koin“nia\ see on ¯8:4|.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:4 @{The weapons of our warfare} (\ta hopla tˆs strateias\). \Strateia\ (old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:1:18|) is {campaign} and not army as some MSS. have (\stratia\). But both \strateia\ and \stratia\ occur in the papyri for the same word (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 181f.). For \hopla\ (Latin _arma_) see on ¯6:7; Rom strkjv@6:13; strkjv@13:12|. {Of the flesh} (\sarkika\). See on ¯1Corinthians:3:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:12|. They had accused him of artifices and craft. {Mighty before God} (\dunata t“i the“i\). This dative of personal interest (ethical dative) can be like \asteios t“i the“i\ (Acts:7:20|), in God's eyes, as it looks to God. {To the casting down of strongholds} (\pros kathairesin ochur“mat“n\). \Kathairesis\ is old word from \kathaire“\, to take down, to tear down walls and buildings. Carries on the military metaphor. \Ochur“ma\ is old word, common in the Apocrypha, from \ochuro“\, to fortify, and that from \ochuros\ (from \ech“\, to hold fast). Nowhere else in N.T. In Cilicia the Romans had to tear down many rocky forts in their attacks on the pirates.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:10 @{They say} (\phasin\). Reading of B old Latin Vulgate, but Westcott and Hort prefer \phˆsin\ (says one, the leader). This charge Paul quotes directly. {Weighty and strong} (\bareiai kai ischurai\). These adjectives can be uncomplimentary and mean "severe and violent" instead of "impressive and vigorous." The adjectives bear either sense. {His bodily presence} (\hˆ parousia tou s“matos\). This certainly is uncomplimentary. "The presence of his body." It seems clear that Paul did not have a commanding appearance like that of Barnabas (Acts:14:12|). He had some physical defect of the eyes (Galatians:4:14|) and a thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|). In the second century _Acts of Paul and Thecla_ he is pictured as small, short, bow-legged, with eye-brows knit together, and an aquiline nose. A forgery of the fourth century in the name of Lucian describes Paul as "the bald-headed, hook-nosed Galilean." However that may be, his accusers sneered at his personal appearance as "weak" (\asthenˆs\). {His speech of no account} (\ho logos exouthenˆmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \exouthene“\, to treat as nothing (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28|). The Corinthians (some of them) cared more for the brilliant eloquence of Apollos and did not find Paul a trained rhetorician (1Corinthians:1:17; strkjv@2:1,4; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:6|). He made different impressions on different people. "Seldom has any one been at once so ardently hated and so passionately loved as St. Paul" (Deissmann, _St. Paul_, p. 70). "At one time he seemed like a man, and at another he seemed like an angel" (_Acts of Paul and Thecla_). He spoke like a god at Lystra (Acts:14:8-12|), but Eutychus went to sleep on him (Acts:20:9|). Evidently Paul winced under this biting criticism of his looks and speech.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:16 @{Let no man think me foolish} (\mˆ tis me doxˆi aphrona einai\). Usual construction in a negative prohibition with \mˆ\ and the aorist subjunctive \doxˆi\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 933). {But if ye do} (\ei de mˆ ge\). Literally, "But if not at least (or otherwise)," that is, If you do think me foolish. {Yet as foolish} (\kan h“s aphrona\). "Even if as foolish." Paul feels compelled to boast of his career and work as an apostle of Christ after the terrible picture just drawn of the Judaizers. He feels greatly embarrassed in doing it. Some men can do it with complete composure (_sang froid_).

rwp@2Corinthians:11:26 @{In journeyings} (\hodoiporiais\). Locative case of old word, only here in N.T. and strkjv@John:4:6|, from \hodoiporos\, wayfarer. {In perils} (\kindunois\). Locative case of \kindunos\, old word for danger or peril. In N.T. only this verse and strkjv@Romans:8:35|. The repetition here is very effective without the preposition \en\ (in) and without conjunctions (asyndeton). They are in contrasted pairs. The rivers of Asia Minor are still subject to sudden swellings from floods in the mountains. Cicero and Pompey won fame fighting the Cilician pirates and robbers (note \lˆist“n\, not \klept“n\, thieves, brigands or bandits on which see ¯Matthew:26:55|). The Jewish perils (\ek genous\, from my race) can be illustrated in strkjv@Acts:9:23,29; strkjv@13:50; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@17:5,13; strkjv@18:12; strkjv@23:12; strkjv@24:27|, and they were all perils in the city also. Perils from the Gentiles (\ex ethn“n\) we know in Philippi (Acts:16:20|) and in Ephesus (Acts:19:23f.|). Travel in the mountains and in the wilderness was perilous in spite of the great Roman highways. {Among false brethren} (\en pseudadelphois\). Chapters strkjv@2Corinthians:10; 11| throw a lurid light on this aspect of the subject.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:7 @{By reason of the exceeding greatness} (\tˆi huperbolˆi\). Instrumental case, "by the excess." {That I should not be exalted overmuch} (\hina mˆ huperair“mai\). Present passive subjunctive in final clause of \huperair“\, old verb to lift up beyond, only here in N.T. This clause is repeated at the end of the sentence. {A thorn in the flesh} (\skolops tˆi sarki\). This old word is used for splinter, stake, thorn. In the papyri and inscriptions examples occur both for splinter and thorn as the meaning. In the LXX it is usually thorn. The case of \tˆi sarki\ can be either locative (in) or dative (for). What was it? Certainly it was some physical malady that persisted. All sorts of theories are held (malaria, eye-trouble, epilepsy, insomnia, migraine or sick-headache, etc.). It is a blessing to the rest of us that we do not know the particular affliction that so beset Paul. Each of us has some such splinter or thorn in the flesh, perhaps several at once. {Messenger of Satan} (\aggelos Satana\). Angel of Satan, the affliction personified. {Buffet} (\kolaphizˆi\). See on ¯Matthew:26:67; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:11| for this late and rare word from \kolaphos\, fist. The messenger of Satan kept slapping Paul in the face and Paul now sees that it was God's will for it to be so.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:2 @{As when I was present the second time} (\h“s par“n to deuteron\). This translation assumes the second visit as already made. It is a natural way to take the Greek \h“s par“n\. But \h“s\ with \par“n\ can also mean "as if present" the second time (Authorized Version). Probably "as when" is the more natural rendering, but the other cannot be ruled entirely out in view of strkjv@1:15-23|. {If I come again} (\ean elth“ eis to palin\). Condition of third class. The use of \palin\ of itself suits the idea that Paul had not yet made the second visit as it means simply "again" or "back," but in strkjv@Matthew:26:44| we find \palin ek tritou\ (again a third time) and so it is not decisive.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:5 @{Unless indeed ye be reprobate} (\ei mˆti adokimoi este\). Paul challenged his opposers in Corinth to try (\peirazete\) themselves, to test (\dokimazete\) themselves, whether they were "in the faith" (\en tˆi pistei\), a much more vital matter for them than trying to prove Paul a heretic. Such tests can be made, unless, alas, they are "reprobate" (\adokimoi\, the very adjective that Paul held up before himself as a dreadful outcome to be avoided, strkjv@1Corinthians:9:27|).

rwp@2Corinthians:13:8 @{Against the truth} (\kata tˆs alˆtheias\). He means in the long run. We can hinder and hold down the truth by evil deeds (Romans:1:18|), but in the end the truth wins.

rwp@2John:1:3 @{Shall be with us} (\estai meth' hˆm“n\). He picks up the words before in reverse order. Future indicative here, not a wish with the optative (\eie\) as we have in strkjv@1Peter:1:2; strkjv@2Peter:1:2|. The salutation is like that in the Pastoral Epistles: "\Charis\, the wellspring in the heart of God; \eleos\, its outpourings; \eirˆnˆ\, its blessed effect" (David Smith). {And from Jesus Christ} (\kai para Iˆsou Christou\). The repetition of \para\ (with the ablative) is unique. "It serves to bring out distinctly the twofold personal relation of man to the Father and to the Son" (Westcott). "The Fatherhood of God, as revealed by one who being His Son _can_ reveal the Father, and who as man (\Iˆsou\) can make him known to men" (Brooke).

rwp@2John:1:10 @{If any one cometh and bringeth not} (\ei tis erchetai kai ou pherei\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and two present indicatives (\erchetai, pherei\). {This teaching} (\tautˆn tˆn didachˆn\). This teaching of Christ of verse 9|, which is the standard by which to test Gnostic deceivers (verse 7|). John does not refer to entertaining strangers (He strkjv@13:2; strkjv@1Timothy:5:10|), but to the deceiving propagandists who were carrying dissension and danger with them. {Receive him not} (\mˆ lambanete auton\). Present active imperative with \mˆ\. For \lamban“\ in this sense see strkjv@John:1:12; strkjv@6:21; strkjv@13:20|. {Into your house} (\eis oikian\). Definite without the article like our at home, to town. {Give him no greeting} (\chairein aut“i mˆ legete\). "Say not farewell to him." Apparently \chairein\ here (present active infinitive, object of \legete\ present active imperative with negative \mˆ\) is used of farewell as in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11|, though usually in the N.T. (Acts:15:23; strkjv@23:26; strkjv@James:1:1|) of the salutation. But here the point turns on the stranger bringing into the house (or trying to do so) his heretical and harmful teaching which seems to be after the salutation is over. The usual greeting to a house is given in strkjv@Luke:10:5|. On the other hand, if \chairein\ means greeting, not farewell, here, it can very well be understood of the peril of allowing these Gnostic propagandists to spread their pernicious teachings (cf. Mormons or Bolshevists) in home and church (usually meeting in the home). This is assuming that the men were known and not mere strangers.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ SLOW IN GENERAL ACCEPTANCE It was accepted in the canon by the council at Laodicea and at Carthage. Jerome accepted it for the Vulgate, though it was absent from the Peshito Syriac Version. Eusebius placed it among the disputed books, while Origen was inclined to accept it. Clement of Alexandria accepted it and apparently wrote a commentary on it. It is probable that the so-called Apocalypse of Peter (early second century) used it and the Epistle of Jude:either used it or II Peter used Jude. There are undoubted allusions also to phrases in II Peter in Aristides, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Ignatius, Clement of Rome. When one considers the brevity of the Epistle, the use of it is really as strong as one can expect. Athanasius and Augustine accepted it as genuine, as did Luther, while Calvin doubted and Erasmus rejected it. It may be said for it that it won its way under criticism and was not accepted blindly.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ CLAIMS PETRINE AUTHORSHIP Not only so, but in fuller form than strkjv@1Peter:1:1|, for the writer terms himself "Simon (Symeon in some MSS.) Peter," a fact that has been used against the genuineness. If no claim had been made, that would have been considered decisive against him. Simon (Symeon was the Jewish form as used by James in strkjv@Acts:15:14|) is the real name (John:1:42|) and Peter merely the Greek for Cephas, the nickname given by Christ. There is no reason why both could not properly be employed here. But the claim to Petrine authorship, if not genuine, leaves the Epistle pseudonymous. That was a custom among some Jewish writers and even Christian writers, as the spurious Petrine literature testifies (Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc.), works of a heretical or curious nature. Whatever the motive for such a pious fraud, the fact remains that II Peter, if not genuine, has to take its place with this pseudonymous literature and can hardly be deemed worthy of a place in the New Testament. And yet there is no heresy in this Epistle, no startling new ideas that would lead one to use the name of Simon Peter. It is the rather full of edifying and orthodox teaching.

rwp@2Peter:1:9 @{He that lacketh these things} (\h“i mˆ parestin tauta\). "To whom (dative case of possession) these things are not (\mˆ\ because a general or indefinite relative clause)." {Seeing only what is near} (\mu“paz“n\). Present active participle of \mu“paz“\, a rare verb from \mu“ps\ (in Aristotle for a near-sighted man) and that from \mue“ tous “pas\ (to close the eyes in order to see, not to keep from seeing). The only other instance of \mu“paz“\ is given by Suicer from Ps. Dion. Eccl. Hier. ii. 3 (\mu“pasousˆi kai apostrephomenˆi\) used of a soul on which the light shines (blinking and turning away). Thus understood the word here limits \tuphlos\ as a short-sighted man screwing up his eyes because of the light. {Having forgotten} (\lˆthˆn lab“n\). "Having received forgetfulness." Second aorist active participle of \lamban“\ and accusative \lˆthˆn\, old word, from \lˆthomai\, to forget, here only in N.T. See strkjv@2Timothy:1:5| for a like phrase \hupomnˆsin lab“n\ (having received remembrance). {The cleansing} (\tou katharismou\). See strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| for this word for the expiatory sacrifice of Christ for our sins as in strkjv@1Peter:1:18; strkjv@2:24; strkjv@3:18|. In strkjv@1Peter:3:21| Peter denied actual cleansing of sin by baptism (only symbolic). If there is a reference to baptism here, which is doubtful, it can only be in a symbolic sense. {Old} (\palai\). Of the language as in strkjv@Hebrews:1:1|.

rwp@2Peter:1:16 @{We did not follow} (\ouk exakolouthˆsantes\). First aorist active participle of \exakolouthe“\, late compound verb, to follow out (Polybius, Plutarch, LXX, papyri, inscriptions as of death following for any Gentile in the temple violating the barrier), with emphatic negative \ouk\, "not having followed." See also strkjv@2:2| for this verb. {Cunningly devised fables} (\sesophismenois muthois\). Associative instrumental case of \muthos\ (old term for word, narrative, story, fiction, fable, falsehood). In N.T. only here and the Pastoral Epistles (1Timothy:1:4|, etc.). Perfect passive participle of \sophiz“\, old word (from \sophos\), only twice in N.T., in causative sense to make wise (2Timothy:3:15|), to play the sophist, to invent cleverly (here) and so also in the old writers and in the papyri. Some of the false teachers apparently taught that the Gospel miracles were only allegories and not facts (Bigg). Cf. strkjv@2:3| for "feigned words." {When we made known unto you} (\egn“risamen humin\). First aorist active indicative of \gn“riz“\, to make known unto you. Possibly by Peter himself. {The power and coming} (\tˆn dunamin kai parousian\). These words can refer (Chase) to the Incarnation, just as is true of \epiphaneia\ in strkjv@2Timothy:1:10| (second coming in strkjv@1Timothy:6:14|), and is true of \parousia\ (2Corinthians:7:6| of Titus). But elsewhere in the N.T. \parousia\ (technical term in the papyri for the coming of a king or other high dignitary), when used of Christ, refers to his second coming (2Peter:3:4,12|). {But we were eye-witnesses} (\all' epoptai genˆthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \ginomai\, "but having become eye-witnesses." \Epoptai\, old word (from \epopt“\ like \epopteu“\ in strkjv@1Peter:2:12; strkjv@3:2|), used of those who attained the third or highest degree of initiates in the Eleusinian mysteries (common in the inscriptions). Cf. \autoptˆs\ in strkjv@Luke:1:2|. {Of his majesty} (\tˆs ekeinou megaleiotˆtos\). Late and rare word (LXX and papyri) from \megaleios\ (Acts:2:11|), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:9:43| (of God); strkjv@Acts:19:27| (of Artemis). Peter clearly felt that he and James and John were lifted to the highest stage of initiation at the Transfiguration of Christ. Emphatic \ekeinou\ as in strkjv@2Timothy:2:26|.

rwp@2Peter:1:20 @{Knowing this first} (\touto pr“ton gin“skontes\). Agreeing with \poieite\ like \prosechontes\ in verse 19|. {No prophecy of Scripture} (\pƒsa prophˆteia ou\). Like the Hebrew _lo-k“l_, but also in the papyri as in strkjv@1John:2:21| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 753). {Is} (\ginetai\). Rather "comes," "springs" (Alford), not "is" (\estin\). {Of private interpretation} (\idias epiluse“s\). Ablative case of origin or source in the predicate as with \gn“mˆs\ in strkjv@Acts:20:3| and with \tou theou\ and \ex hˆm“n\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:7|. "No prophecy of Scripture comes out of private disclosure," not "of private interpretation." The usual meaning of \epilusis\ is explanation, but the word does not occur elsewhere in the N.T. It occurs in the papyri in the sense of solution and even of discharge of a debt. Spitta urges "dissolved" as the idea here. The verb \epilu“\, to unloose, to untie, to release, occurs twice in the N.T., once (Mark:4:34|) where it can mean "disclose" about parables, the other (Acts:19:39|) where it means to decide. It is the prophet's grasp of the prophecy, not that of the readers that is here presented, as the next verse shows.

rwp@2Peter:2:9 @{The Lord knoweth how} (\oiden kurios\). The actual apodosis of the long protasis begun in verse 4|. God can deliver his servants as shown by Noah and Lot and he will deliver you. The idiomatic use of \oida\ and the infinitive (\ruesthai\ present middle and see verse 7|) for knowing how as in strkjv@Matthew:7:11; strkjv@James:4:17|. {The godly} (\eusebeis\). Old anarthrous adjective (from \eu\ and \sebomai\, to worship), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:10:2,7| (by Peter). For {temptation} (\peirasmou\) see strkjv@James:1:2,12; strkjv@1Peter:1:6|. {To keep} (\tˆrein\). Present active infinitive of \tˆre“\ after \oiden\. {Unrighteous} (\adikous\). As in strkjv@1Peter:3:18|. {Under punishment} (\kolazomenous\). Present passive participle of \kolaz“\, old verb (from \kolos\, lopped off), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:4:21|. Present tense emphasises continuity of the punishment. See \kolasin ai“nion\ in strkjv@Matthew:25:46|.

rwp@2Peter:2:20 @{After they have escaped} (\apophugontes\). Second aorist active participle here (see verse 18|). {The defilements} (\ta miasmata\). Old word miasma, from \miain“\, here only in N.T. Our "miasma." The body is sacred to God. Cf. \miasmou\ in verse 10|. {They are again entangled} (\palin emplakentes\). Second aorist passive participle of \emplek“\, old verb, to inweave (noosed, fettered), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:2:4|. {Overcome} (\hˆtt“ntai\). Present passive indicative of \hˆttao“\, for which see verse 19|, "are repeatedly worsted." Predicate in the condition of first class with \ei\. It is not clear whether the subject here is "the deluded victims" (Bigg) or the false teachers themselves (Mayor). See strkjv@Hebrews:10:26| for a parallel. {Therein} (\toutois\). Songs:locative case (in these "defilements"), but it can be instrumental case ("by these," Strachan). {With them} (\autois\). Dative of disadvantage, "for them." {Than the first} (\t“n pr“t“n\). Ablative case after the comparative \cheirona\. See this moral drawn by Jesus (Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:11:26|).

rwp@2Thessalonians:1:11 @{To which end} (\eis ho\). Songs:Colossians:1:29|. Probably purpose with reference to the contents of verses 5-10|. We have had the Thanksgiving (verses 3-10|) in a long, complicated, but rich period or sentence. Now he makes a brief Prayer (verses 11-12|) that God will fulfil all their hopes and endeavours. Paul and his colleagues can still pray for them though no longer with them (Moffatt). {That} (\hina\). Common after \proseuchomai\ (Colossians:4:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@Phillipians:1:9|) when the content of the prayer blends with the purpose (purport and purpose). {Count you worthy} (\humas axi“sˆi\). Causative verb (aorist active subjunctive) like \kataxio“\ in verse 5| with genitive. {Of your calling} (\tˆs klˆse“s\). \Klˆsis\ can apply to the beginning as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26; strkjv@Romans:11:29|, but it can also apply to the final issue as in strkjv@Phillipians:3:14; strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|. Both ideas may be here. It is God's calling of the Thessalonians. {And fulfil every desire of goodness} (\kai plˆr“sˆi pasan eudokian agath“sunˆs\). "Whom he counts worthy he first makes worthy" (Lillie). Yes, in purpose, but the wonder and the glory of it all is that God begins to count us worthy in Christ before the process is completed in Christ (Romans:8:29f.|). But God will see it through and so Paul prays to God. \Eudokia\ (cf. strkjv@Luke:2:14|) is more than mere desire, rather good pleasure, God's purpose of goodness, not in ancient Greek, only in LXX and N.T. \Agath“sunˆ\ like a dozen other words in \-sunˆ\ occurs only in late Greek. This word occurs only in LXX, N.T., writings based on them. It is made from \agathos\, good, akin to \agamai\, to admire. May the Thessalonians find delight in goodness, a worthy and pertinent prayer. {Work of faith} (\ergon piste“s\). The same phrase in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3|. Paul prays for rich fruition of what he had seen in the beginning. Work marked by faith, springs from faith, sustained by faith. {With power} (\en dunamei\). In power. Connect with \plˆr“sˆi\ (fulfil), God's power (Romans:1:29; strkjv@Colossians:1:4|) in Christ (1Corinthians:1:24|) through the Holy Spirit (1Thessalonians:1:5|).

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:2 @{To the end that} (\eis to\). One of Paul's favourite idioms for purpose, \eis to\ and the infinitive. {Ye be not quickly shaken} (\mˆ tache“s saleuthˆnai humas\). First aorist passive infinitive of \saleu“\, old verb to agitate, to cause to totter like a reed (Matthew:11:7|), the earth (Hebrews:12:26|). Usual negative \mˆ\ and accusative of general reference \humas\ with the infinitive. {From your mind} (\apo tou noos\). Ablative case of nous, mind, reason, sober sense, "from your witte" (Wyclif), to "keep their heads." {Nor yet be troubled} (\mˆde throeisthai\). Old verb \throe“\, to cry aloud (from \throos\, clamour, tumult), to be in a state of nervous excitement (present passive infinitive, as if it were going on), "a continued state of agitation following the definite shock received (\saleuthˆnai\)" (Milligan). {Either by spirit} (\mˆte dia pneumatos\). By ecstatic utterance (1Thessalonians:5:10|). The nervous fear that the coming was to be at once prohibited by \mˆde\ Paul divides into three sources by \mˆte, mˆte, mˆte\. No individual claim to divine revelation (the gift of prophecy) can justify the statement. {Or by word} (\mˆte dia logou\). Oral statement of a conversation with Paul (Lightfoot) to this effect {as from us}. An easy way to set aside Paul's first Epistle by report of a private remark from Paul. {Or by epistle as from us} (\mˆte di' epistolˆs h“s di' hˆm“n\). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13-5:3| Paul had plainly said that Jesus would come as a thief in the night and had shown that the dead would not be left out in the rapture. But evidently some one claimed to have a private epistle from Paul which supported the view that Jesus was coming at once, {as that the day of the Lord is now present} (\h“s hoti enestˆken hˆ hˆmera tou kuriou\). Perfect active indicative of \enistˆmi\, old verb, to place in, but intransitive in this tense to stand in or at or near. Songs:"is imminent" (Lightfoot). The verb is common in the papyri. In strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:8:38| we have a contrast between \ta enest“ta\, the things present, and \ta mellonta\, the things future (to come). The use of \h“s hoti\ may be disparaging here, though that is not true in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. In the _Koin‚_ it comes in the vernacular to mean simply "that" (Moulton, _Proleg_., p. 212), but that hardly seems the case in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). Here it means "to wit that," though "as that" or "as if" does not miss it much. Certainly it flatly denies that by conversation or by letter he had stated that the second coming was immediately at hand. "It is this misleading assertion that accounts both for the increased discouragement of the faint-hearted to encourage whom Paul writes strkjv@1:3-2:17|, and for the increased meddlesomeness of the idle brethren to warn whom Paul writes strkjv@3:1-18|" (Frame). It is enough to give one pause to note Paul's indignation over this use of his name by one of the over-zealous advocates of the view that Christ was coming at once. It is true that Paul was still alive, but, if such a "pious fraud" was so common and easily condoned as some today argue, it is difficult to explain Paul's evident anger. Moreover, Paul's words should make us hesitate to affirm that Paul definitely proclaimed the early return of Jesus. He hoped for it undoubtedly, but he did not specifically proclaim it as so many today assert and accuse him of misleading the early Christians with a false presentation.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:4 @{He that opposeth and exalteth himself} (\ho antikeimenos kai huperairomenos\). Like John's Antichrist this one opposes (\anti-\) Christ and exalts himself (direct middle of \huperair“\, old verb to lift oneself up {above} others, only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| in N.T.), but not Satan, but an agent of Satan. This participial clause is in apposition with the two preceding phrases, the man of sin, the son of perdition. Note strkjv@1Corinthians:8:5| about one called God and strkjv@Acts:17:23| for \sebasma\ (from \sebazomai\), object of worship, late word, in N.T. only in these two passages. {Songs:that he sitteth in the temple of God} (\h“ste auton eis ton naon tou theou kathisai\). Another example of the infinitive with \h“ste\ for result. Caius Caligula had made a desperate attempt to have his statue set up for worship in the Temple in Jerusalem. This incident may lie behind Paul's language here. {Setting himself forth as God} (\apodeiknunta heauton hoti estin theos\). Present active participle (\mi\ form) of \apodeiknumi\, agreeing in case with \auton\, {showing himself that he is God}. Caligula claimed to be God. Moffatt doubts if Paul is identifying this deception with the imperial cultus at this stage. Lightfoot thinks that the deification of the Roman emperor supplied Paul's language here. Wetstein notes a coin of Julius with \theos\ on one side and \Thessalonike“n\ on the other. In strkjv@1John:2:18| we are told of "many antichrists" some of whom had already come. Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in verse 6| he speaks of \to katechon\ (that which restraineth) while in verse 7| it is \ho katech“n\ (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul's language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:3 @{But the Lord is faithful} (\pistos de estin ho kurios\). {But faithful is the Lord} (correct rendition), with a play (paronomasia) on \pistis\ by \pistos\ as in strkjv@Romans:3:3| we have a word-play on \apiste“\ and \apistia\. The Lord can be counted on, however perverse men may be. {From the evil one} (\apo tou ponˆrou\). Apparently a reminiscence of the Lord's Prayer in strkjv@Matthew:6:13| \rusai hˆmas apo tou ponˆrou\. But here as there it is not certain whether \tou ponˆrou\ is neuter (evil) like to \ponˆron\ in strkjv@Romans:12:9| or masculine (the evil one). But we have \ho ponˆros\ (the evil one) in strkjv@1John:5:18| and \tou ponˆrou\ is clearly masculine in strkjv@Ephesians:6:16|. If masculine here, as is probable, is it "the Evil One" (Ellicott) or merely the evil man like those mentioned in verse 2|? Perhaps Paul has in mind the representative of Satan, the man of sin, pictured in strkjv@2:1-12|, by the phrase here without trying to be too definite.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:14 @{And if any one obeyeth not our word by this epistle} (\ei de tis ouch hupakouei t“i log“i hˆm“n dia tˆs epistolˆs\). Paul sums up the issue bluntly with this ultimatum. Condition of the first class, with negative \ou\, assuming it to be true. {Note that man} (\touton sˆmeiousthe\). Late verb \sˆmeio“\, from \sˆmeion\, sign, mark, token. Put a tag on that man. Here only in N.T. "The verb is regularly used for the signature to a receipt or formal notice in the papyri and the ostraca of the Imperial period" (Moulton & Milligan's _Vocabulary_). How this is to be done (by letter or in public meeting) Paul does not say. {That ye have no company with him} (\mˆ sunanamignusthai aut“i\). The MSS. are divided between the present middle infinitive as above in a command like strkjv@Romans:12:15; strkjv@Phillipians:3:16| or the present middle imperative \sunanamignusthe\ (\-ai\ and \-e\ often being pronounced alike in the _Koin‚_). The infinitive can also be explained as an indirect command. This double compound verb is late, in LXX and Plutarch, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:5:9,11|. \Aut“i\ is in associative instrumental case. {To the end that he may be ashamed} (\hina entrapˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\. Second aorist passive subjunctive of \entrep“\, to turn on, middle to turn on oneself or to put to shame, passive to be made ashamed. The idea is to have one's thoughts turned in on oneself.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:15 @{Not as an enemy} (\mˆ h“s echthron\). This is always the problem in such ostracism as discipline, however necessary it is at times. Few things in our churches are more difficult of wise execution than the discipline of erring members. The word \echthros\ is an adjective, hateful, from \echthos\, hate. It can be passive, {hated}, as in strkjv@Romans:11:28|, but is usually active {hostile}, enemy, foe.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:16 @{The Lord of peace himself} (\autos ho kurios tˆs eirˆnˆs\). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23| for {the God of peace himself}. {Give you peace} (\doiˆ humin tˆn eirˆnˆn\). Second aorist active optative (_Koin‚_) of \did“mi\, not \d“ˆi\ (subjunctive). Songs:also strkjv@Romans:15:5; strkjv@2Timothy:1:16,18|. The Lord Jesus whose characteristic is peace, can alone give real peace to the heart and to the world. (John:14:27|).

rwp@2Timothy:1:12 @{These things} (\tauta\). His imprisonment in Rome. {Yet I am not ashamed} (\all' ouk epaischunomai\). Plain reference to the exhortation to Timothy in verse 8|. {Him whom I have believed} (\h“i pepisteuka\). Dative case of the relative (\h“i\) with the perfect active of \pisteu“\, the antecedent to the relative not expressed. It is not an indirect question. Paul knows Jesus Christ whom he has trusted. {I am persuaded} (\pepeismai\). See verse 5|. {To guard} (\phulaxai\). First aorist active infinitive of \phulass“\, the very word used in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20| with \parathˆkˆn\ as here, to guard against robbery or any loss. {That which I have committed unto him} (\tˆn parathˆkˆn mou\). Literally, "my deposit," as in a bank, the bank of heaven which no burglar can break (Matthew:6:19f.|). See this word also in verse 14|. Some MSS. have the more common \parakatathˆkˆ\ (a sort of double deposit, \para\, beside, down, \kata\). {Against that day} (\eis ekeinˆn tˆn hˆmeran\). The day of Christ's second coming. See also strkjv@1:18; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:10|, and often in the Gospels. Elsewhere, the day of the Lord (1Thessalonians:5:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14|), the day of Christ or Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:6,10; strkjv@2:16|), the day (1Thessalonians:5:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:13; strkjv@Romans:13:12|), the day of redemption (Ephesians:4:20|), the day of judgment (Romans:2:5,16|).

rwp@2Timothy:1:14 @{That good thing which was committed unto thee} (\tˆn kalˆn parathˆkˆn\). Simply, "the good deposit." {Guard} (\phulaxon\). As in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20|. God has also made an investment in Timothy (cf. verse 12|). Timothy must not let that fail. {Which dwelleth in us} (\tou enoikountos en hˆmin\). It is only through the Holy Spirit that Timothy or any of us can guard God's deposit with us.

rwp@2Timothy:2:11 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). The saying which follows here though it can refer to the preceding as in strkjv@1Timothy:4:9|. See strkjv@1Timothy:1:15|. It is possible that from here to the end of 13| we have the fragment of an early hymn. There are four conditions in these verses (11-13|), all of the first class, assumed to be true. Parallels to the ideas here expressed are found in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3; strkjv@Romans:6:3-8; strkjv@Colossians:3:1-4|. Note the compounds with \sun\ (\sunapethanomen\, {we died with}, from \sunapothnesko\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sunzˆsomen\, {we shall live with}, from \sunza“\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sumbasileusomen\, {we shall reign with}, from \sumbasileu“\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8|). For \hupomenomen\ (we endure) see strkjv@1Corinthians:13:7| and for \apistoumen\ (we are faithless) see strkjv@Romans:3:3|. The verb \arneomai\, to deny (\arnˆsometha\, we shall deny, \arnˆsetai\, he will deny, \arnˆsasthai\, deny, first aorist middle infinitive) is an old word, common in the Gospels in the sayings of Jesus (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@Luke:12:9|), used of Peter (Mark:14:70|), and is common in the Pastorals (1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Titus:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:3:5|). Here in verse 13| it has the notion of proving false to oneself, a thing that Christ "cannot" (\ou dunatai\) do.

rwp@2Timothy:3:16 @{Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable} (\pƒsa graphˆ theopneustos kai “phelimos\). There are two matters of doubt in this clause. One is the absence of the article \hˆ\ before \graphˆ\, whether that makes it mean "every scripture" or "all scripture" as of necessity if present. Unfortunately, there are examples both ways with both \pƒs\ and \graphˆ\. Twice we find \graphˆ\ in the singular without the article and yet definite (1Peter:2:6; strkjv@2Peter:1:20|). We have \pƒs Israˆl\ (Romans:11:26|) for all Israel (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 772). Songs:far as the grammatical usage goes, one can render here either "all scripture" or "every scripture." There is no copula (\estin\) in the Greek and so one has to insert it either before the \kai\ or after it. If before, as is more natural, then the meaning is: "All scripture (or every scripture) is inspired of God and profitable." In this form there is a definite assertion of inspiration. That can be true also of the second way, making "inspired of God" descriptive of "every scripture," and putting \estin\ (is) after \kai\: "All scripture (or every scripture), inspired of God, is also profitable." {Inspired of God} (\theopneustos\). "God-breathed." Late word (Plutarch) here only in N.T. Perhaps in contrast to the commandments of men in strkjv@Titus:1:14|. {Profitable} (\“phelimos\). See strkjv@1Timothy:4:8|. See strkjv@Romans:15:4|. Four examples of \pros\ (facing, with a view to, for): \didaskalian\, teaching; \elegmon\, reproof, in LXX and here only in N.T.; \epanorth“sin\, correction, old word, from \epanortho“\, to set up straight in addition, here only in N.T., with which compare \epidiortho“\ in strkjv@Titus:1:5|; \paideian\, instruction, with which compare strkjv@Ephesians:6:4|.

rwp@2Timothy:4:8 @{Henceforth} (\loipon\). Accusative case, "for the rest." {There is laid up for me} (\apokeitai moi\). Present passive of \apokeimai\, old verb, to be laid away. See strkjv@Colossians:1:5| for the hope laid away. Paul's "crown of righteousness" (\ho tˆs dikaiosunˆs stephanos\, genitive of apposition, the crown that consists in righteousness and is also the reward for righteousness, the victor's crown as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25| which see) "is laid away" for him. {At that day} (\en ekeinˆi tˆi hˆmerƒi\). That great and blessed day (1:12,18|). {The righteous judge} (\ho dikaios kritˆs\). "The just judge," the umpire who makes no mistakes who judges us all (2Corinthians:5:10|). {Shall give me} (\apod“sei moi\). Future active of \apodid“mi\. "Will give back" as in strkjv@Romans:2:6| and in full. {But also to all them that have loved his appearing} (\alla pƒsin tois ˆgapˆkosin tˆn epiphaneian autou\). Dative case of the perfect active participle of \agapa“\, to love, who have loved and still love his second coming. \Epiphaneia\ here can as in strkjv@1:10| be interpreted of Christ's Incarnation.

rwp@2Timothy:4:13 @{The cloke} (\tˆn phelonˆn\). More common form \pheilonˆ\. By metathesis for \phainolˆ\, Latin _paenula_, though which language transliterated the word into the other is not known. The meaning is also uncertain, though probably "cloke" as there are so many papyri examples in that sense (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Milligan (N.T. _Documents_, p. 20) had previously urged "book wrap" as probable but he changed his mind and rightly so. {With Carpus} (\para Karp“i\). "Beside Carpus," at his house. Not mentioned elsewhere. Probably a visit to Troas after Paul's return from Crete. {The books} (\ta biblia\). Probably papyrus rolls. One can only guess what rolls the old preacher longs to have with him, probably copies of Old Testament books, possibly copies of his own letters, and other books used and loved. The old preacher can be happy with his books. {Especially the parchments} (\malista tas membranas\). Latin _membrana_. The dressed skins were first made at Pergamum and so termed "parchments." These in particular would likely be copies of Old Testament books, parchment being more expensive than papyrus, possibly even copies of Christ's sayings (Luke:1:1-4|). We recall that in strkjv@Acts:26:24| Festus referred to Paul's learning (\ta grammata\). He would not waste his time in prison.

rwp@2Timothy:4:21 @{Before winter} (\pro cheim“nos\). Pathetic item if Paul was now in the Mamertine Dungeon in Rome with winter coming on and without his cloak for which he asked. How long he had been in prison this time we do not know. He may even have spent the previous winter or part of it here. Eubulus, Pudens, Linus, Claudia are all unknown otherwise. Irenaeus does speak of Linus. {The Lord be with thy Spirit} (\ho kurios meta tou pneumatos sou\). Let us hope that Timothy and Mark reached Paul before winter, before the end came, with the cloak and with the books. Our hero, we may be sure, met the end nobly. He is already more than conqueror in Christ who is by his side and who will welcome him to heaven and give him his crown. Luke, Timothy, Mark will do all that mortal hands can do to cheer the heart of Paul with human comfort. He already had the comfort of Christ in full measure.

rwp@3John:1:10 @{If I come} (\ean elth“\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. He hopes to come (verse 14|), as he had said in strkjv@2John:1:12| (one argument for identifying II John with the letter in strkjv@3John:1:9|). {I will bring to remembrance} (\hupomnˆs“\). Future active indicative of \hupomimnˆsk“\, old compound (John:14:26; strkjv@2Peter:1:12|). The aged apostle is not afraid of Diotrephes and here defies him. {Which he doeth} (\ha poiei\). Present active indicative, "which he keeps on doing." {Prating against us} (\phluar“n hˆmƒs\). Present active participle of old verb (from \phluaros\, babbling strkjv@1Timothy:5:13|), to accuse idly and so falsely, here only in N.T. with accusative \hˆmƒs\ (us). {With wicked words} (\logois ponˆrois\). Instrumental case. Not simply foolish chatter, but malevolent words. {Not content} (\mˆ arkoumenos\). Present passive participle of \arke“\ with usual negative \mˆ\. For this verb in this sense see strkjv@1Timothy:6:8; strkjv@Hebrews:13:5|, only there \epi\ is absent. John knows that the conduct of Diotrephes will not stand the light. See Paul's threats of exposure (1Corinthians:4:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:11; strkjv@13:1-3|). And John is the apostle of love all the same. {He himself} (\autos\). That was bad enough. {Them that would} (\tous boulomenous\). "Those willing or wishing or receive the brethren" from John. {He forbiddeth} (\k“luei\). "He hinders." Present active indicative of \k“lu“\ and means either actual success in one case (punctiliar use of the present indicative) or repetition in several instances (linear action) or conative action attempted, but not successful as in strkjv@Matthew:3:14| (this same verb) and strkjv@John:10:32|. {Casteth them out of the church} (\ek tˆs ekklˆsias ekballei\). Here again \ekballei\ can be understood in various ways, like \k“luei\. This verb occurs in strkjv@John:2:15| for casting out of the temple the profaners of it and for casting the blind man out of the synagogue (John:9:34f.|). If this ancient "church-boss" did not succeed in expelling John's adherents from the church, he certainly tried to do it.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE PURPOSE OF THE ACTS It is not easy to say in a word precisely the object of Luke in writing this book. It is not the Acts of all the apostles. Outside of Peter and John little is told of any of them after chapter 3. And all the acts of Peter and John are not given for Peter disappears from the narrative after chapter 15, though he has been the central figure through chapter 11. Paul is not one of the twelve apostles, but Luke follows Paul's career mainly after chapter 8. Stephen and Barnabas come in also. Still (_St. Paul on Trial_, 1923) argues that Luke meant the book as an apology to be used in Paul's trial at Rome or at any rate to put Paul in the right light with the Jews in Rome. Hence the full account of Paul's series of defences in Jerusalem, Caesarea, Rome. There may be an element of truth in this idea, but it clearly does not cover the whole purpose of Luke. Others hold that Luke had a dramatic plan to get Paul to Rome as the climax of his campaign to win the Roman Empire to Christ. The book is not a history of all early Christianity. Peter and Paul dominate the atmosphere of the book with Paul as the great hero of Luke. But one can easily see that the work is done with consummate skill. The author is a man of culture, of Christian grace, of literary power. The book pulses with life today.

rwp@Acts:1:5 @{Baptized with water} (\ebaptisen hudati\) {and with the Holy Ghost} (\en pneumati baptisthˆsesthe hagi“i\). The margin has "in the Holy Ghost" (Spirit, it should be). The American Standard Version renders "in" both with "water" and "Holy Spirit" as do Goodspeed (American Translation) and Mrs. Montgomery (Centenary Translation). John's own words (Matthew:3:11|) to which Jesus apparently refers use \en\ (in) both with water and Spirit. There is a so-called instrumental use of \en\ where we in English have to say "with" (Revelation:13:10| \en machairˆi\, like \machairˆi\, strkjv@Acts:12:2|). That is to say \en\ with the locative presents the act as located in a certain instrument like a sword (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 589f.). But the instrumental case is more common without \en\ (the locative and instrumental cases having the same form). Songs:it is often a matter of indifference which idiom is used as in strkjv@John:21:8| we have \t“i ploiari“i\ (locative without \en\). They came {in} (locative case without \en\) the boat. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:31| \en hudati baptiz“n\ baptizing in water. No distinction therefore can be insisted on here between the construction \hudati\ and \en pneumati\ (both being in the locative case, one without, one with \en\). Note unusual position of the verb \baptisthˆsesthe\ (future passive indicative) between \pneumati\ and \hagi“i\. This baptism of the Holy Spirit was predicted by John (Matthew:3:11|) as the characteristic of the Messiah's work. Now the Messiah himself in his last message before his Ascension proclaims that in a few days the fulfilment of that prophecy will come to pass. The Codex Bezae adds here "which ye are about to receive" and "until the Pentecost" to verse 5|. {Not many days hence} (\ou meta pollas tautas hˆmeras\). A neat Greek idiom difficult to render smoothly into English: "Not after many days these." The litotes (not many=few) is common in Luke (Luke:7:6; strkjv@15:13; strkjv@Acts:17:27; strkjv@19:11; strkjv@20:12; strkjv@21:39; strkjv@28:14; strkjv@28:2|). The predicate use of \tautas\ (without article) is to be noted. "These" really means as a starting point, "from these" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 702). It was ten days hence. This idiom occurs several times in Luke (Luke:24:21; strkjv@Acts:24:21|), as elsewhere (John:4:18; strkjv@2Peter:3:1|). In strkjv@Luke:2:12| the copula is easily supplied as it exists in strkjv@Luke:1:36; strkjv@2:2|.

rwp@Acts:1:19 @{Language} (\dialekt“i\). Not a dialect of the Greek, but a different language, the Aramaic. Songs:also in strkjv@2:6; strkjv@21:40|. \Dialektos\ is from \dialegomai\, to converse, to speak between two (\dia\). {Akeldama} (\Hakeldamach\). This Aramaic word Peter explains as "the field of blood." Two traditions are preserved: one in strkjv@Matthew:27:7| which explains that the priests purchased this potter's field with the money which Judas flung down as the price of the blood of Jesus. The other in Acts describes it as the field of blood because Judas poured out his blood there. Hackett and Knowling argue that both views can be true. "The ill-omened name could be used with a double emphasis" (Hackett).

rwp@Acts:1:22 @{Beginning} (\arxamenos\). Aorist middle participle of \arch“\, agreeing (nominative) with \ho kurios Iˆsous\ (the Lord Jesus). The ministry of Jesus began with the ministry of John. Strictly speaking \arxamenos\ should be the accusative and agree with \martura\ (witness) in verse 22|, but the construction is a bit free. The ministry of Jesus began with the baptism of John and lasted until the Ascension. {A witness with us of his resurrection} (\martura tˆs anastase“s autou sun hˆmin\). This Peter considers the essential thing in a successor to Judas. The one chosen should be a personal witness who can speak from his own experience of the ministry, resurrection, and ascension of the Lord Jesus. One can easily see that this qualification will soon put an end to those who bear such personal testimony.

rwp@Acts:2:14 @{Standing up with the eleven} (\statheis sun tois hendeka\). Took his stand with the eleven including Matthias, who also rose up with them, and spoke as their spokesman, a formal and impressive beginning. The Codex Bezae has "ten apostles." Luke is fond of this pictorial use of \statheis\ (first aorist passive participle of \histˆmi\) as seen nowhere else in the N.T. (Luke:18:11,40; strkjv@19:8; strkjv@Acts:5:20; strkjv@17:22; strkjv@27:21|). {Lifted up his voice} (\epˆren tˆn ph“nˆn autou\). This phrase only in Luke in the N.T. (Luke:11:29; strkjv@Acts:2:14; strkjv@14:11; strkjv@22:22|), but is common in the old writers. First aorist active indicative of \epair“\. The large crowd and the confusion of tongues demanded loud speaking. "This most solemn, earnest, yet sober speech" (Bengel). Codex Bezae adds "first" after "voice." Peter did it to win and hold attention. {Give ear unto my words} (\en“tisasthe ta rhˆmata mou\). Late verb in LXX and only here in the N.T. First aorist middle from \en“tizomai\ (\en, ous\, ear) to give ear to, receive into the ear. People's ears differ greatly, but in public speech they have to be reached through the ear. That puts an obligation on the speaker and also on the auditors who should sit where they can hear with the ears which they have, an obligation often overlooked.

rwp@Acts:2:27 @{In Hades} (\eis Hƒidˆn\). Hades is the unseen world, Hebrew Sheol, but here it is viewed as death itself "considered as a rapacious destroyer" (Hackett). It does not mean the place of punishment, though both heaven and the place of torment are in Hades (Luke:16:23|). "Death and Hades are strictly parallel terms: he who is dead is in Hades" (Page). The use of \eis\ here=\en\ is common enough. The Textus Receptus here reads \eis Hƒidou\ (genitive case) like the Attic idiom with \domon\ (abode) understood. "Hades" in English is not translation, but transliteration. The phrase in the Apostles' Creed, "descended into hell" is from this passage in Acts (Hades, not Gehenna). The English word "hell" is Anglo-Saxon from \helan\, to hide, and was used in the Authorized Version to translate both Hades as here and Gehenna as in strkjv@Matthew:5:22|. {Thy Holy One} (\ton hosion sou\). Peter applies these words to the Messiah. {Corruption} (\diaphthoran\). The word can mean destruction or putrefaction from \diaphtheir“\, old word, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:13:34-37|. The Hebrew word in strkjv@Psalms:16| can mean also the pit or the deep.

rwp@Acts:2:38 @{Repent ye} (\metanoˆsate\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Change your mind and your life. Turn right about and do it now. You _crucified_ this Jesus. Now _crown_ him in your hearts as Lord and Christ. This first. {And be baptized every one of you} (\kai baptisthˆt“ hekastos h–m“n\). Rather, "And let each one of you be baptized." Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed "in the name of Jesus Christ" (\en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\). In accordance with the command of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| (\eis to onoma\). No distinction is to be insisted on between \eis to onoma\ and \en t“i onomati\ with \baptiz“\ since \eis\ and \en\ are really the same word in origin. In strkjv@Acts:10:48| \en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\ occurs, but \eis\ to \onoma\ in strkjv@8:16; strkjv@19:5|. The use of \onoma\ means in the name or with the authority of one as \eis onoma prophˆtou\ (Matthew:10:41|) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19|, but this does not show that it was not used. The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See on ¯Matthew:28:19| for discussion of this point. "Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord" (Page). {Unto the remission of your sins} (\eis aphesin t“n hamarti“n h–m“n\). This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of \eis\ does exist as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \eis doxan hˆm“n\ (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of \eis\ for aim or purpose. It is seen in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| in three examples \eis onoma prophˆtou, dikaiou, mathˆtou\ where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in strkjv@Matthew:12:41| about the preaching of Jonah (\eis to kˆrugma I“na\). They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the _Koin‚_ generally (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. Songs:I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received. {The gift of the Holy Ghost} (\tˆn d“rean tou hagiou pneumatos\). The gift consists (Acts:8:17|) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification).

rwp@Acts:2:42 @{They continued steadfastly} (\ˆsan proskarturountes\). Periphrastic active imperfect of \proskarture“\ as in strkjv@Acts:1:14| (same participle in verse 46|). {Fellowship} (\koin“niƒi\). Old word from \koin“nos\ (partner, sharer in common interest) and this from \koinos\ what is common to all. This partnership involves participation in, as the blood of Christ (Phillipians:2:1|) or co-operation in the work of the gospel (Phillipians:1:5|) or contribution for those in need (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:13|). Hence there is wide diversity of opinion concerning the precise meaning of \koin“nia\ in this verse. It may refer to the distribution of funds in verse 44| or to the oneness of spirit in the community of believers or to the Lord's Supper (as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:16|) in the sense of communion or to the fellowship in the common meals or \agapae\ (love-feasts). {The breaking of bread} (\tˆi klasei tou artou\). The word \klasis\ is an old word, but used only by Luke in the N.T. (Luke:24:35; strkjv@Acts:2:42|), though the verb \kla“\ occurs in other parts of the N.T. as in verse 46|. The problem here is whether Luke refers to the ordinary meal as in strkjv@Luke:24:35| or to the Lord's Supper. The same verb \kla“\ is used of breaking bread at the ordinary meal (Luke:24:30|) or the Lord's Supper (Luke:22:19|). It is generally supposed that the early disciples attached so much significance to the breaking of bread at the ordinary meals, more than our saying grace, that they followed the meal with the Lord's Supper at first, a combination called \agapai\ or love-feasts. "There can be no doubt that the Eucharist at this period was preceded uniformly by a common repast, as was the case when the ordinance was instituted" (Hackett). This led to some abuses as in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20|. Hence it is possible that what is referred to here is the Lord's Supper following the ordinary meal. "To simply explain \tˆi klasei tou artou\ as='The Holy Communion' is to pervert the plain meaning of words, and to mar the picture of family life, which the text places before us as the ideal of the early believers" (Page). But in strkjv@Acts:20:7| they seem to have come together especially for the observance of the Lord's Supper. Perhaps there is no way to settle the point conclusively here. {The prayers} (\tais proseuchais\). Services where they prayed as in strkjv@1:14|, in the temple (Acts:3:1|), in their homes (4:23|).

rwp@Acts:4:25 @{By the mouth of our father David} (\tou patros hˆm“n dia pneumatos hagiou stomatos Daueid\). From strkjv@Psalms:2:1f|. here ascribed to David. Baumgarten suggests that the whole company sang the second Psalm and then Peter applied it to this emergency. The Greek MSS. do not have \dia\ (by) here before \stomatos\, but only \dia\ before \pneumatos hagiou\ (the Holy Spirit). Hort calls this a "primitive error" perhaps due to an early scribe who omitted this second \dia\ so close to the first \dia\ (Robertson, _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 238). A small list of such primitive errors is there given as suggested by Dr. Hort. {Why} (\hina ti\). This Greek idiom calls for \genˆtai\ (second aorist middle subjunctive), {That what may happen}. {The Gentiles} (\ethnˆ\). Songs:always in LXX, while \laoi\ (peoples) can include Jews. {Did rage} (\ephruaxan\). First aorist active indicative of \phruass“\, late word, to neigh like a horse, to prance or stamp the ground, to put on lofty airs. Only here in the N.T. in this quotation from strkjv@Psalms:2:1|. {Imagine} (\emeletˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \meleta“\. Old verb from \meletˆ\ (care), to practise, to caution, as orators and rhetoricians. Only here in the N.T. in this quotation.

rwp@Acts:7:19 @{Dealt subtilly} (\katasophisamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \katasophizomai\, late compound (\kata\ and \sophiz“\, old verb, to make wise, to become wise, then to play the sophist), perfective use of \kata\. In the LXX, but here only in the N.T. To use fraud, craft, deceit. {That they should cast out their babes} (\tou poiein ta brephˆ ektheta\). \Tou poiein\ (genitive of the articular present infinitive) can be either design or result. The Revised Version here takes it as purpose while the Authorized as result. In either case Pharaoh required the Israelites to expose their children to death, a possible practice done voluntarily in heathen China and by heathen in so-called Christian lands. But the Israelites fought against such an iniquity. The word \ektheta\ (exposed, cast out) is a verbal adjective from \ektithˆmi\. It is an old word, but here only in the N.T. and not in the LXX. {To the end they might not live} (\eis to mˆ z“ogoneisthai\). Purpose with \eis\ and the articular infinitive (present middle). This compound verb is from \z“ogonos\ (from \z“os\, alive, and \gen“\, to bear) and is used by late writers and the LXX. It is three times in the N.T. (here, strkjv@Luke:17:33; strkjv@1Timothy:6:13|) in the sense to preserve alive.

rwp@Acts:7:49 @{What manner of house} (\Poion oikon\). What sort of a house? This interrogative is sometimes scornful as in strkjv@4:7; strkjv@Luke:6:32ff.| (Page). Songs:Stephen shows by Isaiah that Solomon was right that the temple was not meant to "confine" God's presence and that Jesus had rightly shown that God is a spirit and can be worshipped anywhere by any individual of any race or land. It is a tremendous argument for the universality and spirituality of Christianity free from the shackles of Jewish racial and national limitations, but its very strength only angered the Sanhedrin to desperation.

rwp@Acts:8:24 @{Pray ye for me} (\Deˆthˆte humeis huper emou\). Emphasis on \humeis\ (you). First aorist passive imperative. Simon is thoroughly frightened by Peter's words, but shows no sign of personal repentance or change of heart. He wants to escape the penalty for his sin and hopes that Peter can avert it. Peter had clearly diagnosed his case. He was an unconverted man in spite of his profession of faith and baptism. There is no evidence that he ever changed his life at all. {Which} (\h“n\). Genitive by attraction of the accusative relative \ha\ to case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\ (of those things), a common Greek idiom.

rwp@Acts:8:31 @{How can I, except some one shall guide me?} (\P“s gar an dunaimˆn ean me tis hodˆgˆsei me?\). This is a mixed condition, the conclusion coming first belongs to the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of being determined) with \an\ and the optative, but the condition (\ean\, instead of the usual \ei\, and the future indicative) is of the first class (determined or fulfilled. Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1022), a common enough phenomenon in the _Koin‚_. The eunuch felt the need of some one to guide (\hodˆge“\ from \hodˆgos\, guide, and that from \hodos\, way, and \hegeomai\, to lead).

rwp@Acts:9:6 @The best MSS. do not have "trembling and astonished," and "What wilt thou have me to do, Lord?" The Textus Receptus put these words in here without the authority of a Greek codex. See strkjv@22:10| above for the genuine text. {It shall be told thee} (\lalˆthˆsetai\). Future passive indicative of \lale“\. It is hardly likely that Luke records all that Jesus said to Saul, but more was to come on his arrival in Damascus. Saul had received all that he could bear just now (John:16:12|). {What} (\hoti\). Rare in _Koin‚_ use of this indefinite neuter relative in an indirect question, the only example in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 731). Human agents like Ananias can finish what Jesus by supernatural manifestation has here begun in Saul.

rwp@Acts:9:20 @{He proclaimed Jesus} (\ekˆrussen ton Iˆsoun\). Imperfect indicative, inchoative, began to preach. Jesus, not Christ, is the correct text here. He did this first preaching in the Jewish synagogues, a habit of his life when possible, and following the example of Jesus. {That he is the Son of God} (\hoti houtos estin ho huios tou theou\). This is Paul's platform as a Christian preacher, one that he always occupied to the very end. It was a complete reversal of his previous position. Jesus had turned him completely around. It is the conclusion that Saul now drew from the vision of the Risen Christ and the message through Ananias. By "the Son of God" Saul means the Messiah of promise and hope, the Messianic sense of the Baptist (John:1:34|) and of Nathanael (John:1:49|) for Saul is now proclaiming his faith in Jesus in the very synagogues where he had meant to arrest those who professed their faith in him. Peter laid emphasis on the Resurrection of Jesus as a glorious fact and proclaimed Jesus as Lord and Christ. Paul boldly calls Jesus the Son of God with full acknowledgment of his deity from the very start. Thomas had come to this place slowly (John:20:28|). Saul begins with this truth and never leaves it. With this faith he can shake the world. There is no power in any other preaching.

rwp@Acts:10:35 @{Acceptable to him} (\dektos aut“i\). Verbal adjective from \dechomai\. _Acceptabilis_. That is to say, a Gentile would not have to become a Jew in order to become a Christian. Evidently Peter had not before perceived this fact. On the great Day of Pentecost when he spoke of the promise "to all those afar off" (2:39|) Peter understood that they must first become Jews and then Christians. The new idea that now makes a revolution in Peter's outlook is precisely this that Christ can and will save Gentiles like this Cornelius group without their becoming Jews at all.

rwp@Acts:10:47 @{Can any man forbid the water?} (\Mˆti to hud“r dunatai k“l–sai tis?\). The negative \mˆti\ expects the answer _No_. The evidence was indisputable that these Gentiles were converted and so were entitled to be baptized. See the similar idiom in strkjv@Luke:6:39|. Note the article with "water." Here the baptism of the Holy Spirit had preceded the baptism of water (Acts:1:5; strkjv@11:16|). "The greater had been bestowed; could the lesser be withheld?" (Knowling). {That these should not be baptized} (\tou mˆ baptisthˆnai toutous\). Ablative case of the articular first aorist passive infinitive of \baptiz“\ with the redundant negative after the verb of hindering (\k“l–sai\) and the accusative of general reference (\toutous\). The redundant negative after the verb of hindering is not necessary though often used in ancient Greek and in the _Koin‚_ (papyri). Without it see strkjv@Matthew:19:14; strkjv@Acts:8:36| and with it see strkjv@Luke:4:42; strkjv@24:16; strkjv@Acts:14:18|. Cf. Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1061, 1094, 1171. The triple negatives here are a bit confusing to the modern mind (\mˆti\ in the question, \k“l–sai\, to hinder or to cut off, \mˆ\ with \baptisthˆnai\). Literally, Can any one cut off the water from the being baptized as to these? Meyer: "The water is in this animated language conceived as the element offering itself for the baptism." {As well as we} (\h“s kai hˆmeis\). The argument was conclusive. God had spoken. Note the query of the eunuch to Philip (Acts:8:36|).

rwp@Acts:11:2 @{They that were of the circumcision} (\hoi ek peritomˆs\). Literally, those of circumcision (on the side of circumcision, of the circumcision party). The phrase in strkjv@10:46| is confined to the six brethren with Peter in Caesarea (11:12|). That can hardly be the meaning here for it would mean that they were the ones who brought the charge against Peter though Hort takes this view. All the disciples in Jerusalem were Jews so that it can hardly mean the whole body. In strkjv@Galatians:2:12| the phrase has the narrower sense of the Judaizing or Pharisaic wing of the disciples (Acts:15:5|) who made circumcision necessary for all Gentile converts. Probably here by anticipation Luke so describes the beginning of that great controversy. The objectors probably did not know of Peter's vision at Joppa, but only of the revolutionary conduct of Peter in Caesarea. These extremists who spoke probably had abundant sympathy in their protest. The apostles are mentioned in verse 1|, but are not referred to in verse 2|. Apparently they are in contrast with the circumcision party in the church. {Contended} (\diekrinonto\). Imperfect middle of the common verb \diakrin“\, to {separate}. Here to separate oneself apart (\dia\), to take sides against, to make a cleavage (\dia\, two, in two) as in strkjv@Jude:1:9|. Songs:Peter is at once put on the defensive as the contention went on. It is plain that Peter was not regarded as any kind of pope or overlord.

rwp@Acts:12:13 @{When he knocked at the door of the gate} (\krousantos autou tˆn thuran tou pul“nos\). Genitive absolute with aorist active participle of \krou“\, common verb to knock or knock at. Songs:from the outside (Luke:13:25|). \Pul“n\ here is the gateway or passageway from the door (\thura\) that leads to the house. In verse 14| it is still the passageway without the use of \thura\ (door, so for both door and passageway). {To answer} (\hupakousai\). To listen under before opening. First aorist active infinitive of \hupakou“\, common verb to obey, to hearken. {A maid} (\paidiskˆ\). Portress as in strkjv@John:18:17|. A diminutive of \pais\, a female slave (so on an ostracon of second century A.D., Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 200). {Rhoda}. A rose. Women can have such beautiful names like Dorcas (Gazelle), Euodia (Sweet Aroma), Syntyche (Good Luck). Mark or Peter could tell Luke her name.

rwp@Acts:13:9 @{But Saul, who is also called Paul} (\Saulos de, ho kai Paulos\). By this remarkably brief phrase Luke presents this epoch in the life of Saul Paul. The "also" (\kai\) does not mean that the name Paul was given now for the first time, rather than he had always had it. As a Jew and a Roman citizen, he undoubtedly had both names all the time (cf. John Mark, Symeon Niger, Barsabbas Justus). Jerome held that the name of Sergius Paulus was adopted by Saul because of his conversion at this time, but this is a wholly unlikely explanation, "an element of vulgarity impossible to St. Paul " (Farrar). Augustine thought that the meaning of the Latin _paulus_ (little) would incline Saul to adopt, "but as a proper name the word rather suggested the glories of the Aemilian family, and even to us recalls the name of another Paulus, who was 'lavish of his noble life'" (Page). Among the Jews the name Saul was naturally used up to this point, but from now on Luke employs Paul save when there is a reference to his previous life (Acts:22:7; strkjv@26:14|). His real career is work among the Gentiles and Paul is the name used by them. There is a striking similarity in sound between the Hebrew Saul and the Roman Paul. Paul was proud of his tribe of Benjamin and so of King Saul (Phillipians:3:5|). {Filled with the Holy Spirit} (\plˆstheis pneumatos hagiou\). First aorist (ingressive) passive participle of \pimplˆmi\ with the genitive case. A special influx of power to meet this emergency. Here was a cultured heathen, typical of the best in Roman life, who called forth all the powers of Paul plus the special help of the Holy Spirit to expose the wickedness of Elymas Barjesus. If one wonders why the Holy Spirit filled Paul for this emergency rather than Barnabas, when Barnabas was named first in strkjv@13:2|, he can recall the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit in his choice of agents (1Corinthians:12:4-11|) and also the special call of Paul by Christ (Acts:9:15; strkjv@26:17f.|). {Fastened his eyes} (\atenisas\). As already in strkjv@Luke:4:20; strkjv@22:56; strkjv@Acts:3:4,12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@10:4|.

rwp@Acts:13:48 @{As the Gentiles heard this they were glad} (\akouonta ta ethnˆ echairon\). Present active participle of \akou“\ and imperfect active of \chair“\, linear action descriptive of the joy of the Gentiles. {Glorified the word of God} (\edoxazon ton logon tou theou\). Imperfect active again. The joy of the Gentiles increased the fury of the Jews. "The synagogue became a scene of excitement which must have been something like the original speaking with tongues" (Rackham). The joy of the Gentiles was to see how they could receive the higher blessing of Judaism without circumcision and other repellent features of Jewish ceremonialism. It was the gospel of grace and liberty from legalism that Paul had proclaimed. Whether strkjv@Galatians:4:13| describes this incident or not (the South Galatian theory), it illustrates it when Gentiles received Paul as if he were Christ Jesus himself. It was triumph with the Gentiles, but defeat with the Jews. {As many as were ordained to eternal life} (\hosoi ˆsan tetagmenoi eis z“ˆn ai“nion\). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of \tass“\, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word "ordain" is not the best translation here. "Appointed," as Hackett shows, is better. The Jews here had voluntarily rejected the word of God. On the other side were those Gentiles who gladly accepted what the Jews had rejected, not all the Gentiles. Why these Gentiles here ranged themselves on God's side as opposed to the Jews Luke does not tell us. This verse does not solve the vexed problem of divine sovereignty and human free agency. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an _absolutum decretum_ of personal salvation. Paul had shown that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away. {Believed} (\episteusan\). Summary or constative first aorist active indicative of \pisteu“\. The subject of this verb is the relative clause. By no manner of legerdemain can it be made to mean "those who believe were appointed." It was saving faith that was exercised only by those who were appointed unto eternal life, who were ranged on the side of eternal life, who were thus revealed as the subjects of God's grace by the stand that they took on this day for the Lord. It was a great day for the kingdom of God.

rwp@Acts:14:23 @{And when they had appointed for them elders in every church} (\cheirotonˆsantes de autois kat' ekklˆsian presbuterous\). They needed also some form of organization, though already churches. Note distributive use of \kata\ with \ekklˆsian\ (2:46; strkjv@5:42; strkjv@Titus:1:5|). \Cheirotone“\ (from \cheirotonos\, extending the hand, \cheir\, hand, and \tein“\, to stretch) is an old verb that originally meant to vote by show of the hands, finally to appoint with the approval of an assembly that chooses as in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|, and then to appoint without regard to choice as in Josephus (_Ant_. XIII. 2, 2) of the appointment of Jonathan as high priest by Alexander. Songs:in strkjv@Acts:10:41| the compound \procheiratone“\ is used of witnesses appointed by God. But the seven (deacons) were first selected by the Jerusalem church and then appointed (\katastˆsomen\) by the apostles. That is probably the plan contemplated by Paul in his directions to Titus (Titus:1:5|) about the choice of elders. It is most likely that this plan was the one pursued by Paul and Barnabas with these churches. They selected the elders in each instance and Paul and Barnabas "ordained" them as we say, though the word \cheirotone“\ does not mean that. "Elders" were mentioned first in strkjv@11:30|. Later Paul will give the requirements expected in these "elders" or "bishops" (Phillipians:1:1|) as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:1-7; strkjv@Titus:1:5-9|. It is fairly certain that these elders were chosen to correspond in a general way with the elders in the Jewish synagogue after which the local church was largely copied as to organization and worship. Paul, like Jesus, constantly worshipped and spoke in the synagogues. Already it is plain, as at Antioch in Syria (11:26|), that the Christians can no longer count on the use of the Jewish synagogue. They must have an organization of their own. The use of the plural here implies what was true at Philippi (Phillipians:1:1|) and Ephesus (Acts:20:17,28|) that each church (one in each city) "had its college of elders" (Hackett) as in Jerusalem (21:18|). Elder (\presbuteros\) was the Jewish name and bishop (\episkopos\) the Greek name for the same office. "Those who are called elders in speaking of Jewish communities are called bishops in speaking of Gentile communities" (Hackett). Hovey rightly holds against Hackett that teaching was a normal function of these elders, pastors or bishops as they were variously called (1Timothy:3:2; strkjv@Titus:1:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28,30; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|). {Had prayed with fasting} (\proseuxamenoi meta nˆstei“n\). It was a serious matter, this formal setting apart of these "elders" in the churches. Songs:it was done in a public meeting with prayer and fasting as when Paul and Barnabas were sent forth from Antioch in Syria (13:3|) on this mission tour. {They commended them to the Lord} (\parethento autous t“i kuri“i\). Second aorist middle indicative of \paratithˆmi\. Old and solemn word, to entrust, to deposit as in a bank (1Timothy:1:18; strkjv@2Timothy:2:2|). Cf. \parathˆkˆ\ in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20; strkjv@2Timothy:1:12,14|. It was all that they could now do, to commit them to the Lord Jesus. Jesus used this word on the cross (Luke:22:32|). {On whom they had believed} (\eis hon pepisteukeisan\). Past perfect indicative (without augment) of \pisteu“\. They had "trusted" in Jesus (2Timothy:1:12|) and Paul now "entrusts" them to him with confidence. It was a solemn and serious occasion in each instance as it always is to set apart men for the ministry. These men may not have been ideal men for this service, but they were the only ones available and they were chosen from the actual membership in each instance, men who knew local conditions and problems.

rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo tˆs Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmˆthˆte t“i ethei M“use“s, ou dunasthe s“thˆnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn“\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\t“i ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\s“thˆnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.

rwp@Acts:15:2 @{When Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and questioning with them} (\Genomenˆs stase“s kai zˆtˆse“s ouk oligˆs t“i Paul“i kai Barnabƒi pros autous\). Genitive absolute of second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\, genitive singular agreeing with first substantive \stase“s\. Literally, "No little (litotes for much) strife and questioning coming to Paul and Barnabas (dative case) with them " (\pros autous\, face to face with them). Paul and Barnabas were not willing to see this Gentile church brow-beaten and treated as heretics by these self-appointed regulators of Christian orthodoxy from Jerusalem. The work had developed under the leadership of Paul and Barnabas and they accepted full responsibility for it and stoutly resisted these Judaizers to the point of sedition (riot, outbreak in strkjv@Luke:23:25; strkjv@Acts:19:40|) as in strkjv@23:7|. There is no evidence that the Judaizers had any supporters in the Antioch church so that they failed utterly to make any impression. Probably these Judaizers compelled Paul to think through afresh his whole gospel of grace and so they did Paul and the world a real service. If the Jews like Paul had to believe, it was plain that there was no virtue in circumcision (Galatians:2:15-21|). It is not true that the early Christians had no disagreements. They had selfish avarice with Ananias and Sapphira, murmuring over the gifts to the widows, simony in the case of Simon Magus, violent objection to work in Caesarea, and now open strife over a great doctrine (grace vs. legalism). {The brethren appointed} (\etaxan\). "The brethren" can be supplied from verse 1| and means the church in Antioch. The church clearly saw that the way to remove this deadlock between the Judaizers and Paul and Barnabas was to consult the church in Jerusalem to which the Judaizers belonged. Paul and Barnabas had won in Antioch. If they can win in Jerusalem, that will settle the matter. The Judaizers will be answered in their own church for which they are presuming to speak. The verb \etaxan\ (\tass“\, to arrange) suggests a formal appointment by the church in regular assembly. Paul (Galatians:2:2|) says that he went up by revelation (\kat' apokalupsin\), but surely that is not contradictory to the action of the church. {Certain others of them} (\tinas allous\). Certainly Titus (Galatians:2:1,3|), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number. {The apostles and elders} (\tous apostolous kai presbuterous\). Note one article for both (cf. "the apostles and the brethren" in strkjv@11:1|). "Elders" now (11:30|) in full force. The apostles have evidently returned now to the city after the death of Herod Agrippa I stopped the persecution.

rwp@Acts:15:39 @{A sharp contention} (\paroxusmos\). Our very word paroxysm in English. Old word though only twice in the N.T. (here and strkjv@Hebrews:10:24|), from \paroxun“\, to sharpen (\para, oxus\) as of a blade and of the spirit (Acts:17:16; strkjv@1Corinthians:13:5|). This "son of consolation" loses his temper in a dispute over his cousin and Paul uses sharp words towards his benefactor and friend. It is often so that the little irritations of life give occasion to violent explosions. If the incident in strkjv@Galatians:2:11-21| had already taken place, there was a sore place already that could be easily rubbed. And if Mark also joined with Peter and Barnabas on that occasion, Paul had fresh ground for irritation about him. But there is no way to settle differences about men and we can only agree to disagree as Paul and Barnabas did. {Songs:that they parted asunder from one another} (\h“ste apoch“risthˆnai autous ap' allˆl“n\). Actual result here stated by \h“ste\ and the first aorist passive infinitive of \apoch“riz“\, old verb to sever, to separate, here only and strkjv@Revelation:6:4| in the N.T. The accusative of general reference (\autous\) is normal. For construction with \h“ste\ see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 999f. {And Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus} (\ton te Barnaban paralabonta ton Markon ekpleusai eis Kupron\). Second infinitival clause \ekpleusai\ after \h“ste\ connected by \te\. The same participle is used here minus \sun, paralabonta\ (second aorist active). Barnabas and Mark sailed out (\ekpleusai\ from \ekple“\) from the harbour of Antioch. This is the last glimpse that Luke gives us of Barnabas, one of the noblest figures in the New Testament. Paul has a kindly reference to him in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:6|. No one can rightly blame Barnabas for giving his cousin John Mark a second chance nor Paul for fearing to risk him again. One's judgment may go with Paul, but one's heart goes with Barnabas. And Mark made good with Barnabas, with Peter (1Peter:5:13|) and finally with Paul (Colossians:4:10; strkjv@2Timothy:4:11|). See my little book on John Mark (_Making Good in the Ministry_). Paul and Barnabas parted in anger and both in sorrow. Paul owed more to Barnabas than to any other man. Barnabas was leaving the greatest spirit of the time and of all times.

rwp@Acts:16:6 @{The region of Phrygia and Galatia} (\tˆn Phrugian kai Galatikˆn ch“ran\). This is probably the correct text with one article and apparently describes one "Region" or District in The Province of Galatia which was also Phrygian (the old-ethnographic name with which compare the use of Lycaonia in strkjv@14:6|). Strictly speaking Derbe and Lystra, though in the Province of Galatia, were not Phrygian, and so Luke would here be not resumptive of the record in verses 1-5|; but a reference to the country around Iconium and Antioch in Pisidia in North Galatia is not included. This verse is hotly disputed at every point by the advocates of the North Galatian theory as represented by Chase and the South Galatian theory by Ramsay. Whatever is true in regard to the language of Luke here and in strkjv@18:23|, it is still possible for Paul in strkjv@Galatians:1:2| to use the term Galatia of the whole province of that name which could, in fact, apply to either South or North Galatia or to both. He could, of course, use it also in the ethnographic sense of the real Gauls or Celts who dwelt in North Galatia. Certainly the first tour of Paul and Barnabas was in the Province of Galatia though touching only the Regions of Pisidia, Phrygia, and Lycaonia, which province included besides the Gauls to the north. In this second tour Lycaonia has been already touched (Derbe and Lystra) and now Phrygia. The question arises why Luke here and in strkjv@18:23| adds the term "of Galatia" (\Galatikˆn\) though not in strkjv@13:14| (Pisidian Antioch) nor in strkjv@14:6| (cities of Lycaonia). Does Luke mean to use "of Galatia" in the same ethnographic sense as "of Phrygia" or does he here add the province (Galatia) to the name of the Region (Phrygia)? In itself either view is possible and it really matters very little except that the question is raised whether Paul went into the North Galatian Region on this occasion or later (18:23|). He could have done so and the Epistle be addressed to the churches of South Galatia, North Galatia, or the province as a whole. But the Greek participle \k“luthentes\ ("having been forbidden") plays a part in the argument that cannot be overlooked whether Luke means to say that Paul went north or not. This aorist passive participle of \k“lu“\, to hinder, can only express simultaneous or antecedent action, not subsequent action as Ramsay argues. No example of the so-called subsequent use of the aorist participle has ever been found in Greek as all Greek grammarians agree (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 860-63, 1112-14). The only natural meaning of \k“luthentes\ is that Paul with Silas and Timothy "passed through the region of Phrygia and Galatia" because they were hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia (the Province of Asia of which Ephesus was the chief city and west of Derbe and Lystra). This construction implies that the country called "the region of Phrygia and Galatia" is not in the direct line west toward Ephesus. What follows in verse 7| throws further light on the point.

rwp@Acts:16:34 @{He brought them up} (\anagag“n\). Second aorist active participle of \anag“\. It looks as if his house was above the prison. The baptism apparently took place in the pool or tank in which he bathed Paul and Silas (Deuteronomy:Wette) or the rectangular basin (_impluvium_) in the court for receiving the rain or even in a swimming pool or bath (\kolumbˆthra\) found within the walls of the prison (Kuinoel). Meyer: "Perhaps the water was in the court of the house; and the baptism was that of immersion, which formed an essential part of the symbolism of the act." {Set meat} (\parethˆken trapezan\). Set a "table" before them with food on it. They had probably had no food for a day. {With all his house} (\panoikei\). Adverb, once in Plato, though usually \panoikiƒi\. In LXX, but here alone in the N.T. It is in an amphibolous position and can be taken either with "rejoiced" (\ˆgalliasato\) or "having believed" (\pepisteuk“s\, perfect active participle, permanent belief), coming between them. The whole household (family, warden, slaves) heard the word of God, believed in the Lord Jesus, made confession, were baptized, and rejoiced. Furneaux considers the haste in baptism here "precipitate" as in the baptism of the eunuch. But why delay?

rwp@Acts:17:19 @{And they took hold of him} (\epilabomenoi de autou\). Second aorist middle participle of \epilamban“\, old verb, but in the N.T. only in the middle, here with the genitive \autou\ to lay hold of, but with no necessary sense of violence (Acts:9:27; strkjv@23:27; strkjv@Mark:8:23|), unless the idea is that Paul was to be tried before the Court of Areopagus for the crime of bringing in strange gods. But the day for that had passed in Athens. Even so it is not clear whether "{unto the Areopagus} (\epi ton Areion Pagon\") means the Hill of Mars (west of the Acropolis, north of the agora and reached by a flight of steps in the rock) or the court itself which met elsewhere as well as on the hills, usually in fact in the Stoa Basilica opening on the agora and near to the place where the dispute had gone on. Raphael's cartoon with Paul standing on Mars Hill has made us all familiar with the common view, but it is quite uncertain if it is true. There was not room on the summit for a large gathering. If Paul was brought before the Court of Areopagus (commonly called the Areopagus as here), it was not for trial as a criminal, but simply for examination concerning his new teaching in this university city whether it was strictly legal or not. Paul was really engaged in proselytism to turn the Athenians away from their old gods to Jesus Christ. But "the court of refined and polished Athenians was very different from the rough provincial magistrates of Philippi, and the philosophers who presented Paul to their cognizance very different from the mob of Thessalonians" (Rackham). It was all very polite. {May we know?} (\Dunametha gn“nai\). Can we come to know (ingressive second aorist active infinitive). {This new teaching} (\hˆ kainˆ hautˆ didachˆ\). On the position of \hautˆ\ see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 700f. The question was prompted by courtesy, sarcasm, or irony. Evidently no definite charge was laid against Paul.

rwp@Acts:18:24 @{Apollos} (\Apoll“s\). Genitive \-“\ Attic second declension. Probably a contraction of \Apollonios\ as D has it here. {An Alexandrian} (\Alexandreus\). Alexander the Great founded this city B.C. 332 and placed a colony of Jews there which flourished greatly, one-third of the population at this time. There was a great university and library there. The Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy developed here of which Philo was the chief exponent who was still living. Apollos was undoubtedly a man of the schools and a man of parts. {A learned man} (\anˆr logios\). Or eloquent, as the word can mean either a man of words (like one "wordy," verbose) or a man of ideas, since \logos\ was used either for reason or speech. Apollos was doubtless both learned (mighty in the Scriptures) and eloquent, though eloquence varies greatly in people's ideas. {Mighty in the Scriptures} (\dunatos “n en tais graphais\). Being powerful (\dunatos\ verbal of \dunamai\ and same root as \dunamis\, dynamite, dynamo) in the Scriptures (in the knowledge and the use of the Scriptures), as should be true of every preacher. There is no excuse for ignorance of the Scriptures on the part of preachers, the professed interpreters of the word of God. The last lecture made to the New Testament English class in Southern Baptist Theological Seminary by John A. Broadus was on this passage with a plea for his students to be mighty in the Scriptures. In Alexandria Clement of Alexandria and Origen taught in the Christian theological school.

rwp@Acts:19:12 @{Handkerchiefs} (\soudaria\). Latin word for \sudor\ (sweat). Used in strkjv@Luke:19:20; strkjv@John:11:44; strkjv@20:7|. In two papyri marriage-contracts this word occurs among the toilet articles in the dowry (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 223). {Aprons} (\simikinthia\). Latin word also, _semicinctilum_ (\semi, cingo\). Only here in the N.T. Linen aprons used by servants or artisans (Martial XIV. 153). Paul did manual work at Ephesus (20:34|) and so wore these aprons. {Departed} (\apallalsethai\). Present passive infinitive with \h“ste\ for actual result as in verse 10|. If one wonders how God could honour such superstitious faith, he should remember that there is no power in superstition or in magic, but in God. If God never honoured any faith save that entirely free from superstition, how about Christian people who are troubled over the number 13, over the moon, the rabbit's foot? The poor woman with an issue of blood touched the hem of Christ's garment and was healed (Luke:8:44-46|) as others sought to do (Matthew:14:36|). God condescends to meet us in our ignorance and weakness where he can reach us. Elisha had a notion that some of the power of Elijah resided in his mantle (2Kings:2:13|). Some even sought help from Peter's shadow (Acts:5:15|).

rwp@Acts:19:29 @{With the confusion} (\tˆs sugchuse“s\). Genitive case after \eplˆsthˆ\. An old word, but in the N.T. only here, from verb \sugche“\, to pour together like a flood (only in Acts in the N.T.). Vivid description of the inevitable riot that followed "the appearance of such a body in the crowded agora of an excitable city" (Rackham) "vociferating the city's watch-word." {They rushed} (\h“rmˆsan\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \horma“\, old verb for impetuous dashing, a case of mob psychology (mob mind), with one accord (\homothumadon\ as in strkjv@Acts:1:14|, etc.). {Into the theatre} (\eis to theatron\). A place for seeing (\theaomai\) spectacles, originally for dramatic representation (Thucydides, Herodotus), then for the spectators, then for the spectacle or show (1Corinthians:4:9|). The theatre (amphitheatre) at Ephesus can still be traced in the ruins (Wood, _Ephesus_) and shows that it was of enormous size capable of seating fifty-six thousand persons (some estimate it only 24,500). It was the place for large public gatherings of any sort out of doors like our football and baseball parks. In particular, gladiatorial shows were held in these theatres. {Having seized Gaius and Aristarchus men of Macedonia} (\sunarpasantes Gaion kai Aristarchon Makedonas\). See strkjv@6:12| for this same verb. They wanted some victims for this "gladiatorial" show. These two men were "Paul's companions in travel" (\sunekdˆmous Paulou\), together (\sun\) with Paul in being abroad, away from home or people (\ek-dˆmous\, late word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|). How the mob got hold of Gaius (Acts:20:4|) and Aristarchus (20:4; strkjv@27:2; strkjv@Colossians:4:10; strkjv@Philemon:1:24|) we do not know whether by accidental recognition or by search after failure to get Paul. In strkjv@Romans:16:4| Paul speaks of Priscilla and Aquila as those "who for my life laid down their own necks." Paul lived with them in Ephesus as in Corinth. It is possible that Demetrius led the mob to their house and that they refused to allow Paul to go or to be seized at the risk of their own lives. Paul himself may have been desperately ill at this time as we know was the case once during his stay in Ephesus when he felt the answer of death in himself (2Corinthians:1:9|) and when God rescued him. That may mean that, ill as he was, Paul wanted to go and face the mob in the theatre, knowing that it meant certain death.

rwp@Acts:20:30 @{From among your own selves} (\ex hum“n aut“n\). In sheep's clothing just as Jesus had foretold. The outcome fully justified Paul's apprehensions as we see in Colossians, Ephesians, I and II Timothy, Revelation. False philosophy, immorality, asceticism will lead some astray (Colossians:2:8,18; strkjv@Ephesians:4:14; strkjv@5:6|). John will picture "antichrists" who went out from us because they were not of us (1John:2:18f.|). There is a false optimism that is complacently blind as well as a despondent pessimism that gives up the fight. {Perverse things} (\diestrammena\). Perfect passive participle of \diastreph“\, old verb to turn aside, twist, distort as in strkjv@Acts:13:8,10|. {To draw away} (\tou apospƒin\). Articular genitive present active participle of purpose from \apospa“\, old verb used to draw the sword (Matthew:26:51|), to separate (Luke:22:41; strkjv@Acts:21:1|). The pity of it is that such leaders of dissension can always gain a certain following. Paul's long residence in Ephesus enabled him to judge clearly of conditions there.

rwp@Acts:20:32 @{And now} (\kai ta nun\). Same phrase as in verses 22,25| save that \idou\ (behold) is wanting and the article \ta\ occurs before \nun\, accusative of general reference. And as to the present things (or situation) as in strkjv@4:29|. {I commend} (\paratithemai\). Present middle indicative of \paratithˆmi\, old verb to place beside, middle, to deposit with one, to interest as in strkjv@1Timothy:1:18; strkjv@2Timothy:2:2|. Paul can now only do this, but he does it hopefully. Cf. strkjv@1Peter:4:19|. {The word of his grace} (\t“i log“i tˆs charitos autou\). The instrumentality through preaching and the Holy Spirit employed by God. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:4:6; strkjv@Ephesians:4:29|. {Which is able to build up} (\t“i dunamen“i oikodomˆsai\). God works through the word of his grace and so it is able to build up (edify); a favourite Pauline word (1Corinthians:3:10-14; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Ephesians:2:20-22; strkjv@2Timothy:3:15|; etc.), and strkjv@James:1:21|. The very words "build" and "inheritance among the sanctified" will occur in strkjv@Ephesians:1:11; strkjv@2:30; strkjv@3:18| and which some may recall on reading. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:12|. Stephen in strkjv@Acts:7:5| used the word "inheritance" (\klˆronomian\), nowhere else in Acts, but in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14,18; strkjv@5:5|. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:18| the very expression occurs "his inheritance among the saints " (\tˆn klˆronomian autou en tois hagiois\).

rwp@Acts:21:12 @{Both we and they of that place} (\hˆmeis te kai hoi entopioi\). Usual use of \te kai\ (both--and). \Entopioi\, old word, only here in N.T. {Not to go up} (\tou mˆ anabainein\). Probably ablative of the articular present active infinitive with redundant negative \me\ after \parekaloumen\ (imperfect active, conative). We tried to persuade him from going up. It can be explained as genitive, but not so likely: We tried to persuade him in respect to not going up. Vincent cites the case of Regulus who insisted on returning from Rome to Carthage to certain death and that of Luther on the way to the Diet of Worms. Spalatin begged Luther not to go on. Luther said: "Though devils be as many in Worms as tiles upon the roofs, yet thither will I go." This dramatic warning of Agabus came on top of that in Tyre (21:4|) and Paul's own confession in Miletus (20:23|). It is small wonder that Luke and the other messengers together with Philip and his daughters (prophetesses versus prophet?) joined in a chorus of dissuasion to Paul.

rwp@Acts:21:19 @{He rehearsed} (\exˆgeito\). Imperfect middle of \exˆgeomai\, old verb to lead out, to draw out in narrative, to recount. Songs:Paul is pictured as taking his time for he had a great story to tell of what had happened since they saw him last. {One by one} (\kath' hena hekaston\). According to each one (item) and the adverbial phrase used as an accusative after the verb \exˆgeito\ as Demosthenes does, though it could be like \kath' hena hekastos\ in strkjv@Ephesians:5:33|. {Which} (\h“n\). Genitive attracted from \ha\ (accusative) into the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. {God had wrought} (\epoiˆsen ho theos\). Summary constative aorist active indicative that gathers up all that God did and he takes pains to give God the glory. It is possible that at this formal meeting Paul observed an absence of warmth and enthusiasm in contrast with the welcome accorded by his friends the day before (verse 17|). Furneaux thinks that Paul was coldly received on this day in spite of the generous offering brought from the Gentile Christians. "It looks as though his misgiving as to its reception (Romans:15:31|) was confirmed. Nor do we hear that the Christians of Jerusalem later put in so much as a word on his behalf with either the Jewish or the Roman authorities, or expressed any sympathy with him during his long imprisonment at Caesarea" (Furneaux). The most that can be said is that the Judaizers referred to by James do not appear actively against him. The collection and the plan proposed by James accomplished that much at any rate. It stopped the mouths of those lions.

rwp@Acts:22:5 @{Doth bear me witness} (\marturei moi\). Present active indicative as if still living. Caiaphas was no longer high priest now, for Ananias is at this time (23:2|), though he may be still alive. {All the estate of the elders} (\pan to presbuterion\). All the eldership or the Sanhedrin (4:5|) of which Paul was probably then a member (26:10|). Possibly some of those present were members of the Sanhedrin then (some 20 odd years ago). {From whom} (\par' h“n\). The high priest and the Sanhedrin. {Letters unto the brethren} (\epistalas pros tous adelphous\). Paul still can tactfully call the Jews his "brothers" as he did in strkjv@Romans:9:3|. There is no bitterness in his heart. {Journeyed} (\eporeuomˆn\). Imperfect middle indicative of \poreuomai\, and a vivid reality to Paul still as he was going on towards Damascus. {To bring also} (\ax“n kai\). Future active participle of \ag“\, to express purpose, one of the few N.T. examples of this classic idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1118). {Them which were there} (\tous ekeise ontas\). _Constructio praegnans_. The usual word would be \ekei\ (there), not \ekeise\ (thither). Possibly the Christians who had fled to Damascus, and so were there (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 548). {In bonds} (\dedemenous\). Perfect passive participle of \de“\, predicate position, "bound." {For to be punished} (\hina tim“rˆth“sin\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \tim“re“\, old verb to avenge, to take vengeance on. In the N.T. only here, and strkjv@26:11|. Pure final clause with \hina\. He carried his persecution outside of Palestine just as later he carried the gospel over the Roman empire.

rwp@Acts:23:1 @{Looking steadfastly} (\atenisas\). See on this word strkjv@1:10; strkjv@3:12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@7:55; strkjv@13:9|. Paul may have had weak eyes, but probably the earnest gaze was to see if he recognized any faces that were in the body that tried Stephen and to which he apparently once belonged. {I have lived before God} (\pepoliteumai t“i the“i\). Perfect middle indicative of \politeu“\, old verb to manage affairs of city (\polis\) or state, to be a citizen, behave as a citizen. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. The idea of citizenship was Greek and Roman, not Jewish. "He had lived as God's citizen, as a member of God's commonwealth" (Rackham). God (\the“i\) is the dative of personal interest. As God looked at it and in his relation to God. {In all good conscience unto this day} (\pasˆi suneidˆsei agathˆi achri tautˆs tˆs hˆmeras\). This claim seems to lack tact, but for brevity's sake Paul sums up a whole speech in it. He may have said much more than Luke here reports along the line of his speech the day before, but Paul did not make this claim without consideration. It appears to contradict his confession as the chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:13-16|). But that depends on one's interpretation of "good conscience." The word \suneidˆsis\ is literally "joint-knowledge" in Greek, Latin (_conscientia_) and English "conscience" from the Latin. It is a late word from \sunoida\, to know together, common in O.T., Apocrypha, Philo, Plutarch, New Testament, Stoics, ecclesiastical writers. In itself the word simply means consciousness of one's own thoughts (Hebrews:10:2|), or of one's own self, then consciousness of the distinction between right and wrong (Romans:2:15|) with approval or disapproval. But the conscience is not an infallible guide and acts according to the light that it has (1Corinthians:8:7,10; strkjv@1Peter:2:19|). The conscience can be contaminated (Hebrews:10:22|, evil \ponˆrƒs\). All this and more must be borne in mind in trying to understand Paul's description of his motives as a persecutor. Alleviation of his guilt comes thereby, but not removal of guilt as he himself felt (1Timothy:1:13-16|). He means to say to the Sanhedrin that he persecuted Christians as a conscientious (though mistaken) Jew (Pharisee) just as he followed his conscience in turning from Judaism to Christianity. It is a pointed disclaimer against the charge that he is a renegade Jew, an opposer of the law, the people, the temple. Paul addresses the Sanhedrin as an equal and has no "apologies" (in our sense) to make for his career as a whole. The golden thread of consistency runs through, as a good citizen in God's commonwealth. He had the consolation of a good conscience (1Peter:3:16|). The word does not occur in the Gospels and chiefly in Paul's Epistles, but we see it at work in strkjv@John:8:9| (the interpolation strkjv@7:53-8:11|).

rwp@Acts:23:11 @{The night following} (\tˆi epiousˆi nukti\). Locative case, on the next (following) night. {The Lord} (\ho kurios\). Jesus. Paul never needed Jesus more than now. On a previous occasion the whole church prayed for Peter's release (12:5|), but Paul clearly had no such grip on the church as that, though he had been kindly welcomed (21:18|). In every crisis Jesus appears to him (cf. strkjv@Acts:18:9|). It looked dark for Paul till Jesus spoke. Once before in Jerusalem Jesus spoke words of cheer (22:18|). Then he was told to leave Jerusalem. Now he is to have "cheer" or "courage" (\tharsei\). Jesus used this very word to others (Matthew:9:2,22; strkjv@Mark:10:49|). It is a brave word. {Thou hast testified} (\diemartur“\). First aorist middle indicative second person singular of \diamarturomai\, strong word (see on ¯22:18|). {Must thou} (\se dei\). That is the needed word and on this Paul leans. His hopes (19:21|) of going to Rome will not be in vain. He can bide Christ's time now. And Jesus has approved his witness in Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:23:27 @{Was seized} (\sullˆmphthenta\). First aorist passive participle of \sullamban“\. {Rescued him having learned that he was a Roman} (\exeilamen math“n hoti Romaios estin\). Wendt, Zoeckler, and Furneaux try to defend this record of two facts by Lysias in the wrong order from being an actual lie as Bengel rightly says. Lysias did rescue Paul and he did learn that he was a Roman, but in this order. He did not first learn that he was a Roman and then rescue him as his letter states. The use of the aorist participle (\math“n\ from \manthan“\) after the principal verb \exeilamen\ (second aorist middle of \exaire“\, to take out to oneself, to rescue) can be either simultaneous action or antecedent. There is in Greek no such idiom as the aorist participle of subsequent action (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1112-14). Lysias simply reversed the order of the facts and omitted the order for scourging Paul to put himself in proper light with Felix his superior officer and actually poses as the protector of a fellow Roman citizen.

rwp@Acts:24:10 @{When the governor had beckoned to him} (\neusantos aut“i tou hˆgemonos\). Genitive absolute again with first aorist active participle of \neu“\, to give a nod, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@John:13:24|. "The governor nodding to him." {Forasmuch as I know} (\epistamenos\). Knowing, from \epistamai\. {That thou hast been of many years a judge} (\ek poll“n et“n onta se kritˆn\). The participle in indirect assertion after \epistamenos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1041). Paul goes as far as he can in the way of a compliment. For seven years Felix has been governor, \onta\ being a sort of progressive present participle with \ek poll“n et“n\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 892). {Cheerfully} (\euthum“s\). Old adverb from \euthumos\ (\eu\ and \thumos\, good spirit), here only in N.T. {Make my defence} (\apologoumai\). Old and regular word for this idea as in strkjv@Luke:21:14| which see.

rwp@Acts:24:13 @{Prove} (\parastˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \paristˆmi\, to place beside. They have made "charges," mere assertions. They have not backed up these charges with proof, "nor can they," says Paul. {Now} (\nuni\). As if they had changed their charges from the cries of the mob in Jerusalem which is true. Paul has no hired lawyer to plead for him, but he has made a masterly plea for his freedom.

rwp@Acts:24:16 @{Herein} (\en tout“i\). His whole confession of belief in verses 14,15|. {Do I also exercise myself} (\kai autos ask“\). "Do I also myself take exercise," take pains, labour, strive. Old word in Homer to work as raw materials, to adorn by art, then to drill. Our word ascetic comes from this root, one who seeks to gain piety by rules and severe hardship. Paul claims to be equal to his accusers in efforts to please God. {Void of offence} (\aproskopon\). This word belongs to the papyri and N.T. (only in Paul), not in the ancient writers. The papyri examples (Moulton Milligan, _Vocabulary_) use the word to mean "free from hurt or harm." It is a privative and \proskopt“\ (to cut or stumble against). Page likes "void of offence" since that can be either active "not stumbling" as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:10| or passive "not stumbled against" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:32| (the first toward God and the second toward men), the only other N.T. examples. Hence the word here appears in both senses (the first towards God, the second towards men). Paul adds "alway" (\dia pantos\), a bold claim for a consistent aim in life. "Certainly his conscience acquitted him of having caused any offence to his countrymen" (Rackham). Furneaux thinks that it must have been wormwood and gall to Ananias to hear Paul repeat here the same words because of which he had ordered Paul to be smitten on the mouth (23:1f.|).

rwp@Acts:24:27 @{But when two years were fulfilled} (\dietias de plˆr“theisˆs\). Genitive absolute first aorist passive of \plˆro“\, common verb to fill full. \Dietia\, late word in LXX and Philo, common in the papyri, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:28:30|. Compound of \dia\, two (\duo, dis\) and \etos\, year. Songs:Paul lingered on in prison in Caesarea, waiting for the second hearing under Felix which never came. Caesarea now became the compulsory headquarters of Paul for two years. With all his travels Paul spent several years each at Tarsus, Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, though not as a prisoner unless that was true part of the time at Ephesus for which there is some evidence though not of a convincing kind. We do not know that Luke remained in Caesarea all this time. In all probability he came and went with frequent visits with Philip the Evangelist. It was probably during this period that Luke secured the material for his Gospel and wrote part or all of it before going to Rome. He had ample opportunity to examine the eyewitnesses who heard Jesus and the first attempts at writing including the Gospel of Mark (Luke:1:1-4|). {Was succeeded by} (\elaben diadochon\). Literally, "received as successor." \Diadochos\ is an old word from \diadechomai\, to receive in succession (\dia, duo\, two) and occurs here alone in the N.T. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 115) gives papyri examples where \hoi diadochoi\ means "higher officials at the court of the Ptolemies," probably "deputies," a usage growing out of the "successors" of Alexander the Great (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_), though here the original notion of "successor" occurs (cf. Josephus, _Ant_. XX. 8, 9). Luke does not tell why Felix "received" a successor. The explanation is that during these two years the Jews and the Gentiles had an open fight in the market-place in Caesarea. Felix put the soldiers on the mob and many Jews were killed. The Jews made formal complaint to the Emperor with the result that Felix was recalled and Porcius Festus sent in his stead. {Porcius Festus} (\Porkion Phˆston\). We know very little about this man. He is usually considered a worthier man than Felix, but Paul fared no better at his hands and he exhibits the same insincerity and eagerness to please the Jews. Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 8, 9) says that "Porcius Festus was sent as a successor to Felix." The precise year when this change occurred is not clear. Albinus succeeded Festus by A.D. 62, so that it is probable that Festus came A.D. 58 (or 59). Death cut short his career in a couple of years though he did more than Felix to rid the country of robbers and _sicarii_. Some scholars argue for an earlier date for the recall of Felix. Nero became Emperor Oct. 13, A.D. 54. Poppaea, his Jewish mistress and finally wife, may have had something to do with the recall of Felix at the request of the Jews. {Desiring to gain favour with the Jews} (\thel“n te charita katathesthai tois Ioudaiois\). Reason for his conduct. Note second aorist (ingressive) middle infinitive \katathesthai\ from \katatithˆmi\, old verb to place down, to make a deposit, to deposit a favour with, to do something to win favour. Only here and strkjv@25:9| in N.T., though in some MSS. in strkjv@Mark:15:46|. It is a banking figure. {Left Paul in bonds} (\katelipe ton Paulon dedemenon\). Effective aorist active indicative of \kataleip“\, to leave behind. Paul "in bonds" (\dedemenon\, perfect passive participle of \de“\, to bind) was the "deposit" (\katathesthai\) for their favour. Codex Bezae adds that Felix left Paul in custody "because of Drusilla" (\dia Drousillan\). She disliked Paul as much as Herodias did John the Baptist. Songs:Pilate surrendered to the Jews about the death of Jesus when they threatened to report him to Caesar. Some critics would date the third group of Paul's Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) to the imprisonment here in Caesarea, some even to one in Ephesus. But the arguments for either of these two views are more specious than convincing. Furneaux would even put strkjv@2Timothy:4:9-22| here in spite of the flat contradiction with strkjv@Acts:21:29| about Trophimus being in Jerusalem instead of Miletus (2Timothy:4:20|), a "mistake" which he attributes to Luke! That sort of criticism can prove anything.

rwp@Acts:25:11 @{If I am a wrong-doer} (\ei men oun adik“\). Condition of the first class with \ei\ and the present active indicative of \adike“\ (\a\ privative and \dikˆ\): "If I am in the habit of doing injustice," assuming it to be true for the sake of argument. {And have committed anything worthy of death} (\kai axion thanatou pepracha\). Same condition with the difference in tense (\pepracha\, perfect active indicative) of a single case instead of a general habit. Assuming either or both Paul draws his conclusion. {I refuse not to die} (\ou paraitoumai to apothanein\). Old verb to ask alongside, to beg from, to deprecate, to refuse, to decline. See on ¯Luke:14:18f|. Josephus (_Life_, 29) has \thanein ou paraitoumai\. Here the articular second aorist active infinitive is in the accusative case the object of \paraitoumai\: "I do not beg off dying from myself." {But if none of these things is} (\ei de ouden estin\). \De\ here is contrasted with \men\ just before. No word for "true" in the Greek. \Estin\ ("is") in the Greek here means "exists." Same condition (first class, assumed as true). {Whereof these accuse me} (\h“n houtoi katˆgorousin mou\). Genitive of relative \hon\ by attraction from \ha\ (accusative with \katˆgorousin\) to case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\ ("of these things"). \Mou\ is genitive of person after \katˆgorousin\. {No man can give me up to them} (\oudeis me dunatai autois charisasthai\). "Can" legally. Paul is a Roman citizen and not even Festus can make a free gift (\charisasthai\) of Paul to the Sanhedrin. {I appeal unto Caesar} (\Kaisara epikaloumai\). Technical phrase like Latin _Caesarem appello_. Originally the Roman law allowed an appeal from the magistrate to the people (_provocatio ad populum_), but the emperor represented the people and so the appeal to Caesar was the right of every Roman citizen. Paul had crossed the Rubicon on this point and so took his case out of the hands of dilatory provincial justice (really injustice). Roman citizens could make this appeal in capital offences. There would be expense connected with it, but better that with some hope than delay and certain death in Jerusalem. Festus was no better than Felix in his vacillation and desire to curry favour with the Jews at Paul's expense. No doubt Paul's long desire to see Rome (19:21; strkjv@Romans:15:22-28|) and the promise of Jesus that he would see Rome (Acts:23:11|) played some part in Paul's decision. But he made it reluctantly for he says in Rome (Acts:28:19|): "I was constrained to appeal." But acquittal at the hands of Festus with the hope of going to Rome as a free man had vanished.

rwp@Acts:25:13 @{When certain days were passed} (\Hˆmer“n diagenomenon\). Genitive absolute of \diaginomai\, to come between, "days intervening." {Agrippa the King} (\Agrippas ho basileus\). Agrippa II son of Agrippa I of strkjv@Acts:12:20-23|. On the death of Herod King of Chalcis A.D. 48, Claudius A.D. 50 gave this Herod Agrippa II the throne of Chalcis so that Luke is correct in calling him king, though he is not king of Judea. But he was also given by Claudius the government of the temple and the right of appointing the high priest. Later he was given also the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias. He was the last Jewish king in Palestine, though not king of Judea. He angered the Jews by building his palace so as to overlook the temple and by frequent changes in the high priesthood. He made his capital at Caesarea Philippi which he called Neronias in honour of Nero. Titus visited it after the fall of Jerusalem. {Bernice} (\Bernikˆ\). He was her brother and yet she lived with him in shameful intimacy in spite of her marriage to her uncle Herod King of Chalcis and to Polemon King of Cilicia whom she left. Schuerer calls her both a Jewish bigot and a wanton. She afterwards became the mistress of Titus. {Arrived at Caesarea} (\katˆntˆsan eis Kaisarian\). Came down (first aorist active of \katanta“\) to Caesarea from Jerusalem. {And saluted Festus} (\aspasamenoi ton Phˆston\). The Textus Receptus has \aspasomenoi\ the future participle, but the correct text is the aorist middle participle \aspasamenoi\...as given in the Canterbury Revision...(simultaneous) action "saluting" or antecedent action like the margin "having saluted." But antecedent action is not possible here, so that simultaneous action is the only alternative. It is to be noted that the salutation synchronized with the arrival in Caesarea (note \kata\, down, the effective aorist tense), not with the departure from Jerusalem, nor with the whole journey. Rightly understood the aorist participle here gives no trouble at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 861-3).

rwp@Acts:25:21 @{When Paul had appealed} (\tou Paulou epikalesamenou\). Genitive absolute with first aorist middle participle of \epikaleomai\, the technical word for appeal (verses 11,12|). The first aorist passive infinitive \tˆrˆthˆnai\ (to be kept) is the object of the participle. {For the decision of the emperor} (\eis tˆn tou Sebastou diagn“sin\). \Diagn“sin\ (cf. \diagn“somai\ strkjv@24:22|, I will determine) is the regular word for a legal examination (\cognitio\), thorough sifting (\dia\), here only in N.T. Instead of "the Emperor" it should be "the Augustus," as \Sebastos\ is simply the Greek translation of _Augustus_, the adjective (Revered, Reverent) assumed by Octavius B.C. 27 as the \agnomen\ that summed up all his various offices instead of _Rex_ so offensive to the Romans having led to the death of Julius Caesar. The successors of Octavius assumed _Augustus_ as a title. The Greek term \Sebastos\ has the notion of worship (cf. \sebasma\ in Acts strkjv@17:25|). In the N.T. only here, verse 25; strkjv@27:1| (of the legion). It was more imposing than "Caesar" which was originally a family name (always official in the N.T.) and it fell in with the tendency toward emperor-worship which later played such a large part in Roman life and which Christians opposed so bitterly. China is having a revival of this idea in the insistence on bowing three times to the picture of Sun-Yat-Sen. {Till I should send him to Caesar} (\he“s an anapemps“ auton pros Kaisara\). Here \anapemps“\ can be either future indicative or first aorist subjunctive (identical in first person singular), aorist subjunctive the usual construction with \he“s\ for future time (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 876). Literally, "send up" (\ana\) to a superior (the emperor). Common in this sense in the papyri and _Koin‚_ writers. Here "Caesar" is used as the title of Nero instead of "Augustus" as \Kurios\ (Lord) occurs in verse 26|.

rwp@Acts:26:2 @{I think myself happy} (\hˆgˆmai emauton makarion\). See on ¯Matthew:5:3| for \makarios\. Blass notes that Paul, like Tertullus, begins with _captatio benevolentiae_, but _absque adulatione_. He says only what he can truthfully speak. For \hˆgˆmai\ see strkjv@Phillipians:3:7; strkjv@1Timothy:6:1| (perfect middle indicative of \hˆgeomai\), I have considered. {That I am to make my defence} (\mell“n apologeisthai\). Literally, "being about to make my defence." {Whereof I am accused} (\h“n egkaloumai\). Genitive with \egkaloumai\ as in strkjv@19:40| or by attraction from accusative of relative (\ha\) to case of antecedent (\pant“n\).

rwp@Acts:26:8 @{Incredible with you} (\apiston par' humin\). This old word \apiston\ (\a\ privative and \pistos\) means either unfaithful (Luke:12:46|), unbelieving (John:20:27|), or unbelievable as here). Paul turns suddenly from Agrippa to the audience (\par' humin\, plural), most of whom were probably Gentiles and scouted the doctrine of the resurrection as at Athens (17:32|). {If God doth raise the dead} (\ei ho theos nekrous egeirei\). Condition of the first class assuming that God does raise dead people. Only God can do it. This rhetorical question needs no answer, though the narrative resumed in verse 9| does it in a way.

rwp@Acts:26:22 @{Having therefore obtained} (\oun tuch“n\). Second aorist active participle of old verb \tugchan“\. {The help that is from God} (\epikourias tˆs apo tou theou\). Old word from \epikoure“\, to aid, and that from \epikouros\, ally, assister. Only here in N.T. God is Paul's ally. All of the plots of the Jews against Paul had failed so far. {I stand} (\hestˆka\). Second perfect of \histˆmi\, to place, intransitive to stand. Picturesque word (Page) of Paul's stability and fidelity (cf. strkjv@Phillipians:4:1; strkjv@Ephesians:6:13|). {Both to small and great} (\mikr“i te kai megal“i\). Dative singular (rather than instrumental, taking \marturoumenos\ middle, not passive) and use of \te kai\ links the two adjectives together in an inclusive way. These two adjectives in the singular (representative singular rather than plural) can apply to age (young and old) or to rank (Revelation:11:18|) as is specially suitable here with Festus and Agrippa present. In strkjv@Acts:8:10| (Hebrews:8:11|) the phrase explains \pantes\ (all). {Saying nothing but what} (\ouden ektos leg“n h“n\). "Saying nothing outside of those things which." The ablative relative \h“n\ is attracted into the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\ and so ablative after \ektos\ (adverbial preposition common in LXX, the papyri. In N.T. here and strkjv@1Corinthians:6:18; strkjv@15:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:2f.|). Cf. strkjv@Luke:16:29| about Moses and the prophets.

rwp@Acts:26:23 @{How that the Christ must suffer} (\ei pathˆtos ho Christos\). Literally, "if the Messiah is subject to suffering." \Ei\ can here mean "whether" as in strkjv@Hebrews:7:15|. This use of a verbal in \-tos\ for capability or possibility occurs in the N.T. alone in \pathˆtos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 157). This word occurs in Plutarch in this sense. It is like the Latin _patibilis_ and is from _pasch“_. Here alone in N.T. Paul is speaking from the Jewish point of view. Most rabbis had not rightly understood strkjv@Isaiah:53|. When the Baptist called Jesus "the Lamb of God" (John:1:29|) it was a startling idea. It is not then "must suffer" here, but "can suffer." The Cross of Christ was a stumbling-block to the rabbis. {How that he first by the resurrection of the dead} (\ei pr“tos ex anastase“s nekr“n\). Same construction with \ei\ (whether). This point Paul had often discussed with the Jews: "whether he (the Messiah) by a resurrection of dead people." Others had been raised from the dead, but Christ is the first (\pr“tos\) who arose from the dead and no longer dies (Romans:6:19|) and proclaims light (\ph“s mellei kataggellein\). Paul is still speaking from the Jewish standpoint: "is about to (going to) proclaim light." See verse 18| for "light" and strkjv@Luke:2:32|. {Both to the people and to the Gentiles} (\t“i te la“i kai tois ethnesin\). See verse 17|. It was at the word Gentiles (\ethnˆ\) that the mob lost control of themselves in the speech from the stairs (22:21f.|). Songs:it is here, only not because of that word, but because of the word "resurrection" (\anastasis\).

rwp@Acts:27:12 @{Because the haven was not commodious to winter in} (\aneuthetou tou limenos huparchontos pros paracheimasian\). Genitive absolute again present tense of \huparch“\: "The harbour being unfit (\aneuthetou\, this compound not yet found elsewhere, simplex in strkjv@Luke:9:62; strkjv@14:35; strkjv@Hebrews:6:7|) for wintering" (\paracheimasia\, only here in N.T., but in Polybius and Diodorus, in an inscription A.D. 48, from \paracheimaz“\). {The more part advised} (\hoi pleiones ethento boulˆn\). Second aorist middle indicative of \tithˆmi\, ancient idiom with \boulˆn\, to take counsel, give counsel. Lysias held a council of the officers of the ship on the issue raised by Paul. {If by any means they could reach Phoenix and winter there} (\ei p“s dunainto katantˆsantes eis Phoinika paracheimasai\). The optative \dunainto\ (present middle of \dunamai\) here with \ei\ is a condition of the fourth class with the notion of purpose implied and indirect discourse (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). "We vote for going on the chance that we may be able" (Page). Phoenix is the town of palms (John:12:13|), the modern Lutro, the only town in Crete on the southern coast with a harbour fit for wintering, though Wordsworth and Page argue for Phineka which suits Luke's description better. The verb \paracheimaz“\, to winter, is from \para\ and \cheim“n\ (see also strkjv@28:11|). Used in several _Koin‚_ writers. {Looking northeast and southeast} (\bleponta kata liba kai kata ch“ron\). There are two ways of interpreting this language. \Lips\ means the southwest wind and \ch“ros\ the northwest wind. But what is the effect of \kata\ with these words? Does it mean "facing" the wind? If so, we must read "looking southwest and northwest." But \kata\ can mean down the line of the wind (the way the wind is blowing). If so, then it is proper to translate "looking northeast and southeast." This translation suits Lutro, the other suits Phoenike. Ramsay takes it to be Lutro, and suggests that sailors describe the harbour by the way it looks as they go into it (the subjectivity of the sailors) and that Luke so speaks and means Lutro which faces northeast and southeast. On the whole Lutro has the best of the argument.

rwp@Acts:28:7 @{To the chief man of the island} (\t“i pr“t“i tˆs nˆsou\). An official title correct in Malta (Ramsay, _St. Paul_, p. 343). An inscription in Malta calls Prudens "Primate of the Maltese" (\pr“tos Melitai“n\). Here it is plainly a title and not the common use seen in strkjv@13:50; strkjv@25:2; strkjv@28:17|. {Publius} (\Popli“i\). This Greek name (\praenomen\) can be derived either from \Popilius\ or \Publius\ (cf. \publicus\ for \populicus\ from \populus\). Entertained us (\exenisen hˆmƒs\). Paul and his companions (Luke and Aristarchus). Was Julius included? On \xeniz“\ see strkjv@Acts:10:23|. {Courteously} (\philophron“s\). This old adverb from \philophr“n\ (\philos, phren\, friendly mind) occurs here alone in the N.T. In a kindly or friendly manner, all the more so because of the original suspicion of Paul as a criminal.

rwp@Acts:28:11 @{Which had wintered} (\parakecheimakoti\). Perfect active participle of \paracheimaz“\, to pass the winter. Old verb, in N.T. only strkjv@27:12; strkjv@28:11; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:6; strkjv@Titus:3:12|. The locative case agreeing with \ploi“i\. Navigation in the Mediterranean usually opened up in February (always by March), spring beginning on Feb. 9 (Page). {Whose sign was the Twin Brothers} (\parasˆm“i Dioskourois\). The word \parasˆm“i\ can be either a substantive (as Revised Version has it) or an adjective "marked by the sign," examples of both uses common in ancient Greek. \Dioskourois\ is in apposition with \parasˆm“i\. The word means the twin sons (\kouros\ or \koros\) of Zeus (\Dios\, genitive of \Zeus\) and Leda, viz., Castor and Pollux. The Attic used the dual, \t“ Dioskor“\. Castor and Pollux were the tutelary deities of sailors whose figures were painted one on each side of the prow of the ship. This sign was the name of the ship. Songs:they start in another grain ship of Alexandria bound for Rome.

rwp@Acts:28:15 @{When they heard of us} (\akousantes ta peri hˆm“n\). How "they heard the things concerning us" we do not know. Good news had its way of travel even before the days of telegraph, telephone, daily papers. Possibly Julius had to send on special couriers with news of his arrival after the shipwreck. Possibly some of the brethren in Puteoli at once (beginning of the week) sent on news to the brethren in Rome. The church in Rome had long ago received Paul's letter from Corinth at the hands of Phoebe. {To meet us} (\eis apantˆsin hˆmin\). Idiomatic phrase, "for meeting with us" (associative instrumental case). _Koin‚_ word \apantˆsis\ from verb \apanta“\, to meet, in N.T. only here; strkjv@Matthew:25:6; strkjv@1Timothy:4:17|. Use after \eis\ rather than infinitive like a translation Hebraism (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 91). {As far as the Market of Appius} (\achri Appiou Phorou\). The Forum of Appius, 90 miles from Puteoli, 40 from Rome, on the great Appian Way. The Censor Appius Claudius had constructed this part of the road, B.C. 312. Paul probably struck the Appian Way at Capua. Portions of this great stone highway are still in use. If one wishes to tread where Paul trod, he can do it here. Appii Forum had a bad reputation, the haunt of thieves, thugs, and swindlers. What would this motley crowd think of Paul chained to a soldier? {Three Taverns} (\Tri“n Tabern“n\). Genitive case after \achri\ like \Appiou Phorou\. About 30 miles from Rome. _Tres Tabernae_. {Whom} (\hous\). Two groups of the disciples came (one Gentile, one Jewish, Rackham thinks), one to Appii Forum, the other to Three Taverns. It was a joyous time and Julius would not interfere. {Took courage} (\elabe tharsos\). The old substantive \tharsos\ is here alone in the N.T. Jesus himself had exhorted Paul to be of good courage (\tharsei\ strkjv@Acts:23:11|) as he had done the disciples (John:16:33|). Paul had passed through enough to cause depression, whether he was depressed or not, but he deeply appreciated this kindly sympathy.

rwp@Acts:28:16 @{Paul was suffered to abide by himself} (\epetrapˆ t“i Paul“i menein kath' heauton\). Second aorist passive of \epitrepo\, to permit or allow. Literally, "It was permitted to Paul to abide by himself." Some late documents (Textus Receptus) here add: "The centurion delivered the prisoners to the captain of the guard" (or the \stratopedarch\). This officer used to be considered Burrus who was Prefect of the Praetorian Guard A.D. 51-62. But it is by no means certain that Julius turned the prisoners over to this officer. It seems more likely that Julius would report to the captain of the Peregrini. If so, we may be sure that Julius would give a good report of Paul to this officer who would be kindly disposed and would allow Paul comparative freedom (living by himself, in his lodging, verse 23|, his own hired house verse 30|, though still chained to a soldier). {With the soldier that guarded him} (\sun t“i phulassonti auton strati“tˆi\). Probably a new soldier every day or night, but always with this soldier chained to his right hand day and night. Now that Paul is in Rome what can he do for Christ while he awaits the outcome of his own appeal to Nero?

rwp@Acts:28:30 @{Two whole years} (\dietian holˆn\). Only here in N.T. and strkjv@24:27| which see. During these busy years in Rome Paul wrote Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians, Epistles that would immortalize any man, unless, forsooth, one or more of them was written from Ephesus or Caesarea, which has not yet been proven. {In his own hired dwelling} (\en idi“i misth“mati\). Old word, here only in N.T., that which is hired for a price (from \mistho“\ and that from \misthos\, hire). {Received} (\apedecheto\). Imperfect middle of \apodechomai\, received from time to time as they came, all that came (\eisporeuomenous\) from time to time. {Preaching} (\keruss“n\), {teaching} (\didask“n\), the two things that concerned Paul most, doing both as if his right hand was not in chains, to the amazement of those in Rome and in Philippi (Phillipians:1:12-14|). {None forbidding him} (\ak“lut“s\). Old adverb from \a\ privative and the verbal adjective \k“lutos\ (from \k“lu“\, to hinder), here only in the N.T. Page comments on "the rhythmic cadence of the concluding words." Page rejects the notion that the book is an unfinished work. It closes with the style of a concluded work. I agree with Harnack that Luke wrote the Acts during this period of two years in Rome and carried events no further because they had gone no further. Paul was still a prisoner in Rome when Luke completed the book. But he had carried Paul to "Rome, the capital of the world, _Urbi et Orbi_" (Page). The gospel of Christ has reached Rome. For the fate of Paul we must turn elsewhere. But Luke had the presence of Paul while he carried the Acts to its triumphant conclusion. Ramsay can give a good deal in proof of his claim that Luke is the greatest of all historians. Beyond a doubt his rank is high and the world can never repay its debt to this cultured physician who wrote the Gospel and the Acts.

rwp@Colossians:1:3 @{God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\t“i the“i patri tou kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). Correct text without \kai\ (and) as in strkjv@3:17|, though usually "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@11:31; strkjv@Romans:15:6; strkjv@1Peter:1:3; strkjv@Revelation:1:6|). In verse 2| we have the only instance in the opening benediction of an epistle when the name of "Jesus Christ" is not joined with "God our Father." {Always} (\pantote\). Amphibolous position between \eucharistoumen\ (we give thanks) and \proseuchomenoi\ (praying). Can go with either.

rwp@Colossians:1:15 @{The image} (\eik“n\). In predicate and no article. On \eik“n\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4; strkjv@3:18; strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Colossians:3:10|. Jesus is the very stamp of God the Father as he was before the Incarnation (John:17:5|) and is now (Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3|). {Of the invisible God} (\tou theou tou aoratou\). But the one who sees Jesus has seen God (John:14:9|). See this verbal adjective (\a\ privative and \hora“\) in strkjv@Romans:1:20|. {The first born} (\pr“totokos\). Predicate adjective again and anarthrous. This passage is parallel to the \Logos\ passage in strkjv@John:1:1-18| and to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| as well as strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| in which these three writers (John, author of Hebrews, Paul) give the high conception of the Person of Christ (both Son of God and Son of Man) found also in the Synoptic Gospels and even in Q (the Father, the Son). This word (LXX and N.T.) can no longer be considered purely "Biblical" (Thayer), since it is found In inscriptions (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 91) and in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary, etc._). See it already in strkjv@Luke:2:7| and Aleph for strkjv@Matthew:1:25; strkjv@Romans:8:29|. The use of this word does not show what Arius argued that Paul regarded Christ as a creature like "all creation" (\pƒsˆs ktise“s\, by metonomy the _act_ regarded as _result_). It is rather the comparative (superlative) force of \pr“tos\ that is used (first-born of all creation) as in strkjv@Colossians:1:18; strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Hebrews:1:6; strkjv@12:23; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|. Paul is here refuting the Gnostics who pictured Christ as one of the aeons by placing him before "all creation" (angels and men). Like \eik“n\ we find \pr“totokos\ in the Alexandrian vocabulary of the \Logos\ teaching (Philo) as well as in the LXX. Paul takes both words to help express the deity of Jesus Christ in his relation to the Father as \eik“n\ (Image) and to the universe as \pr“totokos\ (First-born).

rwp@Colossians:1:21 @{And you} (\kai humƒs\). Accusative case in a rather loose sentence, to be explained as the object of the infinitive \parastˆsai\ in verse 22| (note repeated \humƒs\ there) or as the anticipated object of \apokatˆllaxen\ if that be the genuine form in verse 22|. It can be the accusative of general reference followed by anacoluthon. See similar idiom in strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,12|. {Being in time past alienated} (\pote ontas apˆllotri“menous\). Periphrastic perfect passive participle (continuing state of alienation) of \apallotrio“\, old word from Plato on, to estrange, to render \allotrios\ (belonging to another), alienated from God, a vivid picture of heathenism as in strkjv@Romans:1:20-23|. Only other N.T. examples in strkjv@Ephesians:2:12; strkjv@4:18|. \Enemies\ (\exthrous\). Old word from \echthos\ (hatred). Active sense here, {hostile} as in strkjv@Matthew:13:28; strkjv@Romans:8:7|, not passive {hateful} (Romans:11:28|). {In your mind} (\tˆi dianoiƒi\). Locative case. \Dianoia\ (\dia, nous\), mind, intent, purpose. Old word. It is always a tragedy to see men use their minds actively against God. {In your evil works} (\en tois ergois tois ponˆrois\). Hostile purpose finds natural expression in evil deeds.

rwp@Colossians:2:3 @{In whom} (\en h“i\). This locative form can refer to \mustˆriou\ or to \Christou\. It really makes no difference in sense since Christ is the mystery of God. {All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge} (\pantes hoi thˆsauroi tˆs sophias kai gn“se“s\). See on ¯Matthew:2:11; strkjv@6:19-21| for this old word, our thesaurus, for coffer, storehouse, treasure. Paul confronts these pretentious intellectuals (Gnostics) with the bold claim that Christ sums up all wisdom and knowledge. These treasures are hidden (\apokruphoi\, old adjective from \apokrupt“\, to hide away, strkjv@Mark:4:22|) whether the Gnostics have discovered them or not. They are there (in Christ) as every believer knows by fresh and repeated discovery.

rwp@Colossians:2:4 @{This I say} (\touto leg“\). Paul explains why he has made this great claim for Christ at this point in his discussion. {May delude} (\paralogizˆtai\). Present middle subjunctive of \paralogizomai\, old verb, only here in N.T., from \para\ and \logizomai\, to count aside and so wrong, to cheat by false reckoning, to deceive by false reasoning (Epictetus). {With persuasiveness of speech} (\en pithanologiƒi\). Rare word (Plato) from \pithanos\ and \logos\, speech, adapted to persuade, then speciously leading astray. Only here in N.T. One papyrus example. The art of persuasion is the height of oratory, but it easily degenerates into trickery and momentary and flashy deceit such as Paul disclaimed in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4| (\ouk en pithois sophias logois\) where he uses the very adjective \pithos\ (persuasive) of which \pithanos\ (both from \peith“\) is another form. It is curious how winning champions of error, like the Gnostics and modern faddists, can be with plausibility that catches the gullible.

rwp@Colossians:2:5 @{Though} (\ei kai\). Not \kai ei\ (even if). {Yet} (\alla\). Common use of \alla\ in the apodosis (conclusion) of a conditional or concessive sentence. {Your order} (\tˆn taxin\). The military line (from \tass“\), unbroken, intact. A few stragglers had gone over to the Gnostics, but there had been no panic, no breach in the line. {Steadfastness} (\stere“ma\). From \stereo“\ (from \stereos\) to make steady, and probably the same military metaphor as in \taxin\ just before. The solid part of the line which can and does stand the attack of the Gnostics. See strkjv@Acts:16:5| where the verb \stereo“\ is used with \pistis\ and strkjv@1Peter:5:9| where the adjective \stereos\ is so used. In strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:6,8,11| Paul speaks of his own \taxis\ (orderly conduct).

rwp@Colossians:2:13 @{And you} (\kai humas\). Emphatic position, object of the verb \sunez“opoiˆsen\ (did he quicken) and repeated (second \humƒs\). You Gentiles as he explains. {Being dead through your trespasses} (\nekrous ontas tois parapt“masin\). Moral death, of course, as in strkjv@Romans:6:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|. Correct text does not have \en\, but even so \parapt“masin\ (from \parapipt“\, to fall beside or to lapse, strkjv@Hebrews:6:6|), a lapse or misstep as in strkjv@Matthew:6:14; strkjv@Romans:5:15-18; strkjv@Galatians:6:1|, can be still in the locative, though the instrumental makes good sense also. {And the uncircumcision of your flesh} (\kai tˆi akroboustiƒi tˆs sarkos hum“n\). "Dead in your trespasses and your alienation from God, of which the uncircumcision of your flesh was a symbol" (Abbott). Clearly so, "the uncircumcision" used merely in a metaphorical sense. {Did he quicken together with him} (\sunez“opoiˆsen sun aut“i\). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb \sunz“opoie“\, to make alive (\z“os, poie“\) with (\sun\, repeated also with \aut“i\, associative instrumental), found only here and in strkjv@Ephesians:2:5|, apparently coined by Paul for this passage. Probably \theos\ (God) is the subject because expressly so stated in strkjv@Ephesians:2:4f.| and because demanded by \sun aut“i\ here referring to Christ. This can be true even if Christ be the subject of \ˆrken\ in verse 14|. {Having forgiven us} (\charisamenos hˆmin\). First aorist middle participle of \charizomai\, common verb from \charis\ (favour, grace). Dative of the person common as in strkjv@3:13|. The act of forgiving is simultaneous with the quickening, though logically antecedent.

rwp@Colossians:2:15 @{Having put off from himself} (\apekdusamenos\). Only here and strkjv@3:9| and one MS. of Josephus (\apekdus\). Both \apodu“\ and \ekdu“\ occur in ancient writers. Paul simply combines the two for expression of complete removal. But two serious problems arise here. Is God or Christ referred to by \apekdusamenos\? What is meant by "the principalities and the powers" (\tas archas kai tas exousias\)? Modern scholars differ radically and no full discussion can be attempted here as one finds in Lightfoot, Haupt, Abbott, Peake. On the whole I am inclined to look on God as still the subject and the powers to be angels such as the Gnostics worshipped and the verb to mean "despoil" (American Standard Version) rather than "having put off from himself." In the Cross of Christ God showed his power openly without aid or help of angels. {He made a show of them} (\edeigmatisen\). First aorist active indicative of \deigmatiz“\, late and rare verb from \deigma\ (Jude:1:7|), an example, and so to make an example of. Frequent in the papyri though later than \paradeigmatiz“\ and in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:1:19| of Joseph's conduct toward Mary. No idea of disgrace is necessarily involved in the word. The publicity is made plain by "openly" (\en parrˆsiƒi\). {Triumphing over them on it} (\thriambeusas autous en aut“i\). On the Cross the triumph was won. This late, though common verb in _Koin‚_ writers (\ekthriambeu“\ in the papyri) occurs only twice in the N.T., once "to lead in triumph" (2Corinthians:2:14|), here to celebrate a triumph (the usual sense). It is derived from \thriambos\, a hymn sung in festal procession and is kin to the Latin _triumphus_ (our triumph), a triumphal procession of victorious Roman generals. God won a complete triumph over all the angelic agencies (\autous\, masculine regarded as personal agencies). Lightfoot adds, applying \thriambeusas\ to Christ: "The convict's gibbet is the victor's car." It is possible, of course, to take \aut“i\ as referring to \cheirographon\ (bond) or even to Christ.

rwp@Colossians:3:3 @{For ye died} (\apethanete gar\). Definite event, aorist active indicative, died to sin (Romans:6:2|). {Is hid} (\kekruptai\). Perfect passive indicative of \krupt“\, old verb, to hide, remains concealed, locked "together with" (\sun\) Christ, "in" (\en\) God. No hellish burglar can break that combination.

rwp@Colossians:3:16 @{The word of Christ} (\ho logos tou Christou\). This precise phrase only here, though "the word of the Lord" in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8; strkjv@4:15; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:1|. Elsewhere "the word of God." Paul is exalting Christ in this Epistle. \Christou\ can be either the subjective genitive (the word delivered by Christ) or the objective genitive (the word about Christ). See strkjv@1John:2:14|. {Dwell} (\enoikeit“\). Present active imperative of \enoike“\, to make one's home, to be at home. {In you} (\en humin\). Not "among you." {Richly} (\plousi“s\). Old adverb from \plousios\ (rich). See strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|. The following words explain \plousi“s\. {In all wisdom} (\en pasˆi sophiƒi\). It is not clear whether this phrase goes with \plousi“s\ (richly) or with the participles following (\didaskontes kai nouthetountes\, see strkjv@1:28|). Either punctuation makes good sense. The older Greek MSS. had no punctuation. There is an anacoluthon here. The participles may be used as imperatives as in strkjv@Romans:12:11f.,16|. {With psalms} (\psalmois\, the Psalms in the Old Testament originally with musical accompaniment), {hymns} (\humnois\, praises to God composed by the Christians like strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|), {spiritual songs} (\“idais pneumatikais\, general description of all whether with or without instrumental accompaniment). The same song can have all three words applied to it. {Singing with grace} (\en chariti ƒidontes\). In God's grace (2Corinthians:1:12|). The phrase can be taken with the preceding words. The verb \ƒid“\ is an old one (Ephesians:5:19|) for lyrical emotion in a devout soul. {In your hearts} (\en tais kardiais hum“n\). Without this there is no real worship "to God" (\t“i the“i\). How can a Jew or Unitarian in the choir lead in the worship of Christ as Saviour? Whether with instrument or with voice or with both it is all for naught if the adoration is not in the heart.

rwp@Colossians:3:18 @{Wives} (\kai gunaikes\). The article here distinguishes class from class and with the vocative case can be best rendered "Ye wives." Songs:with each group. {Be in subjection to your husbands} (\hupotassesthe tois andrasin\). "Own" (\idiois\) is genuine in strkjv@Ephesians:5:22|, but not here. The verb \hupotassomai\ has a military air, common in the _Koin‚_ for such obedience. Obedience in government is essential as the same word shows in strkjv@Romans:13:1,5|. {As is fitting in the Lord} (\h“s anˆken en Kuri“i\). This is an idiomatic use of the imperfect indicative with verbs of propriety in present time (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 919). Wives have rights and privileges, but recognition of the husband's leadership is essential to a well-ordered home, only the assumption is that the husband has a head and a wise one.

rwp@Colossians:4:4 @{As I ought to speak} (\h“s dei me lalˆsai\). Wonderful as Paul's preaching was to his hearers and seems to us, he was never satisfied with it. What preacher can be?

rwp@Ephesians:2:15 @{Having abolished} (\katargˆsas\). First aorist active participle of \katarge“\, to make null and void. {The enmity} (\tˆn echthran\). But it is very doubtful if \tˆn echthran\ (old word from \echthros\, hostile, strkjv@Luke:23:12|) is the object of \katargˆsas\. It looks as if it is in apposition with to \mesotoichon\ and so the further object of \lusas\. The enmity between Jew and Gentile was the middle wall of partition. And then it must be decided whether "in his flesh" (\en tˆi sarki autou\) should be taken with \lusas\ and refer especially to the Cross (Colossians:1:22|) or be taken with \katargˆsas\. Either makes sense, but better sense with \lusas\. Certainly "the law of commandments in ordinances (\ton nomon t“n entol“n en dogmasin\) is governed by \katargˆsas\. {That he might create} (\hina ktisˆi\). Final clause with first aorist active subjunctive of \ktiz“\. {The twain} (\tous duo\). The two men (masculine here, neuter in verse 14|), Jew and Gentile. {One new man} (\eis hena kainon anthr“pon\). Into one fresh man (Colossians:3:9-11|) "in himself" (\en haut“i\). Thus alone is it possible. {Making peace} (\poi“n eirˆnˆn\). Thus alone can it be done. Christ is the peace-maker between men, nations, races, classes.

rwp@Ephesians:3:9 @{To make see} (\ph“tisai\). First aorist active infinitive of \photiz“\, late verb, to turn the light on. With the eyes of the heart enlightened (Ephesians:1:18|) one can then turn the light for others to see. See strkjv@Colossians:1:26|.

rwp@Ephesians:3:19 @{And to know} (\gn“nai te\). Second aorist active infinitive with \exischusˆte\. {Which passeth knowledge} (\tˆn huperballousan tˆs gn“se“s\). Ablative case \gn“se“s\ after \huperballousan\ (from \huperball“\). All the same Paul dares to scale this peak. {That ye may be filled with all the fulness of God} (\hina plˆr“thˆte eis pƒn to plˆr“ma tou theou\). Final clause again (third use of \hina\ in the sentence) with first aorist passive subjunctive of \plˆro“\ and the use of \eis\ after it. One hesitates to comment on this sublime climax in Paul's prayer, the ultimate goal for followers of Christ in harmony with the injunction in strkjv@Matthew:5:48| to be perfect (\teleioi\) as our heavenly Father is perfect. There is nothing that any one can add to these words. One can turn to strkjv@Romans:8:29| again for our final likeness to God in Christ.

rwp@Ephesians:4:6 @{One God and Father of all} (\heis theos kai patˆr pant“n\). Not a separate God for each nation or religion. One God for all men. See here the Trinity again (Father, Jesus, Holy Spirit). {Who is over all} (\ho epi pant“n\), {and through all} (\kai dia pant“n\), {and in all} (\kai en pƒsin\). Thus by three prepositions (\epi, dia, en\) Paul has endeavoured to express the universal sweep and power of God in men's lives. The pronouns (\pant“n, pant“n, pƒsin\) can be all masculine, all neuter, or part one or the other. The last "in all" is certainly masculine and probably all are.

rwp@Ephesians:4:10 @{Is the same also} (\autos estin\). Rather, "the one who came down (\ho katabas\, the Incarnation) is himself also the one who ascended (\ho anabas\, the Ascension)." {Far above} (\huperan“\). See strkjv@1:21|. {All the heavens} (\pant“n t“n ouran“n\). Ablative case after \huperan“\. For the plural used of Christ's ascent see strkjv@Hebrews:4:14; strkjv@7:27|. Whether Paul has in mind the Jewish notion of a graded heaven like the third heaven in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:2| or the seven heavens idea one does not know. {That he might fill all things} (\hina plˆr“sˆi ta panta\). This purpose we can understand, the supremacy of Christ (Colossians:2:9f.|).

rwp@Ephesians:4:11 @{And he gave} (\kai autos ed“ken\). First aorist active indicative of \did“mi\. In strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28| Paul uses \etheto\ (more common verb, appointed), but here repeats \ed“ken\ from the quotation in verse 8|. There are four groups (\tous men\, \tous de\ three times, as the direct object of \ed“ken\). The titles are in the predicate accusative (\apostolous, prophˆtas, poimenas kai didaskalous\). Each of these words occurs in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28| (which see for discussion) except \poimenas\ (shepherds). This word \poimˆn\ is from a root meaning to protect. Jesus said the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep (John:10:11|) and called himself the Good Shepherd. In strkjv@Hebrews:13:20| Christ is the Great Shepherd (cf. strkjv@1Peter:2:25|). Only here are preachers termed shepherds (Latin _pastores_) in the N.T. But the verb \poimain“\, to shepherd, is employed by Jesus to Peter (John:21:16|), by Peter to other ministers (1Peter:5:2|), by Paul to the elders (bishops) of Ephesus (Acts:20:28|). Here Paul groups "shepherds and teachers" together. All these gifts can be found in one man, though not always. Some have only one.

rwp@Ephesians:5:26 @{That he might sanctify it} (\hina autˆn hagiasˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hagiaz“\. Jesus stated this as his longing and his prayer (John:17:17-19|). This was the purpose of Christ's death (verse 25|). {Having cleansed it} (\katharisas\). First aorist active participle of \kathariz“\, to cleanse, either simultaneous action or antecedent. {By the washing of water} (\t“i loutr“i tou hudatos\). If \loutron\ only means bath or bathing-place ( = \loutron\), then \loutr“i\ is in the locative. If it can mean bathing or washing, it is in the instrumental case. The usual meaning from Homer to the papyri is the bath or bathing-place, though some examples seem to mean bathing or washing. Salmond doubts if there are any clear instances. The only other N.T. example of \loutron\ is in strkjv@Titus:3:5|. The reference here seems to be to the baptismal bath (immersion) of water, "in the bath of water." See strkjv@1Corinthians:6:11| for the bringing together of \apelousasthe\ and \hˆgiasthˆte\. Neither there nor here does Paul mean that the cleansing or sanctification took place in the bath save in a symbolic fashion as in strkjv@Romans:6:4-6|. Some think that Paul has also a reference to the bath of the bride before marriage. Still more difficult is the phrase "with the word" (\en rˆmati\). In strkjv@John:17:17| Jesus connected "truth" with "sanctify." That is possible here, though it may also be connected with \katharisas\ (having cleansed). Some take it to mean the baptismal formula.

rwp@Ephesians:5:28 @{Even so ought} (\hout“s opheilousin\). As Christ loves the church (his body). And yet some people actually say that Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:7| gives a degrading view of marriage. How can one say that after reading strkjv@Ephesians:5:22-33| where the noblest picture of marriage ever drawn is given?

rwp@Info_Epistles-General @ IMPORTANCE OF THE GENERAL EPISTLES Without them we should be deprived of much concerning three outstanding personalities in early Christianity. We should know much less of "James, and Cephas, and John, they who were reputed to be pillars" (Galatians:2:9|). We should know less also of the Judaic (not Judaizing) form of Christianity seen in the Epistles of James and Jude:in contrast with, though not opposed to, the Pauline type. In Peter's Epistles we see, indeed, a mediating position without compromise of principle, for Peter in the Jerusalem Conference loyally supported Paul and Barnabas even if he did flicker for a moment later in Antioch. In the Johannine Epistles we see the great Eagle soar as in his Gospel in calm serenity in spite of conflict with the Gnostics who struck at the very life of Christianity itself. "The only opposition which remains worthy of a Christian's consideration is that between light and darkness, truth and falsehood, love and hate, God and the world, Christ and Antichrist, life and death" (Plummer). Songs:we can be grateful for the preservation of these little Epistles which reveal differences in the development of the great Christian leaders and the adaptation of the gospel message to changing world conditions then and now. Info_Epistles-Pastorial

rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ THE FOURTH GROUP THE PASTORAL EPISTLES FIRST TIMOTHY TITUS SECOND TIMOTHY A.D. 65 TO 68 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It is necessary to discuss introductory matters concerning the three because they are common to them all. It is true that some modern scholars admit as Pauline the personal passages in strkjv@2Timothy:1:15-18; strkjv@4:9-22| while they deny the genuineness of the rest. But that criticism falls by its own weight since precisely the same stylistic characteristics appear in these admitted passages as in the rest and no earthly reason can be advanced for Paul's writing mere scraps or for the omission of the other portions and the preservation of these by a second century forger.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ The external evidence for the Pauline authorship is strong and conclusive (...Tertullian, Theophilus, the Muratorian Canon...). "Traces of their circulation in the church before Marcion's time are clearer than those which can be found for Romans and II Corinthians" (Zahn, _Introduction to the N.T._, tr. II, p. 85). Marcion and Tatian rejected them because of the condemnation of asceticism by Paul.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ Objections on internal grounds are made on the lines laid down by Baur and followed by Renan. They are chiefly four. The "most decisive" as argued by McGiffert (_History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age_, p. 402) is that "the Christianity of the Pastoral Epistles is not the Christianity of Paul." He means as we know Paul in the other Epistles. But this charge is untrue. It is true that Paul here lists faith with the virtues, but he does that in strkjv@Galatians:5:22|. Nowhere does Paul give a loftier word about faith than in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12-17|. Another objection urged is that the ecclesiastical organization seen in the Pastoral Epistles belongs to the second century, not to the time of Paul's life. Now we have the Epistles of Ignatius in the early part of the second century in which "bishop" is placed over "elders" of which there is no trace in the New Testament (Lightfoot). A forger in the second century would certainly have reproduced the ecclesiastical organization of that century instead of the first as we have it in the Pastoral Epistles. There is only here the normal development of bishop (=elder) and deacon. A third objection is made on the ground that there is no room in Paul's life as we know it in the Acts and the other Pauline Epistles for the events alluded to in the Pastoral Epistles and it is also argued on late and inconclusive testimony that Paul was put to death A.D. 64 and had only one Roman imprisonment. If Paul was executed A.D. 64, this objection has force in it, though Bartlet (_The Apostolic Age_) tries to make room for them in the period covered by the Acts. Duncan makes the same attempt for the Pauline scraps admitted by him as belonging to the hypothecated imprisonment in Ephesus. But, if we admit the release of Paul from the first Roman imprisonment, there is ample room before his execution in A.D. 68 for the events referred to in the Pastoral Epistles and the writing of the letters (his going east to Ephesus, Macedonia, to Crete, to Troas, to Corinth, to Miletus, to Nicopolis, to Rome), including the visit to Spain before Crete once planned for (Romans:15:24,28|) and mentioned by Clement of Rome as a fact ("the limit of the west"). The fourth objection is that of the language in the Pastoral Epistles. Probably more men are influenced by this argument than by any other. The ablest presentation of this difficulty is made by P. N. Harrison in _The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles_. Besides the arguments Dr. Harrison has printed the Greek text in a fashion to help the eye see the facts. Words not in the other Pauline Epistles are in red, Pauline phrases (from the other ten) are underlined, _hapax legomena_ are marked by an asterisk. At a superficial glance one can see that the words here not in the other Pauline Epistles and the common Pauline phrases are about equal. The data as to mere words are broadly as follows according to Harrison: Words in the Pastorals, not elsewhere in the N.T. (Pastoral _hapax legomena_) 175 (168 according to Rutherford); words in the other ten Pauline Epistles not elsewhere in the N.T. 470 (627 according to Rutherford). Variations in MSS. will account for some of the difficulty of counting. Clearly there is a larger proportion of new words in the Pastorals (about twice as many) than in the other Pauline Epistles. But Harrison's tables show remarkable differences in the other Epistles also. The average of such words per page in Romans is 4, but 5.6 in II Corinthians, 6.2 in Philippians, and only 4 in Philemon. Parry (_Comm._, p. CXVIII) notes that of the 845 words in the Pastorals as compared with each other 278 occur only in I Tim., 96 only in Titus, 185 only in II Tim. "If vocabulary alone is taken, this would point to separate authorship of each epistle." And yet the same style clearly runs through all three. After all vocabulary is not wholly a personal problem. It varies with age in the same person and with the subject matter also. Precisely such differences exist in the writings of Shakespeare and Milton as critics have long ago observed. The only problem that remains is whether the differences are so great in the Pastoral Epistles as to prohibit the Pauline authorship when "Paul the aged" writes on the problem of pastoral leadership to two of the young ministers trained by him who have to meet the same incipient Gnostic heresy already faced in Colossians and Ephesians. My judgment is that, all things considered, the contents and style of the Pastoral Epistles are genuinely Pauline, mellowed by age and wisdom and perhaps written in his own hand or at least by the same amanuensis in all three instances. Lock suggests Luke as the amanuensis for the Pastorals.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE EPISTLES OF PAUL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION IMPORTANCE OF PAUL'S WORK It is impossible to put too much emphasis on the life and work of Paul as the great interpreter of Christ. He has been misunderstood in modern times as he was during his career. Some accuse him of perverting the pure gospel of Christ about the Kingdom of God into a theological and ecclesiastical system. He has been accused of rabbinizing the gospel by carrying over his Pharisaism, while others denounce him for Hellenizing the gospel with Greek philosophy and the Greek mystery-religions. But out of all the welter of attacks Paul's Epistles stand as the marvellous expression of his own conception of Christ and the application of the gospel to the life of the Christians in the Graeco-Roman world in which they lived by eternal principles that apply to us today. In order to understand Paul's Epistles one must know the Acts of the Apostles in which Luke has drawn with graphic power the sudden change of the foremost opponent of Christ into the chief expounder and proclaimer of the gospel of the Risen Christ. The Acts and the Epistles supplement each other in a marvellous way, though chiefly in an incidental fashion. It is by no means certain that Luke had access to any of Paul's Epistles before he wrote the Acts, though that was quite possible for the early Epistles. It does not greatly matter for Luke had access to Paul himself both in Caesarea and in Rome. The best life of Paul one can get comes by combining the Acts with the Epistles if he knows how to do it. Paul is Luke's hero, but he has not overdrawn the picture in the Acts as is made clear by the Epistles themselves which reveal his own grasp and growth. The literature on Paul is vast and constantly growing. He possesses a fascination for students of the New Testament and of Christianity. It is impossible here to allude even to the most important in so vast a field. Conybeare and Howson's _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_ still has value. Sir W. M. Ramsay has a small library on Paul and his Epistles. Stalker's masterful little book on Paul still grips men as does the work of Sabatier. Deissmann's _St. Paul _ continues to throw light on the great Apostle to the Gentiles. Those who wish my own view at greater length will find them in my various books on Paul (_Epochs in the Life of Paul_, _Paul the Interpreter of Christ_, etc.).

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE REASON FOR HIS EPISTLES In a real sense Paul's Epistles are tracts for the times, not for the age in general, but to meet real emergencies. He wrote to a particular church or group of churches or persons to meet immediate needs brought to his attention by messengers or letters. Dr. Deissmann contends strongly for the idea of calling Paul's Epistles "letters" rather than "Epistles." He gives a studied literary character to "epistles" as more or less artificial and written for the public eye rather than for definite effect. Four of Paul's Epistles are personal (those to Philemon, Titus, and Timothy) beyond a doubt, but in these which can properly be termed personal letters there are the principles of the gospel applied to personal, social, and ecclesiastical problems in such a pungent fashion that they possess permanent value. In the earliest group of Paul's Epistles, he reminds the Thessalonians of the official character of the Epistle which was meant for the church as a whole (1Thessalonians:5:27|). He says also: "But if any one does not obey our word by the epistle, mark this one, not to associate with him, that he may be put to shame" (2Thessalonians:3:14|). He calls attention to his signature as proof of the genuineness of every epistle (2Thessalonians:3:17|). He gave directions for the public reading of his epistles (Colossians:4:16|). He regarded them as the expression of God's will through the life of the churches and he put his whole heart into them. Two great controversies stirred Paul's life. That with the Judaizers called forth the great doctrinal group (I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans). That with the Gnostics occasioned the Epistles to the Colossians and the Ephesians (Laodiceans) and this controversy ran on into the Pastoral Epistles. Each Epistle had its particular occasion which will be pointed out in due season. But even in the short ones like Philippians, Colossians and Ephesians Paul deals with the sublimest of all themes, the Person of Christ, with a masterfulness never equalled elsewhere. Even in I Corinthians, which deals so largely with church problems in Corinth, two great chapters rise to the heights of real eloquence (Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13| on Love and Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15| on the Resurrection). Romans, the greatest of his Epistles, has the fullest discussion of Paul's gospel of grace and Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:8| has a sweep of imagination and a grasp of faith unsurpassed. Hence, while denying to Paul the artificial rules of the rhetoricians attributed to him by Blass, I cannot agree that Paul's church Epistles are mere incidental letters. It is not a question whether Paul was writing for posterity or for the present emergency. He wrote for the present emergency in the most effective possible way. He brought the whole gospel message to bear upon the varied and pressing problems of the early Christians in the power of the Holy Spirit with the eloquence of a mind all ablaze with the truth and with a heart that yearned for their souls for Christ. They are not literary epistles, but they are more than personal letters. They are thunderbolts of passion and power that struck centre and that strike fire now for all who will take the trouble to come to them for the mind of Christ that is here.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ DATES OF HIS EPISTLES Unfortunately there is not complete agreement among scholars as to the dates of some of Paul's Epistles. Baur denied the Pauline authorship of all the Epistles save I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans. Today some deny that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles, though admitting the others. Some admit Pauline fragments even in the Pastoral Epistles, but more about this when these Epistles are reached. There is more doubt about the date of Galatians than any of the others. Lightfoot put it just before Romans, while Ramsay now makes it the earliest of all. The Epistle itself has no notes of place or time. The Epistles to the Thessalonians were written from Corinth after Timothy had been sent from Athens by Paul to Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:1f.|) and had just returned to Paul (1Thessalonians:3:6|) which we know was in Corinth (Acts:18:5|) shortly before Gallio came as Proconsul of Achaia (Acts:18:12|). We can now feel certain from the new "acclamation" of Claudius in the inscription at Delphi recently explained by Deissmann in his _St. Paul_ that the Thessalonian Epistles were written 50 to 51 A.D. We know also that he wrote I Corinthians while in Ephesus (1Corinthians:16:8|) and before pentecost, though the precise year is not given. But he spent three years at Ephesus in round numbers (Acts:19:8,10; strkjv@20:31|) and he wrote just before he left, probably spring of A.D. 54 or 55. He wrote II Corinthians from Macedonia shortly after leaving Ephesus (2Corinthians:2:12|) ] apparently the same year. Romans was written from Corinth and sent by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:1f.|) unless strkjv@Romans:16| be considered a separate Epistle to Ephesus as some hold, a view that does not commend itself to me. Deissmann (_New Testament in the Light of Modern Research_, p. 33) accepts a modern theory that Ephesus was the place of the writing of the first prison Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) as well as I Corinthians and Galatians and dates them all between A.D. 52 and 55. But we shall find that these prison Epistles most naturally fall to Rome between A.D. 61 and 63. If the Pastoral Epistles are genuine, as I hold, they come between A.D. 65 and 68. Bartlet argues for a date before A.D. 64, accepting the view that Paul was put to death then. But it is still far more probable that Paul met his death in Rome in A.D. 68 shortly before Nero's death which was June 8, A.D. 68. It will thus be seen that the dates of several of the Epistles are fairly clear, while some remain quite uncertain. In a broad outlook they must all come between A.D. 50 and 68.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ The study of Paul's Epistles in the order of their writing is the best possible way of seeing his own growth as a theologian and interpreter of Christ. Sabatier long ago laid emphasis on this point in his book _The Apostle Paul_ as did Matheson in _The Spiritual Development of Paul_. It is a tragedy to have to read Paul's Epistles as printed in the usual Greek text of Westcott and Hort and the English translations, beginning with Romans and ending with Philemon. In the manuscripts that give Paul's Epistles Romans comes first as the largest and most important, but Titus and Philemon come after II Timothy (the last just before his death). We know something of Paul's early preaching how he laid emphasis on the Messiahship of Jesus proven by his resurrection, Paul himself having seen the Risen Christ (Acts:9:22|). This conviction and experience lay at the foundation of all his work and he never faltered concerning it (Acts:17:3). In the earliest sermon of which we have a full report Paul proclaims justification by faith in Christ with forgiveness of sins (Acts:13:38f.|), blessings not obtained by the law of Moses. In the unfolding life of Paul he grappled with great problems of Jewish rabbinism and Greek philosophy and mystery-religions and Paul himself grew in stature as he courageously and victoriously faced Judaizer and Gnostic. There are scholars who claim that Paul surrendered to the appeal of Gnostic sacramentarianism and so went back on his great doctrine of justification by faith, not by works. It will be shown at the proper time that this view misinterprets Paul's attitude. The events given by Luke in the Acts fit in with the self-revelation of Paul in his own Epistles as we read them. Each one of the four groups of Epistles has a slightly different style and vocabulary as is natural when one comes to think of it. The same thing is true of the plays of Shakespeare and the poems of Milton. Style is the man, Buffon says. Yes, but style is also a function of the subject. Particularly is this true of vocabulary which has to vary with the different topics treated. But style in the same man varies with different ages. Ripened old age mellows the exuberance of youth and the passionate vehemence of manhood. We shall see Paul himself in his Epistles, letting himself go in various ways and in different moods. But in all the changing phases of his life and work there is the same masterful man who glories in being the slave of Jesus Christ and the Apostle to the Gentiles. The passion of Paul is Christ and one can feel the throb of the heart of the chief of sinners who became the chief of saints in all his Epistles. There is the Pauline glow and glory in them all.

rwp@Galatians:1:8 @{If we} (\ean hˆmeis\). Condition of third class (\ean\ and aorist middle subjunctive \euaggelisˆtai\). Suppose I (literary plural) should turn renegade and preach "other than" (\par' ho\), "contrary to that which we preached." Preachers have turned away from Christ, alas, and preached "humanism" or some other new-fangled notion. The Jews termed Paul a renegade for leaving Judaism for Christianity. But it was before Paul had seen Christ that he clung to the law. Paul is dogmatic and positive here, for he knows that he is standing upon solid ground, the fact of Christ dying for us and rising again. He had seen the Risen Jesus Christ. No angel can change Paul now. {Let him be anathema} (\anathema est“\). See on ¯1Corinthians:12:3| for this word.

rwp@Galatians:1:12 @{Nor was I taught it} (\oute edidachthˆn\). He did not receive it "from man" (\para anthr“p“n\, which shuts out both \apo\ and \dia\ of verse 1|), whether Peter or any other apostle, nor was he taught it in the school of Gamaliel in Jerusalem or at the University of Tarsus. He "received" his gospel in one way, "through revelation of Jesus Christ" (\di' apokalupse“s Iˆsou Christou\). He used \parelabon\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:3| about the reception of his message from Christ. It is not necessary to say that he had only one (because of the aorist active \parelabon\, from \paralamban“\, for it can very well be constative aorist) revelation (unveiling) from Christ. In fact, we know that he had numerous visions of Christ and in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23| he expressly says concerning the origin of the Lord's Supper: "I received (\parelabon\, again) from the Lord." The Lord Jesus revealed his will to Paul.

rwp@Galatians:1:16 @{To reveal his Son in me} (\apokalupsai ton huion autou en emoi\). By "in me" (\en emoi\) Paul can mean to lay emphasis on his inward experience of grace or he may refer objectively to the vision of Christ on the way to Damascus, "in my case." Paul uses \en emoi\ in this sense (in my case) several times (verse 24; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:3; strkjv@Phillipians:1:30; strkjv@1Timothy:1:16|). Once (1Corinthians:14:11|) \en emoi\ is almost equivalent to the dative (to me). On the whole Lightfoot seems correct here in taking it to mean "in my case," though the following words suit either idea. Certainly Paul could not preach Christ among the Gentiles without the rich inward experience and in the objective vision he was called to that task. {I conferred not with flesh and blood} (\ou prosanethemˆn sarki kai haimati\). Second aorist middle indicative of \prosanatithˆmi\, old verb, double compound (\pros, ana\), to lay upon oneself in addition, to betake oneself to another, to confer with, dative case as here. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2:6|.

rwp@Galatians:2:13 @{Dissembled likewise with him} (\sunupekrithˆsan aut“i kai\). First aorist passive indicative of the double compound verb \sunupokrinomai\, a late word often in Polybius, only here in N.T. One example in Polybius means to pretend to act a part with. That idea here would help the case of the rest of the Jews, but does not accord with Paul's presentation. {Insomuch that even Barnabas} (\h“ste kai Barnabas\). Actual result expressed by \h“ste\ and the indicative and \kai\ clearly means "even." {Was carried away with their dissimulation} (\sunapˆchthˆ aut“n tˆi hupokrisei\). First aorist passive indicative of \sunapag“\, old verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:3:17|. \Hupokrisei\ is in the instrumental case and can only mean hypocrisy in the bad sense (Matthew:23:28|), not merely acting a part. It was a solemn moment when Paul saw the Jerusalem victory vanish and even Barnabas desert him as they followed the timid cowardice of Peter. It was _Paulus contra mundum_ in the cause of spiritual freedom in Christ.

rwp@Galatians:2:21 @{I do not make void the grace of God} (\ouk athet“ tˆn charin tou theou\). Common word in LXX and Polybius and on, to make ineffective (\a\ privative and \tithˆmi\, to place or put). Some critic would charge him with that after his claim to such a close mystic union with Christ. {Then Christ died for nought} (\ara Christos d“rean apethanen\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. If one man apart from grace can win his own righteousness, any man can and should. Hence (\ara\, accordingly) Christ died gratuitously (\d“rean\), unnecessarily. Adverbial accusative of \d“rea\, a gift. This verse is a complete answer to those who say that the heathen (or any mere moralist) are saved by doing the best that they know and can. No one, apart from Jesus, ever did the best that he knew or could. To be saved by law (\dia nomou\) one has to keep all the law that he knows. That no one ever did.

rwp@Galatians:3:15 @{After the manner of men} (\kata anthr“pon\). After the custom and practice of men, an illustration from life. {Though it be but a man's covenant, yet when it hath been confirmed} (\hom“s anthr“pou kekur“menˆn diathˆkˆn\). Literally, "Yet a man's covenant ratified." On \Diathˆkˆ\ as both covenant and will see on ¯Matthew:26:28; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:25; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:6; strkjv@Hebrews:9:16f|. On \kuro“\, to ratify, to make valid, see on ¯2Corinthians:2:8|. Perfect passive participle here, state of completion, authoritative confirmation. {Maketh it void} (\athetei\). See on ¯2:21| for this verb. Both parties can by agreement cancel a contract, but not otherwise. {Addeth thereto} (\epidiatassetai\). Present middle indicative of the double compound verb \epidiatassomai\, a word found nowhere else as yet. But inscriptions use \diatassomai, diataxis, diatagˆ, diatagma\ with the specialized meaning to "determine by testamentary disposition" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 90). It was unlawful to add (\epi\) fresh clauses or specifications (\diataxeis\).

rwp@Galatians:3:28 @{There can be neither} (\ouk eni\). Not a shortened form of \enesti\, but the old lengthened form of \en\ with recessive accent. Songs:\ouk eni\ means "there is not" rather than "there cannot be," a statement of a fact rather than a possibility, as Burton rightly shows against Lightfoot. {One man} (\heis\). No word for "man" in the Greek, and yet \heis\ is masculine, not neuter \hen\. "One moral personality" (Vincent). The point is that "in Christ Jesus" race or national distinctions ("neither Jew nor Greek") do not exist, class differences ("neither bond nor free," no proletarianism and no capitalism) vanish, sex rivalry ("no male and female") disappears. This radical statement marks out the path along which Christianity was to come in the sphere (\en\)...and power of Christ. Candour compels...

rwp@Galatians:4:13 @{Because of an infirmity of the flesh} (\di' astheneian tˆs sarkos\). All that we can get from this statement is the fact that Paul's preaching to the Galatians "the first time" or "the former time" (\to proteron\, adverbial accusative) was due to sickness of some kind whether it was eye trouble (4:15|) which was a trial to them or to the thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|) we do not know. It can be interpreted as applying to North Galatia or to South Galatia if he had an attack of malaria on coming up from Perga. But the narrative in strkjv@Acts:13; 14| does not read as if Paul had planned to pass by Pisidia and by Lycaonia but for the attack of illness. The Galatians understood the allusion for Paul says "Ye know" (\oidate\).

rwp@Galatians:4:14 @{A temptation to you in my flesh} (\ton peirasmon hum“n en tˆi sarki mou\). "Your temptation (or trial) in my flesh." Peirasmon can be either as we see in strkjv@James:1:2,12ff|. If trial here, it was a severe one. {Nor rejected} (\oude exeptusate\). First aorist active indicative of \ekptu“\, old word to spit out (Homer), to spurn, to loathe. Here only in N.T. Clemen (_Primitive Christianity_, p. 342) thinks it should be taken literally here since people spat out as a prophylactic custom at the sight of invalids especially epileptics. But Plutarch uses it of mere rejection. {As an angel of God} (\h“s aggelon theou\), {as Christ Jesus} (\h“s Christon Iˆsoun\). In spite of his illness and repulsive appearance, whatever it was. Not a mere "messenger" of God, but a very angel, even as Christ Jesus. We know that at Lystra Paul was at first welcomed as Hermes the god of oratory (Acts:14:12f.|). But that narrative hardly applies to these words, for they turned against Paul and Barnabas then and there at the instigation of Jews from Antioch in Pisidia and Iconium.

rwp@Galatians:4:17 @{They zealously seek you} (\zˆlousin humas\). \Zˆlo“\ is an old and a good word from \zˆlos\ (zeal, jealousy), but one can pay court with good motives or evil. Songs:here in contrast with Paul's plain speech the Judaizers bring their fawning flattery. {To shut you out} (\ekkleisai humas\). From Christ as he will show (5:4|). {That ye may seek them} (\hina autous zˆloute\). Probably present active indicative with \hina\ as in \phusiousthe\ (1Corinthians:4:6|) and \gin“skomen\ (1John:5:20|). The contraction \-oˆte\ would be \-“te\, not \-oute\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 325).

rwp@Galatians:6:8 @{Corruption} (\phthoran\). For this old word from \phtheir“\, see on ¯1Corinthians:15:42|. The precise meaning turns on the context, here plainly the physical and moral decay or rottenness that follows sins of the flesh as all men know. Nature writes in one's body the penalty of sin as every doctor knows. {Eternal life} (\z“ˆn ai“nion\). See on ¯Matthew:25:46| for this interesting phrase so common in the Johannine writings. Plato used \ai“nios\ for perpetual. See also strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|. It comes as nearly meaning "eternal" as the Greek can express that idea.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE AUTHOR Origen bluntly wrote: "Who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" as quoted by Eusebius. Origen held that the thoughts were Paul's while Clement of Rome or Luke may have written the book. Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius says) thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek. No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul. Eusebius thought it was originally written in Hebrew whether by Paul or not and translated by Clement of Rome. But there is no certainty anywhere in the early centuries. It was accepted first in the east and later in the west which first rejected it. But Jerome and Augustine accepted it. When the Renaissance came Erasmus had doubts, Luther attributed it to Apollos, Calvin denied the Pauline authorship. In North Africa it was attributed to Barnabas. In modern times Harnack has suggested Priscilla, but the masculine participle in strkjv@Hebrews:11:32| (\me diˆgoumenon\) disposes of that theory. The oldest Greek MSS. (Aleph A B) have simply \Pros Hebraious\ as the title, but they place it before the Pastoral Epistles, while the Textus Receptus puts it after the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon. In the light of all the facts one can only make a guess without a sense of certainty. For myself I should with Luther guess Apollos as the most likely author of this book which is full of the Spirit of God.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE RECIPIENTS If the title is allowed to be genuine or a fair interpretation of the Epistle, then it is addressed to Jewish (Hebrew) Christians in a local church somewhere. Dr. James Moffatt in his _Commentary_ (pp. xv to xvii) challenges the title and insists that the book is written for Gentile Christians as truly as First Peter. He argues this largely from the author's use of the LXX. For myself Dr. Moffatt's reasons are not convincing. The traditional view that the author is addressing Jewish Christians in a definite locality, whether a large church or a small household church, is true, I believe. The author seems clearly to refer to a definite church in the experiences alluded to in strkjv@Hebrews:10:32-34|. The church in Jerusalem had undergone sufferings like these, but we really do not know where the church was. Apparently the author is in Italy when he writes (Hebrews:13:24|), though "they of Italy" (\hoi apo tˆs Italias\) can mean those who have come from Italy. These Jewish Christians may even have lived in Rome itself.

rwp@Hebrews:1:3 @{Being} (\“n\). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of \eimi\) in contrast with \genomenos\ in verse 4| like \ˆn\ in strkjv@John:1:1| (in contrast with \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|) and like \huparch“n\ and \genomenos\ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {The effulgence of his glory} (\apaugasma tˆs doxˆs\). The word \apaugasma\, late substantive from \apaugaz“\, to emit brightness (\augˆ, augaz“\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4|), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in strkjv@John:12:45; strkjv@14:9|. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John:1:1|), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6|. {The very image of his substance} (\charaktˆr tˆs hupostase“s\). \Charaktˆr\ is an old word from \charass“\, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending \=tˆr\) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by \charagma\ (Acts:17:29; strkjv@Revelation:13:16f.|). Menander had already used (Moffatt) \charaktˆr\ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word \hupostasis\ for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In strkjv@11:1| \hypostasis\ is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| in his controversy with Arius. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase \morphˆ theou\ (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of \Logos\ in strkjv@John:1:1-18| is parallel to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4|. {And upholding} (\pher“n te\). Present active participle of \pher“\ closely connected with \“n\ (being) by \te\ and like strkjv@Colossians:1:17| in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. {By the word of his power} (\t“i rˆmati tˆs duname“s autou\). Instrumental case of \rˆma\ (word). See strkjv@11:3| for \rˆmati theou\ (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here \autou\ refers to God's Son as in strkjv@1:2|. {Purification of sins} (\katharismon t“n hamarti“n\). \Katharismos\ is from \kathariz“\, to cleanse (Matthew:8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Job:7:21|. Note middle participle \poiˆsamenos\ like \heuramenos\ in strkjv@9:12|. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). First aorist active of \kathiz“\, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act. {Of the Majesty on high} (\tˆs megalosunˆs en hupsˆlois\). Late word from \megas\, only in LXX (Deuteronomy:32:3; strkjv@2Samuel:7:23|, etc.), Aristeas, strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Jude:1:25|. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John:17:5|). The phrase \en hupsˆlois\ occurs in the Psalms (Psalms:93:4|), here only in N.T., elsewhere \en hupsistois\ in the highest (Matthew:21:9; strkjv@Luke:2:14|) or \en tois epouraniois\ in the heavenlies (Ephesians:1:3,20|). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.

rwp@Hebrews:1:7 @{Of the angels} (\pros tous aggelous\). "With reference to" (\pros\) as in strkjv@Luke:20:9|. Songs:"of the Son" in verse 8|. Note \men\ here and \de\ in verse 8| in carefully balanced contrast. The quotation is from strkjv@Psalms:104:4|. {Winds} (\pneumata\). "Spirits" the word also means. The meaning (note article with \aggelous\, not with \pneumata\) apparently is one that can reduce angels to the elemental forces of wind and fire (Moffatt). {A flame of fire} (\puros phloga\). Predicate accusative of \phlox\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:16:24|. Lunemann holds that the Hebrew here is wrongly rendered and means that God makes the wind his messengers (not angels) and flaming fire his servants. That is all true, but that is not the point of this passage. Preachers also are sometimes like a wind-storm or a fire.

rwp@Hebrews:3:15 @{While it is said} (\en t“i legesthai\). Locative case with \en\ of the articular present passive infinitive of \leg“\, "in the being said." Thus the author (cf. same phrase in strkjv@Psalms:42:4|) introduces the repeated quotation from verses 7,8|. Probably it is to be connected with \katasch“men\, though it can be joined with \parakaleite\ in verse 13| (treating 14| as a parenthesis).

rwp@Hebrews:4:13 @{That is not manifest} (\aphanˆs\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \phain“\, to show), here only in the N.T. God's microscope can lay bare the smallest microbe of doubt and sin. {Naked} (\gumna\). Both soul and body are naked to the eye of God. {Laid open} (\tetrachˆlismena\). Perfect passive participle of \trachˆliz“\, late verb to bend back the neck (\trachˆlos\, strkjv@Matthew:18:6|) as the surgeon does for operating, here only in N.T. See strkjv@Romans:16:4| for the peril of risking one's neck (\trachˆlon hupotithenai\). God's eyes see all the facts in our inmost hearts. There are no mental reservations from God. {With whom we have to do} (\pros hon hˆmin ho logos\). "With whom the matter or account for us is." There is a slight play here on \logos\ of verse 12|. Surely every servant of Christ today needs to gaze into this revealing mirror and be honest with himself and God.

rwp@Hebrews:5:2 @{Who can bear gently} (\metriopathein dunamenos\). Present active infinitive of the late verb \metriopathe“\ (\metrios\, moderate, \pate“\, to feel or suffer). It is a philosophical term used by Aristotle to oppose the \apatheia\ (lack of feeling) of the Stoics. Philo ranks it below \apatheia\. Josephus (_Ant_. XII. 32) uses it of the moderation of Vespasian and Titus towards the Jews. It occurs here only in the N.T. "If the priest is cordially to plead with God for the sinner, he must bridle his natural disgust at the loathsomeness of sensuality, his impatience at the frequently recurring fall, his hopeless alienation from the hypocrite and the superficial, his indignation at any confession he hears from the penitent" (Dods). {With the ignorant} (\tois agnoousin\). Dative case of the articular present active participle of \agnoe“\, old verb not to know (Mark:9:32|). {And erring} (\kai plan“menois\). Present middle participle (dative case) of \plana“\. The one article with both participles probably makes it a hendiadys, sins of ignorance (both accidence and sudden passion) as opposed to high-handed sins of presumption and deliberate purpose. People who sinned "willingly" (\hekousi“s\, strkjv@10:26|) had no provision in the Levitical system. For deliberate apostasy (3:12; strkjv@10:26|) no pardon is offered. {Is compassed with infirmity} (\perikeitai astheneian\). Present passive indicative of the old verb \perikeimai\ here used transitively as in strkjv@Acts:28:20| (\halusin\, chain). The priest himself has weakness lying around him like a chain. Not so Jesus.

rwp@Hebrews:5:11 @{Of whom} (\peri hou\). Or "concerning which," for \hou\ can be either masculine or neuter (genitive). It is the likeness of Jesus as high priest to Melchizedek that the author has in mind. He is ready to discuss that but for the fear that the reader may fail to grasp his meaning, for he will run counter to the usual Jewish ideas. Hence he pauses to stir up the interest of the readers (5:11-6:20|) before going on with the argument (7:1-28|). {Hard of interpretation} (\dusermˆneutos\). Late and rare verbal compound (\dus, hermˆneu“\), in Diodorus and Philo, here only in N.T. Hard to explain because of the strange (to Jews) line taken, but still more because of their dulness. {Dull of hearing} (\n“throi tais akoais\). Old adjective (papyri also), from negative \nˆ\ and \“the“\, to push, no push in the hearing, slow and sluggish in mind as well as in the ears. In N.T. only here and strkjv@6:12| (slack, sluggish). Plato calls some students \n“throi\ (stupid).

rwp@Hebrews:7:24 @{Because he abideth} (\dia to menein auton\). Same idiom as in verse 23|, "because of the abiding as to him" (accusative of general reference, \auton\). {Unchangeable} (\aparabaton\). Predicate adjective in the accusative (feminine of compound adjective like masculine), late double compound verbal adjective in Plutarch and papyri, from alpha privative and \parabain“\, valid or inviolate. The same idea in verse 3|. God placed Christ in this priesthood and no one else can step into it. See verse 11| for \hier“sunˆ\.

rwp@Hebrews:10:12 @{When he had offered} (\prosenegkas\). Second aorist active participle (with first aorist ending \-as\ in place of \-on\) of \prospher“\, single act in contrast to present participle \prospher“n\ above. {One sacrifice} (\mian thusian\). This the main point. The one sacrifice does the work that the many failed to do. One wonders how priests who claim that the "mass" is the sacrifice of Christ's body repeated explain this verse. {For ever} (\eis to diˆnekes\). Can be construed either with \mian thusian\ or with \ekathisen\ (sat down). See strkjv@1:3| for \ekathisen\.

rwp@Hebrews:10:17 @Here again the writer adds "their iniquities" (\t“n anomi“n\) to "sins" of strkjv@8:12| and reads \mnˆsthˆsomai\ (first future passive) with \ou mˆ\ rather than \mnˆsth“\ (first aorist passive subjunctive) of strkjv@8:12| (the more common idiom). It is uncertain also whether the writer means verse 17| to be the principal clause with 15,16| as subordinate or the whole quotation to be subordinate to \meta to eirˆkenai\ of verse 15| with anacoluthon in verse 18|. At any rate verse 17| in the quotation does not follow immediately after verse 16| as one can see in strkjv@8:10-12| (skipping part of strkjv@8:10| and all of strkjv@8:11|).

rwp@Hebrews:10:22 @{Let us draw near} (\proserch“metha\). Present middle volitive subjunctive as in strkjv@4:16| with which exhortation the discussion began. There are three exhortations in verses strkjv@22:25| (Let us draw near, \proserch“metha\, let us hold fast, \katech“men\, let us consider one another, \katano“men allˆlous\). Four items are added to this first exhortation. {With a true heart} (\meta alˆthinˆs kardias\). With loyalty and fealty. {In fulness of faith} (\en plˆrophoriƒi piste“s\). See strkjv@6:11| for this very phrase. {Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience} (\rerantismenoi tas kardias apo suneidˆse“s ponˆras\). Perfect passive participle of \rantiz“\ with the accusative retained in the passive, an evident allusion to the sprinkling of blood in the old tabernacle (9:18-22|) and the shedding of Christ's blood for the cleansing of our consciences (10:1-4|). Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:2| for "the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." {Our body washed with pure water} (\lelousmenoi to s“ma hudati kathar“i\). Perfect passive (or middle) of \lou“\, old verb to bathe, to wash. Accusative also retained if passive. \Hudati\ can be either locative (in) or instrumental (with). See strkjv@Ephesians:5:26; strkjv@Titus:3:5| for the use of \loutron\. If the reference here is to baptism (quite doubtful), the meaning is a symbol (Dods) of the previous cleansing by the blood of Christ.

rwp@Hebrews:10:26 @{If we sin wilfully} (\hekousi“s hamartanont“n hˆm“n\). Genitive absolute with the present active participle of \hamartan“\, circumstantial participle here in a conditional sense. {After that we have received} (\meta to labein\). "After the receiving" (accusative case of the articular infinitive second aorist active of \lamban“\ after \meta\). {Knowledge} (\epign“sin\). "Full knowledge," as in strkjv@6:4f|. {There remaineth no more} (\ouketi apoleipetai\). "No longer is there left behind" (present passive indicative as in strkjv@4:9|), for one has renounced the one and only sacrifice for sin that does or can remove sin (10:1-18|).

rwp@Hebrews:10:34 @{Ye had compassion on} (\sunepathˆsate\). First aorist active indicative of \sunpathe“\, old verb to have a feeling with, to sympathize with. {Them that were in bonds} (\tois desmiois\). Associative instrumental case, "with the prisoners" (the bound ones). Used of Paul (Ephesians:3:1; strkjv@2Timothy:1:8|). {Took joyfully} (\meta charas prosedexasthe\). First aorist middle (indirect) indicative, "ye received to yourselves with joy." See strkjv@Romans:13:1,3; strkjv@15:7|. {The spoiling} (\tˆn harpagˆn\). "The seizing," "the plundering." Old word from \harpaz“\. See strkjv@Matthew:23:35|. {Of your possessions} (\t“n huparchont“n hum“n\). "Of your belongings." Genitive of the articular present active neuter plural participle of \huparch“\ used as a substantive (cf. \hum“n\ genitive) as in strkjv@Matthew:19:21|. {That ye yourselves have} (\echein heautous\). Infinitive (present active of \ech“\) in indirect discourse after \gin“skontes\ (knowing) with the accusative of general reference (\heautous\, as to yourselves), though some MSS. omit \heautous\, some have \heautois\ (dative, for yourselves), and some \en heautois\ (in yourselves). The predicate nominative \autoi\ could have been used agreeing with \gin“skontes\ (cf. strkjv@Romans:1:22|). {A better possession} (\kreissona huparxin\). Common word in the same sense as \ta huparchonta\ above, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:2:45|. In place of their plundered property they have treasures in heaven (Matthew:6:20|). {Abiding} (\menousan\). Present active participle of \men“\. No oppressors (legal or illegal) can rob them of this (Matthew:6:19ff.|).

rwp@Hebrews:11:3 @{By faith} (\pistei\). Instrumental case of \pistis\ which he now illustrates in a marvellous way. Each example as far as verse 31| is formally and with rhetorical skill introduced by \pistei\. After that only a summary is given. {We understand} (\nooumen\). Present active indicative of \noe“\, old verb (from \nous\, intellect) as in strkjv@Matthew:15:17; strkjv@Romans:1:20|. The author appeals to our knowledge of the world in which these heroes lived as an illustration of faith. Recent books by great scientists like Eddington and Jeans confirm the position here taken that a Supreme Mind is behind and before the universe. Science can only stand still in God's presence and believe like a little child. {The worlds} (\tous ai“nas\). "The ages" as in strkjv@1:2| (cf. Einstein's fourth dimension, time). Accusative case of general reference. {Have been framed} (\katˆrtisthai\). Perfect passive infinitive of \katartiz“\, to mend, to equip, to perfect (Luke:6:40|), in indirect discourse after \nooumen\. {Songs:that} (\eis to\). As a rule \eis to\ with the infinitive is final, but sometimes as here it expresses result as in strkjv@Romans:12:3| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003). {Hath been made} (\gegonenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \ginomai\. {What is seen} (\to blepomenon\). Present passive articular participle (accusative case of general reference) of \blep“\. {Of things which do appear} (\ek phainomen“n\). Ablative case with \ek\ (out of) of the present passive participle. The author denies the eternity of matter, a common theory then and now, and places God before the visible universe as many modern scientists now gladly do.

rwp@Hebrews:11:19 @{Accounting} (\logisamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \logizomai\. Abraham had God's clear command that contravened God's previous promise. This was his solution of his difficult situation. {God is able} (\dunatai ho theos\). God had given him Isaac in his old age. God can raise him from the dead. It was Abraham's duty to obey God. {In a parable} (\en parabolˆi\). See already strkjv@9:9| for \parabolˆ\. Because of (\hothen\, whence) Abraham's superb faith Isaac was spared and so he received him back (\ekomisato\) as almost from the dead. This is the test that Abraham stood of which James speaks (James:2:23|).

rwp@Hebrews:12:28 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Ground for loyalty to Christ and for calm trust in God. {That cannot be shaken} (\asaleuton\). Old compound with alpha privative and the verbal adjective from \saleu“\ just used. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:27:41|. {Let us have grace} (\ech“men charin\). Present active volitive subjunctive of \ech“\, "Let us keep on having grace" as in strkjv@4:16|, though it can mean "Let us keep on having gratitude" as in strkjv@Luke:17:9|. {Whereby} (\di' hˆs\). That is \dia charitos\. {We may offer service} (\latreu“men\). This subjunctive in a relative clause can be volitive like \ech“men\ just before (cf. imperative \stˆte\ in strkjv@1Peter:5:12|) or it might be the futuristic subjunctive as in strkjv@8:3| (\ho prosenegkˆi\). {Well pleasing} (\euarest“s\). Old compound adverb, here only in N.T. {With reverence and awe} (\meta eulabeias kai deous\). For \eulabeia\ see strkjv@5:7; strkjv@11:7|. \Deos\ is apprehension of danger as in a forest. "When the voice and tread of a wild beast are distinctly heard close at hand the \deos\ becomes \phobos\" (Vincent).

rwp@Hebrews:13:4 @{Let marriage be} (\ho gamos\). No verb in the Greek. The copula can be supplied either \estin\ (is) or \est“\ (let be, imperative). {Had in honour} (\timios\). Old adjective from \timˆ\ (honour) as in strkjv@Acts:5:34|. \Gamos\ elsewhere in the N.T., means the wedding or wedding feast (Matthew:22:29; strkjv@John:2:1|). {Undefiled} (\amiantos\). Old compound word (alpha privative and verbal of \miain“\, to defile), already in strkjv@Hebrews:7:26|. \Miain“ tˆn koitˆn\ is a common expression for adultery. {Fornicators} (\pornous\). Unmarried and impure. {Adulterers} (\moichous\). Impure married persons. God will judge both classes whether men do or not.

rwp@Hebrews:13:8 @{Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today, yea and forever} (\Iˆsous Christos echthes kai sˆmeron ho autos kai eis tous ai“nas\). There is no copula in the Greek. Vincent insists that \estin\ be supplied between \Iˆsous\ and \Christos\, "Jesus is Christ," but it more naturally comes after \Christos\ as the Revised Version has it. The old adverb \echthes\ is rare in the N.T. (John:4:52; strkjv@Acts:7:28; strkjv@Hebrews:13:8|). Here it refers to the days of Christ's flesh (2:3; strkjv@5:7|) and to the recent work of the leaders (13:7|). "Today" (\sˆmeron\, strkjv@3:15|) is the crisis which confronts them. "Forever" (\eis tous ai“nas\) is eternity as well as the Greek can say it. Jesus Christ is eternally "the same" (1:12|) and the revelation of God in him (1:1f.|) is final and never to be superseded or supplemented (Moffatt). Hence the peril of apostasy from the only hope of man.

rwp@James:1:19 @{Ye know this} (\iste\). Or "know this." Probably the perfect active indicative (literary form as in strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@Hebrews:12:17|, unless both are imperative, while in strkjv@James:4:4| we have \oidate\, the usual vernacular _Koin‚_ perfect indicative). The imperative uses only \iste\ and only the context can decide which it is. \Esto\ (let be) is imperative. {Swift to hear} (\tachus eis to akousai\). For this use of \eis to\ with the infinitive after an adjective see strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:9|. For \eis to\ after adjectives see strkjv@Romans:16:19|. The picture points to listening to the word of truth (verse 18|) and is aimed against violent and disputatious speech (chapter strkjv@3:1-12|). The Greek moralists often urge a quick and attentive ear. {Slow to speak} (\bradus eis to lalˆsai\). Same construction and same ingressive aorist active infinitive, slow to begin speaking, not slow while speaking. {Slow to anger} (\bradus eis orgˆn\). He drops the infinitive here, but he probably means that slowness to speak up when angry will tend to curb the anger.

rwp@James:1:21 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Because of this principle. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:25|. {Putting away} (\apothemenoi\). Second aorist middle participle of \apotithˆmi\, to put off, metaphor of removing clothing as in strkjv@Romans:13:12; strkjv@Colossians:3:8; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22,25; strkjv@1Peter:2:1|. {Filthiness} (\ruparian\). Late word (Plutarch) from \ruparos\, dirty (James:2:2|), here only in N.T. Surely a dirty garment. {Overflowing of wickedness} (\perisseian kakias\). \Perisseia\ is a late word (from \perissos\, abundant, exceeding), only four times in N.T., in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2| with \charas\ (of joy), in strkjv@Romans:5:17| with \charitos\ (of grace). \Kakia\ (from \kakos\, evil) can be either general like \ruparia\ (filthiness, naughtiness), or special like "malice." But any of either sense is a "superfluity." {With meekness} (\en pra–tˆti\). In docility. "The contrast is with \orgˆ\ rather than \kakias\" (Ropes). {The implanted word} (\ton emphuton logon\). This old verbal adjective (from \emphu“\ to implant, to grow in), only here in N.T., meaning properly ingrown, inborn, not \emphuteuton\ (engrafted). It is "the rooted word" (verse 18|), sown in the heart as the soil or garden of God (Matthew:13:3-23; strkjv@15:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:6|). {Able to save} (\dunamenon s“sai\). Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:9; strkjv@James:2:14; strkjv@4:12; strkjv@5:20; strkjv@Romans:1:16|. Ultimate salvation (effective aorist active infinitive \s“sai\ from \s“z“\).

rwp@James:2:8 @{Howbeit} (\mentoi\). Probably not adversative here, but simply confirmatory, "if now," "if indeed," "if really." Common in Xenophon in this sense. See the contrast (\de\) in verse 9|. {If ye fulfil} (\ei teleite\). Condition of first class, assumed as true with \ei\ and present active indicative of \tele“\, old verb, to bring to completion, occurring in strkjv@Romans:2:27| also with \nomos\ (law). Jesus used \plˆro“\ in strkjv@Matthew:4:17|. James has \tˆre“\ in strkjv@2:10|. {The royal law} (\nomon basilikon\). Old adjective for royal, regal (from \basileus\ king), as of an officer (John:4:46|). But why applied to \nomos\? The Romans had a phrase, _lex regia_, which came from the king when they had kings. The absence of the article is common with \nomos\ (4:11|). It can mean a law fit to guide a king, or such as a king would choose, or even the king of laws. Jesus had said that on the law of love hang all the law and the prophets (Matthew:22:40|), and he had given the Golden Rule as the substance of the Law and the prophets (Matthew:7:12|). This is probably the royal law which is violated by partiality (James:2:3|). It is in accord with the Scripture quoted here (Leviticus:19:18|) and ratified by Jesus (Luke:10:28|).

rwp@James:2:13 @{Without mercy} (\aneleos\). Found here only save a doubtful papyrus example (\anele“s\) for the vernacular \anile“s\ and the Attic \anˆleˆs\. For this principle of requital see strkjv@Matthew:5:7; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@7:1f.; strkjv@18:33|. {Glorieth against} (\katakauchƒtai\). Present middle indicative of the old compound verb \katakauchaomai\, to exult over (down), in N.T. only here, strkjv@3:14; strkjv@Romans:11:18|. Only mercy can triumph over justice with God and men. "Mercy is clothed with the divine glory and stands by the throne of God" (Chrysostom). See strkjv@Romans:8:31-39; strkjv@Matthew:9:13; strkjv@12:7|.

rwp@James:2:18 @{Yea, a man will say} (\all' erei tis\). Future active of \eipon\. But \all'\ here is almost certainly adversative (But some one will say), not confirmatory. James introduces an imaginary objector who speaks one sentence: "Thou hast faith and I have works" (\Su pistin echeis kag“ erga ech“\). Then James answers this objector. The objector can be regarded as asking a short question: "Hast thou faith?" In that case James replies: "I have works also." {Show me thy faith apart from thy works} (\deixon moi tˆn pistin sou ch“ris t“n erg“n\). This is the reply of James to the objector. First aorist active imperative of \deiknumi\, tense of urgency. The point lies in \ch“ris\, which means not "without," but "apart from," as in strkjv@Hebrews:11:6| (with the ablative case), "the works that properly belong to it and should characterise it" (Hort). James challenges the objector to do this. {And I by my works will shew thee my faith} (\kag“ soi deix“ ek t“n erg“n mou tˆn pistin\). It is not faith _or_ works, but proof of real faith (live faith _vs_. dead faith). The mere profession of faith with no works or profession of faith shown to be alive by works. This is the alternative clearly stated. Note \pistin\ (faith) in both cases. James is not here discussing "works" (ceremonial works) as a means of salvation as Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:4|, but works as proof of faith.

rwp@James:3:1 @{Be not many teachers} (\mˆ polloi didaskaloi ginesthe\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and present middle imperative of \ginomai\. "Stop becoming many teachers" (so many of you). There is thus a clear complaint that too many of the Jewish Christians were attempting to teach what they did not clearly comprehend. There was a call for wise teachers (verses 13f.|), not for foolish ones. This soon became an acute question, as one can see in I Cor. 12 to 14. They were not all teachers (1Corinthians:12:28f.; strkjv@14:26|). The teacher is here treated as the wise man (3:13-18|) as he ought to be. The rabbi was the teacher (Matthew:23:7f.; strkjv@John:1:38; strkjv@3:10; strkjv@20:16|). Teachers occupied an honourable position among the Christians (Ephesians:4:11; strkjv@Acts:13:1|). James counts himself a teacher (we shall receive, strkjv@3:1|) and this discussion is linked on with strkjv@1:19-27|. Teachers are necessary, but incompetent and unworthy ones do much harm. {Heavier judgment} (\meizon krima\). "Greater sentence." See strkjv@Mark:12:40; strkjv@Luke:20:47| for \perrisoteron krima\ (the sentence from the judge, strkjv@Romans:13:2|). The reason is obvious. The pretence of knowledge adds to the teacher's responsibility and condemnation.

rwp@James:3:6 @{The tongue is a fire} (\hˆ gl“ssa pur\). Songs:necessarily since there is no article with \pur\ (apparently same word as German _feuer_, Latin _purus_, English _pure, fire_). This metaphor of fire is applied to the tongue in strkjv@Proverbs:16:27; strkjv@26:18-22|; Sirach strkjv@28:22. {The world of iniquity} (\ho kosmos tˆs adikias\). A difficult phrase, impossible to understand according to Ropes as it stands. If the comma is put after \pur\ instead of after \adikias\, then the phrase may be the predicate with \kathistatai\ (present passive indicative of \kathistˆmi\, "is constituted," or the present middle "presents itself"). Even so, \kosmos\ remains a difficulty, whether it means the "ornament" (1Peter:3:3|) or "evil world" (James:1:27|) or just "world" in the sense of widespread power for evil. The genitive \adikias\ is probably descriptive (or qualitative). Clearly James means to say that the tongue can play havoc in the members of the human body. {Which defileth the whole body} (\hˆ spilousa holon to s“ma\). Present active participle of \spilo“\ late _Koin‚_, verb, to stain from \spilos\ (spot, also late word, in N.T. only in strkjv@Ephesians:5:27; strkjv@2Peter:2:13|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Judges:1:23|. Cf. strkjv@1:27| \aspilon\ (unspotted). {Setteth on fire} (\phlogizousa\). Present active participle of \phlogiz“\, old verb, to set on fire, to ignite, from \phlox\ (flame), in N.T. only in this verse. See \anaptei\ (verse 5|). {The wheel of nature} (\ton trochon genese“s\). Old word for wheel (from \trech“\, to run), only here in N.T. "One of the hardest passages in the Bible" (Hort). To what does \trochon\ refer? For \genese“s\ see strkjv@1:23| apparently in the same sense. Vincent suggests "the wheel of birth" (cf. strkjv@Matthew:1:1,18|). The ancient writers often use this same phrase (or \kuklos\, cycle, in place of \trochos\), but either in a physiological or a philosophical sense. James may have caught the metaphor from the current use, but certainly he has no such Orphic or Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls, "the unending round of death and rebirth" (Ropes). The wheel of life may be considered either in motion or standing still, though setting on fire implies motion. There is no reference to the zodiac. {And is set on fire by hell} (\kai phlogizomenˆ hupo gehennˆs\). Present passive participle of \phlogiz“\, giving the continual source of the fire in the tongue. For the metaphor of fire with \gehenna\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:22|.

rwp@James:4:2 @{Ye lust} (\epithumeite\). Present active indicative of \epithume“\, old word (from \epi, thumos\, yearning passion for), not necessarily evil as clearly not in strkjv@Luke:22:15| of Christ, but usually so in the N.T., as here. Coveting what a man or nation does not have is the cause of war according to James. {Ye kill and covet} (\phoneuete kai zˆloute\). Present active indicatives of \phoneu“\ (old verb from \phoneus\, murderer) and \zˆlo“\, to desire hotly to possess (1Corinthians:12:31|). It is possible (perhaps probable) that a full stop should come after \phoneuete\ (ye kill) as the result of lusting and not having. Then we have the second situation: "Ye covet and cannot obtain (\epituchein\, second aorist active infinitive of \epitugchan“\), and (as a result) ye fight and war." This punctuation makes better sense than any other and is in harmony with verse 1|. Thus also the anticlimax in \phoneuete\ and \zˆloute\ is avoided. Mayor makes the words a hendiadys, "ye murderously envy." {Ye have not, because ye ask not} (\ouk echete dia to mˆ aiteisthai humas\). James refers again to \ouk echete\ (ye do not have) in verse 2|. Such sinful lusting will not obtain. "Make the service of God your supreme end, and then your desires will be such as God can fulfil in answer to your prayer" (Ropes). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:6:31-33|. The reason here is expressed by \dia\ and the accusative of the articular present middle infinitive of \aite“\, used here of prayer to God as in strkjv@Matthew:7:7f|. \Humƒs\ (you) is the accusative of general reference. Note the middle voice here as in \aiteisthe\ in 3|. Mayor argues that the middle here, in contrast with the active, carries more the spirit of prayer, but Moulton (_Prol_., p. 160) regards the distinction between \aite“\ and \aiteomai\ often "an extinct subtlety."

rwp@James:5:3 @{Are rusted} (\kati“tai\). Perfect passive indicative (singular for \chrusos\ and \arguros\ are grouped as one) of \katio“\, late verb (from \ios\, rust) with perfective sense of \kata\, to rust through (down to the bottom), found only here, Sir. strkjv@12:11, Epictetus (_Diss_. 4, 6, 14). {Rust} (\ios\). Poison in strkjv@James:3:8; strkjv@Romans:3:13| (only N.T. examples of old word). Silver does corrode and gold will tarnish. Dioscorides (V.91) tells about gold being rusted by chemicals. Modern chemists can even transmute metals as the alchemists claimed. {For a testimony} (\eis marturion\). Common idiom as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4| (use of \eis\ with accusative in predicate). {Against you} (\humin\). Dative of disadvantage as in strkjv@Mark:6:11| (\eis marturion autois\) where in the parallel passage (Luke:9:5|) we have \eis marturion ep' autous\. "To you" will make sense, as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4; strkjv@10:18|, but "against" is the idea here as in strkjv@Luke:21:13|. {Shall eat} (\phagetai\). Future middle (late form from \ephagon\) of defective verb \esthi“\, to eat. {Your flesh} (\tas sarkas\). The plural is used for the fleshy parts of the body like pieces of flesh (Revelation:17:16; strkjv@19:18,21|). Rust eats like a canker, like cancer in the body. {As fire} (\h“s pur\). Editors differ here whether to connect this phrase with \phagetai\, just before (as Mayor), for fire eats up more rapidly than rust, or with the following, as Westcott and Hort and Ropes, that is the eternal fire of Gehenna which awaits them (Matthew:25:41; strkjv@Mark:9:44|). This interpretation makes a more vivid picture for \ethˆsaurisate\ (ye have laid up, first aorist active indicative of \thˆsauriz“\, strkjv@Matthew:6:19| and see strkjv@Proverbs:16:27|), but it is more natural to take it with \phagetai\.

rwp@James:5:14 @{Is any among you sick?} (\asthenei tis en humin;\). Present active indicative of \asthene“\, old verb, to be weak (without strength), often in N.T. (Matthew:10:8|). {Let him call for} (\proskalesasth“\). First aorist (ingressive) middle imperative of \proskale“\. Note change of tense (aorist) and middle (indirect) voice. Care for the sick is urged in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| ("help the sick"). Note the plural here, "elders of the church, as in strkjv@Acts:20:17; strkjv@15:6,22; strkjv@21:18; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| (bishops). {Let them pray over him} (\proseuxasth“san ep' auton\). First aorist middle imperative of \proseuchomai\. Prayer for the sick is clearly enjoined. {Anointing him with oil} (\aleipsantes elai“i\). First aorist active participle of \aleiph“\, old verb, to anoint, and the instrumental case of \elaion\ (oil). The aorist participle can be either simultaneous or antecedent with \proseuxasth“san\ (pray). See the same use of \aleiph“ elai“i\ in strkjv@Mark:6:13|. The use of olive oil was one of the best remedial agencies known to the ancients. They used it internally and externally. Some physicians prescribe it today. It is clear both in strkjv@Mark:6:13| and here that medicinal value is attached to the use of the oil and emphasis is placed on the worth of prayer. There is nothing here of the pagan magic or of the later practice of "extreme unction" (after the eighth century). It is by no means certain that \aleiph“\ here and in strkjv@Mark:6:13| means "anoint" in a ceremonial fashion rather than "rub" as it commonly does in medical treatises. Trench (N.T. Synonyms) says: "\Aleiphein\ is the mundane and profane, \chriein\ the sacred and religious, word." At bottom in James we have God and medicine, God and the doctor, and that is precisely where we are today. The best physicians believe in God and want the help of prayer.

rwp@Info_John @ THE AUTHOR THE APOSTLE JOHN Loisy (_Leviticus:Quatr. Evangile_, p. 132) says that if one takes literally what is given in the body of the Gospel of the Beloved Disciple he is bound to be one of the twelve. Loisy does not take it "literally." But why not? Are we to assume that the author of this greatest of books is playing a part or using a deliberate artifice to deceive? It may be asked why John does not use his own name instead of a _nom de plume_. Reference can be made to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, no one of which gives the author's name. One can see a reason for the turn here given since the book consists so largely of personal experiences of the author with Christ. He thus avoids the too frequent use of the personal pronoun and preserves the element of witness which marks the whole book. One by one the other twelve apostles disappear if we test their claims for the authorship. In the list of seven in chapter strkjv@John:21| it is easy to drop the names of Simon Peter, Thomas, and Nathanael. There are left two unnamed disciples and the sons of Zebedee (here alone mentioned, not even named, in the book). John in this Gospel always means the Baptist. Why does the author so uniformly slight the sons of Zebedee if not one of them himself? In the Acts Luke does not mention his own name nor that of Titus his brother, though so many other friends of Paul are named. If the Beloved Disciple is John the Apostle, the silence about James and himself is easily understood. James is ruled out because of his early death (Acts:12:1|). The evidence in the Gospel points directly to the Apostle John as the author.

rwp@Info_John @ THE UNITY OF THE GOSPEL This has been attacked in various ways in spite of the identity of style throughout. There are clearly three parts in the Gospel: the Prologue, strkjv@John:1:1-18|, the Body of the Book, strkjv@John:1:19-20:31|, the Epilogue, strkjv@John:21|. But there is no evidence that the Prologue was added by another hand, even though the use of Logos (Word) for Christ does not occur thereafter. This high conception of Christ dominates the whole book. Some argue that the Epilogue was added by some one else than John, but here again there is no proof and no real reason for the supposition. It is possible, as already stated, that John stopped at strkjv@John:20:31| and then added strkjv@John:21| before sending the book forth after his friends added strkjv@John:21:24| as their endorsement of the volume. Some scholars claim that they detect various displacements in the arrangement of the material, but such subjective criticism is never convincing. There are undoubtedly long gaps in the narrative as between chapters 5 and 6, but John is not giving a continuous narrative, but only a supplementary account assuming knowledge of the Synoptics. It is held that editorial comments by redactors can be detected here and there. Perhaps, and perhaps not. The unity of this great book stands even if that be true.

rwp@Info_John @ A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE (SINCE 1880) ABBOT, EZRA, _On the Authorship of the Fourth Gospel_. ABBOT, PEABODY, and LIGHTFOOT, _The Fourth Gospel_. ABBOTT, E.A., _Johannine Vocabulary_.,_Johannine Grammar_. APPEL, _Die Echtheit des Johannesevangeliums_. ASKWITH, E.H., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_. BACON, B.W., _The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate_. BALDENSPERGER, W., _Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums_. BARTH, K., _The Gospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels_. BAUER, W., _Das Johannes-Evangelium_. 2 Aufl.. BELZER, _Das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes_. BERNARD, J. H., _Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1929), in Int. Crit. Comm. BERT, _Das Evangelium des Johannes_. BLASS, F., _Evangelium secundum Johannem_. BROOKE, A. E., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (Cambridge Biblical Essays, pp. 289 to 328. 1909). BURCH, VACHER, _The Structure and Message of St. John's Gospel_. BURNEY, C. F., _The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel_. CALMES, _L'Evangile selon S. Jean_. CANDLER, W. A., _Practical Studies in the Gospel of John_ (3 vols,, 1912-15). CARPENTER, J. ESTLIN, _The Johannine Writings_. CHAPMAN, DOM JOHN, _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_. CHARNWOOD, LORD, _According to St. John_. CLEMEN, C., _Die Entstehung des Johannesevangeliums_. D'ALMA, _Lamentations:Controverse du quatrieme evangile_.,Philo et le quotrieme evangile_. DAUSCH' _Das Johannesevangelium_. DELFF, H., _Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt_.,Neue Beitrage zur Kritik und Erklarung des vierten Evangeliums. DODS, M., _Expositor's Bible_ (2 vols., 1891).,Expositor's Greek Testament_. DRUMMOND, JAMES, _An Inquiry into the Character and Author- ship of the Fourth Gospel_. EVANS, H. H., _St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel_. EWALD, P., _Das Hauptproblem der Evangelienfrage und der Weg zu seiner Losung_. FOUARD, S., _Jean et la hn de l'age apostolique_. GARDNER, P., _The Ephesian Gospel_. GARVIE, A. E., _The Beloved Disciple_. GOBEL, _Die Reden des Herrn nach Johannes_ (2 vols., 1906, 1910). GODET, F., _Comm. on the Gospel of St. John_ (Tr., 2 vols., 1886--90). GOGUEL, M., _Les sources du recit Johannique de la Passion_.,Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_. GORDON, S. D., _Quiet Talks on St. John's Gospel_. GORE, C., _Exposition of the Gospel of John_. GREEN, A. V., _The Ephesian Canonical Writings_. GREGORY, C. R., _Wellhausen und Johannes_. GRILL, J., _Untersuchungen uber die Entstehung des vierten Evangeliums_. GUMBEL, _Das Johannesevangelium Eine Erganzung des Lukas ev_.. HARRIS, J. RENDEL, _The Origin of the Prologue to St. John's Gospel_. HAYES, D. A., _John and His Writings_. HOERNLE, E. S., _The Record of the Loved Disciple_ etc.. HOLLAND, H. S., _The Philosophy of Faith and the Fourth Gospel_.,_The Fourth Gospel_. HOLTZMANN, H. J., _Evangelium, Briefe, und Offenbarung des Johannes_. 3 Aufl.. HOLTZMANN, _Hand-Comm_. 3 Aufl. von Bauer. HOVEY, A. H., _In American Comm_.. HOWARD, W. F., _The Fourth Gospel in Recent Criticism and Interpretation_. IVERACH, JAMES, _Gospel of John_ (Int. Stand. Bible Encycl.). JACKSON, H. L., _The Fourth Gospel and Some Recent German Criticism_.,_The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_. JOHNSTON, J. S., _The Philosophy of the Fourth Gospel_. KEISKER, _The Inner Witness of the Fourth Gospel_. KREYENBUHL, _Neue Losung der Johanneischen Frage_. LARFIELD, _Die beide Johannes von Ephesus_. LEATHES, STANLEY, _The Witness of St. John to Christ_. LEPIN, _L'origine du quatrieme evangile_ (1907; 1927).,_Lamentations:valeur historique du quatrieme euangile_. LEWIS, F. G., _The Irenaeus Testimony to the Fourth Gospel_. LEWIS, F. G., _Disarrangements in the Fourth Gospel_. LIGHTFOOT, J. B., _Biblical Essays_ (pages 1-198; I-III, 1893). LLOYD, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_. LOISY, A., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_. LOWRIE, _The Doctrine of John_. LYMAN, MARY ELY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Life of Today_. MANSON, W., _The Incarnate Glory_. MAURICE, F. D., _The Gospel of St. John_. McGREGoR, G. H., _The Moffatt Commentary_. MONTGOMERY, J. A., _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_. MOUSE, _Johannes und Paulus_. MUIRHEAD, L. A., _The Message of the Fourth Gospel_. NOLLOTH, C. F., _The Fourth Evangelist_. NUNN, H. P. V., _The Son of Zebedee and the Fourth Gospel. ORR, JAMES, _The Authenticity of St. John's Gospel Deduced from Internal Evidence_. OVERBECK, _Das Johannesevangelium_. PLUMMER, A., _Cambridge Greek Testament_. REVILLE, J., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_. REYNOLDS, H. R., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D. B., 1899). RICHMOND, W., _The Gospel of the Rejection_. ROBERTSON, A. T., _The Divinity of Christ in the Gospel of John_. ROBINSON, A., _The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel_. ROBINSON, B. W., _The Gospel of John_. SANDAY, W., _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_. SCHLATTER, _Die Sprache und Heimath des vierten Evangelisten_. SCHMIEDEL, P. W., _The Johannine Writings_. SCOTT, E. F., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose and Theology_. SCOTT, E. F., _The Historical and Religious Value of the Fourth Gospel_. SCOTT-MONCRIEFF, C. E., _St. John, Apostle, Evangelist and Prophet_. SELBIE, W. B., _Belief and Life: Studies in the Thought of the Fourth Gospel_. SMITH, J. R., _The Teaching of the Fourth Gospel_. SMITH, P. V., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Historical Importance_. SPEER, R. E., _The Greatest Book in the World_. SPITTA, F., _Das Johannesevangelium als Quelle der Geschichte Jesu_. STANGE, _Die Eigenart des Johanneischen Produktion_. STANTON, V. H., _The Fourth Gospel_ (Part III of Gospels as Hist. Documents, 1921). STEVENS, G. B., _The Johannine Theology_. STRACHAN, R. H., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D C G 1906).,The Fourth Gospel: Its Significance and Environ- ment_.,The Fourth Evangelist: Dramatist or Historian_. TILLMANN, FRITZ, _Das Johannesevangelium Uebersetzt und Erklart_. VEDDER, H. C., _The Johannine Writings and the Johannine Problems_. WARSCHAUER, J., _The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_. WATKINS, W. H., _Modern Criticism Considered in its Rela- tion to the Fourth Gospel_. WATSON, H. A., _The Mysticism of St. John's Gospel_. WEARING, _The World View of the Fourth Gospel_. WEISS, B., _Meyer Komm_. 9 Aufl..,_Das Johannesevangelium als einheitliches Werk_. WELLHAUSEN, J., _Das Evangelium Johannis_. WENDT, H. H., _The Gospel according to St. John: An Inquiry into its Genesis and Historical Value_.,_Die Schichten im vierten Evangelium_. WESTCOTT, B. F., _The Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1908). WHITELAW, _The Gospel of John_. WINDISCH, H., _Johannes und die Synoptiker_. WORSLEY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Synoptists_. WREDE, W., _Charakter und Tendenz del Johannesevangelium_. ZAHN, TH., _Dal Evangelium Johannis. 6 Aufl.. strkjv@John:1:1 @{In the beginning} (\en archˆi\). \Archˆ\ is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew _be reshith_ in strkjv@Genesis:1:1|. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing. {Was} (\ˆn\). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of \eimi\ to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (\egeneto\, became) appears in verse 14| for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in strkjv@8:58| "before Abraham came (\genesthai\) I am" (\eimi\, timeless existence). {The Word} (\ho logos\). \Logos\ is from \leg“\, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. \Logos\ is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (\anima mundi\) and Marcus Aurelius used \spermatikos logos\ for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew _memra_ was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in strkjv@Proverbs:8:23|. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (_The Origin of the _Prologue to St. John_, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John's standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term \Logos\, but not John's conception of personal pre-existence. The term \Logos\ is applied to Christ only in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:13; strkjv@1John:1:1| "concerning the Word of life" (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of "the Word of God" in strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f.; strkjv@Colossians:1:17|) and in strkjv@Hebrews:1:2f.| and in strkjv@John:17:5|. This term suits John's purpose better than \sophia\ (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the \aeon\ Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos "became flesh" (\sarx egeneto\, verse 14|) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once. {With God} (\pros ton theon\). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. \Pros\ with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In strkjv@1John:2:1| we have a like use of \pros\: "We have a Paraclete with the Father" (\paraklˆton echomen pros ton patera\). See \pros“pon pros pros“pon\ (face to face, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|), a triple use of \pros\. There is a papyrus example of \pros\ in this sense \to gn“ston tˆs pros allˆlous sunˆtheias\, "the knowledge of our intimacy with one another" (M.&M., _Vocabulary_) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, _Origin of Prologue_, p. 8) that the use of \pros\ here and in strkjv@Mark:6:3| is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is _Koin‚_, not old Attic. In strkjv@John:17:5| John has \para soi\ the more common idiom. {And the Word was God} (\kai theos ˆn ho logos\). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying \ho theos ˆn ho logos\. That would mean that all of God was expressed in \ho logos\ and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (\ho logos\) and the predicate without it (\theos\) just as in strkjv@John:4:24| \pneuma ho theos\ can only mean "God is spirit," not "spirit is God." Songs:in strkjv@1John:4:16| \ho theos agapˆ estin\ can only mean "God is love," not "love is God" as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 767f. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:14| \ho Logos sarx egeneto\, "the Word became flesh," not "the flesh became Word." Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.

rwp@John:1:9 @{There was} (\ˆn\). Imperfect indicative. Emphatic position at the beginning of the sentence and so probably not periphrastic conjugation with \erchomenon\ (coming) near the end, though that is possible. {The true light} (\to ph“s to alˆthinon\). "The light the genuine," not a false light of wreckers of ships, but the dependable light that guides to the harbor of safety. This true light had been on hand all the time in the darkness (\ˆn\ imperfect, linear action) before John came. {Even the light} (not in the Greek). Added in the English to make plain this interpretation. {Lighteth every man} (\ph“tizei panta anthr“pon\). Old verb (from \ph“s\) to give light as in strkjv@Revelation:22:5; strkjv@Luke:11:35f|. The Quakers appeal to this phrase for their belief that to every man there is given an inner light that is a sufficient guide, the Quaker's text it is called. But it may only mean that all the real light that men receive comes from Christ, not necessarily that each one receives a special revelation. {Coming} (\erchomenon\). This present middle participle of \erchomai\ can be taken with \anthr“pon\ just before (accusative masculine singular), "every man as he comes into the world." It can also be construed with \ph“s\ (nominative neuter singular). This idea occurs in strkjv@John:3:19; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46|. In the two last passages the phrase is used of the Messiah which makes it probable here. But even so the light presented in strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46| is that of the Incarnate Messiah, not the Pre-incarnate Logos. Here \kosmos\ rather than \panta\ occurs in the sense of the orderly universe as often in this Gospel. See strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|.

rwp@John:1:14 @{And the Word became flesh} (\kai ho logos sarx egeneto\). See verse 3| for this verb and note its use for the historic event of the Incarnation rather than \ˆn\ of verse 1|. Note also the absence of the article with the predicate substantive \sarx\, so that it cannot mean "the flesh became the Word." The Pre-existence of the Logos has already been plainly stated and argued. John does not here say that the Logos entered into a man or dwelt in a man or filled a man. One is at liberty to see an allusion to the birth narratives in strkjv@Matthew:1:16-25; strkjv@Luke:1:28-38|, if he wishes, since John clearly had the Synoptics before him and chiefly supplemented them in his narrative. In fact, one is also at liberty to ask what intelligent meaning can one give to John's language here apart from the Virgin Birth? What ordinary mother or father ever speaks of a child "becoming flesh"? For the Incarnation see also strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:4:4; strkjv@Romans:1:3; strkjv@8:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:7f.; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16; strkjv@Hebrews:2:14|. "To explain the exact significance of \egeneto\ in this sentence is beyond the powers of any interpreter" (Bernard). Unless, indeed, as seems plain, John is referring to the Virgin Birth as recorded in Matthew and Luke. "The Logos of philosophy is, John declares, the Jesus of history" (Bernard). Thus John asserts the deity and the real humanity of Christ. He answers the Docetic Gnostics who denied his humanity. {Dwelt among us} (\eskˆn“sen en hˆmin\). First aorist ingressive aorist active indicative of \skˆno“\, old verb, to pitch one's tent or tabernacle (\skˆnos\ or \skˆnˆ\), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:7-15; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@13:6; strkjv@21:3|. In Revelation it is used of God tabernacling with men and here of the Logos tabernacling, God's Shekinah glory here among us in the person of his Son. {We beheld his glory} (\etheasametha tˆn doxan autou\). First aorist middle indicative of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, spectacle). The personal experience of John and of others who did recognize Jesus as the Shekinah glory (\doxa\) of God as James, the brother of Jesus, so describes him (James:2:1|). John employs \theaomai\ again in strkjv@1:32| (the Baptist beholding the Spirit coming down as a dove) and strkjv@1:38| of the Baptist gazing in rapture at Jesus. Songs:also strkjv@4:35; strkjv@11:45; strkjv@1John:1:1f.; strkjv@4:12,14|. By this word John insists that in the human Jesus he beheld the Shekinah glory of God who was and is the Logos who existed before with God. By this plural John speaks for himself and all those who saw in Jesus what he did. {As of the only begotten from the Father} (\h“s monogenous para patros\). Strictly, "as of an only born from a father," since there is no article with \monogenous\ or with \patros\. In strkjv@John:3:16; strkjv@1John:4:9| we have \ton monogenˆ\ referring to Christ. This is the first use in the Gospel of \patˆr\ of God in relation to the Logos. \Monogenˆs\ (only born rather than only begotten) here refers to the eternal relationship of the Logos (as in strkjv@1:18|) rather than to the Incarnation. It distinguishes thus between the Logos and the believers as children (\tekna\) of God. The word is used of human relationships as in strkjv@Luke:7:12; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@9:38|. It occurs also in the LXX and strkjv@Hebrews:11:17|, but elsewhere in N.T. only in John's writings. It is an old word in Greek literature. It is not clear whether the words \para patros\ (from the Father) are to be connected with \monogenous\ (cf. strkjv@6:46; strkjv@7:29|, etc.) or with \doxan\ (cf. strkjv@5:41,44|). John clearly means to say that "the manifested glory of the Word was as it were the glory of the Eternal Father shared with His only Son" (Bernard). Cf. strkjv@8:54; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|. {Full} (\plˆrˆs\). Probably indeclinable accusative adjective agreeing with \doxan\ (or genitive with \monogenous\) of which we have papyri examples (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 275). As nominative \plˆrˆs\ can agree with the subject of \eskˆn“sen\. {Of grace and truth} (\charitos kai alˆtheias\). Curiously this great word \charis\ (grace), so common with Paul, does not occur in John's Gospel save in strkjv@1:14,16,17|, though \alˆtheia\ (truth) is one of the keywords in the Fourth Gospel and in 1John, occurring 25 times in the Gospel and 20 in the Johannine Epistles, 7 times in the Synoptics and not at all in Revelation (Bernard). In strkjv@1:17| these two words picture the Gospel in Christ in contrast with the law of Moses. See Epistles of Paul for origin and use of both words.

rwp@John:1:15 @{Beareth witness} (\marturei\). Historical (dramatic) present indicative of this characteristic word in John (cf. strkjv@1:17f.|). See strkjv@1:32,34| for historical examples of John's witness to Christ. This sentence is a parenthesis in Westcott and Hort's text, though the Revised Version makes a parenthesis of most of verse 14|. The witness of John is adduced in proof of the glory full of grace and truth already claimed for the Incarnate Logos. {Crieth} (\kekragen\). Second perfect active indicative of \kraz“\, old verb for loud crying, repeated in dramatic form again for emphasis recalling the wonderful Voice in the wilderness which the Beloved Disciple can still hear echoing through the years. {This was} (\houtos ˆn\). Imperfect indicative where John throws the tense back in past time when he looked forward to the coming of the Messiah as in strkjv@Acts:3:10| where we should prefer "is" (\estin\). Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 96) calls this the "imperfect of sudden appreciation of the real state of things." {Of whom I said} (\hon eipon\). But B C and a corrector of Aleph (Westcott and Hort) have \ho eip“n\ "the one who said," a parenthetical explanation about the Baptist, not the words of the Baptist about Christ. {After me} (\opis“ mou\). See also strkjv@1:27|. Later in time John means. He described "the Coming One" (\ho erchomenos\) before he saw Jesus. The language of John here is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:3:11| \ho opis“ mou erchomenos\ (cf. strkjv@Mark:1:7|). The Beloved Disciple had heard the Baptist say these very words, but he also had the Synoptic Gospels. {Is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. It is already an actual fact when the Baptist is speaking. {Before me} (\emprosthen mou\). In rank and dignity, the Baptist means, \ho ischuroteros mou\ "the one mightier than I" (Mark:1:7|) and \ischuroteros mou\ "mightier than I" (Matthew:3:11|). In strkjv@John:3:28| \emprosthen ekeinou\ (before him, the Christ) does mean priority in time, but not here. This superior dignity of the Messiah John proudly recognizes always (John:3:25-30|). {For he was before me} (\hoti pr“tos mou ˆn\). Paradox, but clear. He had always been (\ˆn imperfect\) before John in his Pre-incarnate state, but "after" John in time of the Incarnation, but always ahead of John in rank immediately on his Incarnation. \Pr“tos mou\ (superlative with ablative) occurs here when only two are compared as is common in the vernacular _Koin‚_. Songs:the Beloved Disciple came first (\pr“tos\) to the tomb, ahead of Peter (20:4|). Songs:also \pr“ton hum“n\ in strkjv@15:18| means "before you" as if it were \proteron hum“n\. Verse 30| repeats these words almost exactly.

rwp@John:1:46 @{Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?} (\Ek Nazaret dunatai ti agathon einai;\). Literally, "Out of Nazareth can anything good be." There is a tinge of scorn in the question as if Nazareth (note position at beginning of sentence)...extent for it since Cana... (home of Nathanael) was near Nazareth. Clearly he had never heard of Jesus. The best thing in all the world came out of Nazareth, but Philip does not argue the point. A saying had arisen that no prophet comes out of Galilee (John:7:52|), untrue like many such sayings. {Come and see} (\erchou kai ide\). Present middle imperative (come on) and second active imperative (and see at once). Philip followed the method of Jesus with Andrew and John (verse 39|), probably without knowing it. Wise is the one who knows how to deal with the sceptic.

rwp@John:2:4 @{Woman} (\gunai\). Vocative case of \gunˆ\, and with no idea of censure as is plain from its use by Jesus in strkjv@19:26|. But the use of \gunai\ instead of \mˆter\ (Mother) does show her she can no longer exercise maternal authority and not at all in his Messianic work. That is always a difficult lesson for mothers and fathers to learn, when to let go. {What have I to do with thee?} (\Ti emoi kai soi;\). There are a number of examples of this ethical dative in the LXX (Judges:11:12; strkjv@2Samuel:16:10; strkjv@1Kings:17:18; strkjv@2Kings:3:13; strkjv@2Chronicles:35:21|) and in the N.T. (Mark:1:24; strkjv@5:7; strkjv@Matthew:8:29; strkjv@27:19; strkjv@Luke:8:28|). Some divergence of thought is usually indicated. Literally the phrase means, "What is it to me and to thee?" In this instance F.C. Burkitt (_Journal of Theol. Studies_, July, 1912) interprets it to mean, "What is it to us?" That is certainly possible and suits the next clause also. {Mine hour is not yet come} (\oup“ hˆkei hˆ h“ra mou\). This phrase marks a crisis whenever it occurs, especially of his death (7:30; strkjv@8:20; strkjv@12:23; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@17:1|). Here apparently it means the hour for public manifestation of the Messiahship, though a narrower sense would be for Christ's intervention about the failure of the wine. The Fourth Gospel is written on the plane of eternity (W. M. Ramsay) and that standpoint exists here in this first sign of the Messiah.

rwp@John:2:22 @{When therefore he was raised from the dead} (\Hote oun ˆgerthˆ ek nekr“n\). First aorist passive indicative of \egeir“\, to raise up. And not at first then, but only slowly after the disciples themselves were convinced. Then "they believed the Scripture" (\episteusan tˆi graphˆi\). They "believed" again. Dative case \graphˆi\. Probably strkjv@Psalms:16:10| is meant (Acts:2:31; strkjv@13:35|). {And the word which Jesus had said} (\kai t“i log“i hon eipen\). Dative case \log“i\ also, but \hon\ (relative) is not attracted to the dative. Clearly then John interprets Jesus to have a parabolic reference to his death and resurrection by his language in strkjv@2:19|. There are those who bluntly say that John was mistaken. I prefer to say that these scholars are mistaken. Even Bernard considers it "hardly possible" that John interprets Jesus rightly in strkjv@1:21|. "Had he meant that, He would have spoken with less ambiguity." But how do we know that Jesus wished to be understood clearly at this time? Certainly no one understood Christ when he spoke the words. The language of Jesus is recalled and perverted at his trial as "I will destroy" (Mark:14:58|), "I can destroy" (Matthew:26:61|), neither of which he said.

rwp@John:2:25 @{And because he needed not} (\kai hoti chreian eichen\). Imperfect active, "and because he did not have need." {That any one should bear witness concerning man} (\hina tis marturˆsˆi peri tou anthr“pou\). Non-final use of \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \marture“\ and the generic article (\peri tou anthr“pou\) concerning mankind as in the next clause also. {For he himself knew} (\autos gar egin“sken\). Imperfect active, "for he himself kept on knowing" as he did from the start. {What was in man} (\ti ˆn en t“i anthr“p“i\). Indirect question with \estin\ of the direct changed to the imperfect \ˆn\, a rare idiom in the _Koin‚_. This supernatural knowledge of man is a mark of deity. Some men of genius can read men better than others, but not in the sense meant here.

rwp@John:3:8 @{The wind} (\to pneuma\). In Greek \pneuma\ means either wind or spirit as _spiritus_ does in Latin (so also in Hebrew and Syriac). Wycliff follows the Latin and keeps spirit here and Marcus Dods argues for it. The word \pneuma\ occurs 370 times in the N.T. and never means wind elsewhere except in a quotation from the O.T. (Hebrews:1:7| from strkjv@Psalms:104:4|), though common in the LXX. On the other hand \pne“\ (bloweth, \pnei\) occurs five times elsewhere in the N.T. and always of the wind (like strkjv@John:6:18|). Songs:\ph“nˆ\ can be either sound (as of wind) or voice (as of the Spirit). In simple truth either sense of \pneuma\ can be taken here as one wills. Tholuck thinks that the night-wind swept through the narrow street as Jesus spoke. In either case the etymology of \pneuma\ is "wind" from \pne“\, to blow. The Spirit is the use of \pneuma\ as metaphor. Certainly the conclusion "of the Spirit" is a direct reference to the Holy Spirit who works his own way beyond our comprehension even as men even yet do not know the law of the wind.

rwp@John:4:17 @{I have no husband} (\ouk ech“ andra\). The Greek \anˆr\ means either "man" or "husband." She had her "man," but he was not a legal "husband." Her language veils her deceit. {Thou saidst well} (\kal“s eipes\). Jesus saw through the double sense of her language and read her heart as he only can do, a supernatural gift of which John often speaks (1:48; strkjv@2:24f.; strkjv@5:20|). {For thou hast had five husbands} (\pente gar andras esches\). "For thou didst have five men." Second aorist (constative) active indicative of \ech“\. {Is not thy husband} (\ouk estin sou anˆr\). In the full and legal sense of \anˆr\, not a mere "man." {This hast thou said truly} (\touto alˆthes eirˆkas\). "This a true thing thou hast said." Note absence of article with \alˆthes\ (predicate accusative). Perfect active indicative \eirˆkas\ here, not aorist \eipes\ (verse 17|).

rwp@John:4:24 @{God is a Spirit} (\pneuma ho theos\). More precisely, "God is Spirit" as "God is Light" (1John:1:5|), "God is Love" (1John:4:8|). In neither case can we read Spirit is God, Light is God, Love is God. The non-corporeality of God is clearly stated and the personality of God also. All this is put in three words for the first time. {Must} (\dei\). Here is the real necessity (\dei\), not the one used by the woman about the right place of worship (verse 20|).

rwp@John:4:35 @{Say not ye?} (\Ouch humeis legete;\). It is not possible to tell whether Jesus is alluding to a rural proverb of which nothing is known about there being four months from seedtime to harvest (a longer time than four months in fact) or whether he means that it was then actually four months to harvest. In the latter sense, since harvest began about the middle of April, it would be December when Jesus spoke. {There are yet four months} (\eti tetramˆnos estin\). The use of \eti\ (yet) and the fact that the space between seedtime and harvest is longer than four months (\tetra\, Aeolic for \tessara\, and \mˆn\, month) argue against the proverb idea. {And then cometh the harvest} (\kai ho therismos erchetai\). "And the harvest (\therismos\, from \theriz“\, rare in Greek writers) comes." The possible Iambic verse here is purely accidental as in strkjv@5:14|. {Lift up your eyes} (\eparate tous ophthalmous hum“n\). First aorist active imperative of \epair“\. Deliberate looking as in strkjv@John:6:5| where \theaomai\ also is used as here. {Fields} (\ch“ras\). Cultivated or ploughed ground as in strkjv@Luke:21:21|. {White} (\leukai\). Ripened grain like grey hair (Matthew:5:36|). {Already unto harvest} (\pros therismon ˆdˆ\). Probably \ˆdˆ\ (already) goes with verse 36|. The Samaritans could already be seen approaching and they were the field "white for harvest." This is the meaning of Christ's parable. If it is the spring of the year and Christ can point to the ripened grain, the parable is all the plainer, but it is not dependent on this detail. Recall the parable of the sower in strkjv@Matthew:13|.

rwp@John:4:36 @{Already he that reapeth receiveth wages} (\ˆdˆ ho theriz“n misthon lambanei\). The spiritual harvester can gather his harvest without waiting four months. Jesus is reaping a harvest right now by the conversion of this woman. The labourer is worthy of his hire (Luke:10:7; strkjv@2Timothy:2:6|). John does not use \misthos\ (reward) again, but \karpos\ (15:2-16|), "fruit for life eternal" (cf. strkjv@4:14|). {That he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together} (\hina ho speir“n homou chairˆi kai ho theriz“n\). Final use of \hina\ with present active subjunctive of \chair“\, to rejoice, in the singular with \ho speir“n\ (the sower) and to be repeated with \ho theriz“n\ (the reaper). The adverb \homou\ (together) elsewhere in N.T. only strkjv@20:4; strkjv@21:2; strkjv@Acts:2:1|. Usually considerable time passes between the sowing and the reaping as in verse 35|. Amos (Amos:9:13|) spoke of the time when "the ploughman shall overtake the reaper" and that has happened here with the joy of the harvest time (Isaiah:9:3|). Jesus the Sower and the disciples as the reapers are here rejoicing simultaneously.

rwp@John:4:52 @{Inquired} (\eputheto\). Second aorist middle indicative of \punthanomai\. {Began to mend} (\kompsoteron eschen\). Second aorist ingressive active indicative of \ech“\ (took a turn, got better) and comparative of adverb \komps“s\. Arrian (_Epictetus iii. 10.13) has \komps“s echeis\ from a physician, "Thou hast it fine," "Thou art doing finely." The papyri give several similar examples. \Komps“s\ (neat) is from \kome“\, to take care of. {At the seventh hour} (\h“ran hebdomˆn\). The accusative case without a preposition as in strkjv@Revelation:3:3|, though we have \peri h“ran enatˆn\ (about the ninth hour) in strkjv@Acts:10:3|. See the accusative also in strkjv@Exodus:9:18| \tautˆn tˆn h“ran aurion\ (tomorrow about this hour). The accusative has the notion of extension and can be thus loosely used. It can even mean here "during the seventh hour." In verse 53| the locative is more exact, "at that hour" (\en ekeinˆi tˆi h“rƒi\). The seventh hour would be (Roman time) seven P.M.

rwp@John:5:2 @{There is} (\estin\). Bengel argues that this proves a date before the destruction of Jerusalem, but it is probably only John's vivid memory. {By the sheep gate} (\epi tˆi probatikˆi\). Supply \pulˆi\ (gate) which occurs with the adjective \probatikˆ\ (pertaining to sheep, \probata\) in strkjv@Nehemiah:3:1,22|. {A pool} (\kolumbˆthra\). A diving or swimming pool (from \kolumba“\, to swim, strkjv@Acts:27:43|), old word, only here in N.T. {Which is called} (\hˆ epilegomenˆ\). "The surnamed" (present passive participle, only N.T. example except strkjv@Acts:15:40| first aorist middle participle \epilexamenos\). {In Hebrew} (\Ebraisti\). "In Aramaic" strictly as in strkjv@19:13,17,20; strkjv@20:16; strkjv@Revelation:9:11; strkjv@16:16|. {Bethesda} (\Bethesda\, or House of Mercy. Songs:A C Syr cu). Aleph D L 33 have \Bethzatha\ or House of the Olive, while B W Vulg. Memph. have \Bethsaida\. {Having five porches} (\pente stoas echousa\). \Stoa\ was a covered colonnade where people can gather from which Stoic comes (Acts:17:18|). See strkjv@John:10:23; strkjv@Acts:3:11|. Schick in 1888 found twin pools north of the temple near the fortress of Antonia one of which has five porches. It is not, however, certain that this pool existed before A.D. 70 when the temple was destroyed (Sanday, _Sacred Sites of the Gospels_, p. 55). Some have identified it with the Pool of Siloam (9:7|), though John distinguishes them. There is also the Virgin's Well, called the Gusher, because it periodically bubbles over from a natural spring, a kind of natural siphon. This is south of the temple in the Valley of Kedron and quite possibly the real site.

rwp@John:5:13 @{He that was healed} (\ho iatheis\). First aorist passive articular participle of \iaomai\ (John's usual word). {Who it was} (\tis estin\). Present tense preserved in indirect question. {Had conveyed himself away} (\exeneusen\). First aorist active indicative of \ekne“\, old verb to swim out, to slip out, or from \ekneu“\, to turn out, to turn the head to one side (to one side with which compare \eneneuon\, they nodded, strkjv@Luke:1:62|). Either of these verbs can explain the form here. The aorist tense simply states an antecedent action without being a pastperfect. {A multitude being in the place} (\ochlou ontos en t“i top“i\). Genitive absolute and the reason for Christ's departure.

rwp@John:5:29 @{Unto the resurrection of life} (\eis anastasin z“ˆs\). \Anastasis\ is an old word (Aeschylus) from \anistˆmi\, to raise up, to arise. This combination occurs nowhere else in the N.T. nor does "the resurrection of judgement" (\eis anastasin krise“s\), but in strkjv@Luke:14:14| there is the similar phrase "in the resurrection of the just" (\en tˆi anastasei t“n dikai“n\). Only there note both articles. Here without the articles it can mean "to a resurrection of life" and "to a resurrection of judgement," though the result is practically the same. There are two resurrections as to result, one to life, one to judgement. See both in strkjv@Daniel:12:2|.

rwp@John:5:39 @{Ye search} (\eraunƒte\). Proper spelling as the papyri show rather than \ereunƒte\, the old form (from \ereuna\, search) as in strkjv@7:52|. The form here can be either present active indicative second person plural or the present active imperative second person plural. Only the context can decide. Either makes sense here, but the reason given "because ye think" (\hoti humeis dokeite\, clearly indicative), supports the indicative rather than the imperative. Besides, Jesus is arguing on the basis of their use of "the Scriptures" (\tas graphas\). The plural with the article refers to the well-known collection in the Old Testament (Matthew:21:42; strkjv@Luke:24:27|). Elsewhere in John the singular refers to a particular passage (2:22; strkjv@7:38; strkjv@10:35|). {In them ye have eternal life} (\en autais z“ˆn ai“nion echein\). Indirect assertion after \dokeite\ without "ye" expressed either as nominative (\humeis\) or accusative (\humas\). Bernard holds that in John \doke“\ always indicates a mistaken opinion (5:45; strkjv@11:13,31; strkjv@13:29; strkjv@16:20; strkjv@20:15|). Certainly the rabbis did make a mechanical use of the letter of Scripture as a means of salvation. {These are they} (\ekeinai eisin hai\). The true value of the Scriptures is in their witness to Christ (of me, \peri emou\). Luke (24:27,45|) gives this same claim of Jesus, and yet some critics fail to find the Messiah in the Old Testament. But Jesus did.

rwp@John:5:44 @{How can ye believe?} (\p“s dunasthe humeis pisteusai;\). Emphasis on "ye" (\humeis\), ye being what ye are. They were not true Jews (Romans:2:29; strkjv@Esther:9:28|) who cared for the glory of God, but they prefer the praise of men (Matthew:6:1f.; strkjv@23:5|) like the Pharisees who feared to confess Christ (John:12:43|). {From the only God} (\para tou monou theou\). B and W omit \theou\ which is certainly meant even if not genuine here. See strkjv@17:3; strkjv@Romans:16:27; strkjv@1Timothy:6:15f|.

rwp@John:6:31 @{Ate the manna} (\to manna ephagon\). The rabbis quoted strkjv@Psalms:72:16| to prove that the Messiah, when he comes, will outdo Moses with manna from heaven. Jesus was claiming to be the Messiah and able to give bread for eternal life (verse 27|). Lightfoot (_Biblical Essays_, p. 152) says: "The key to the understanding of the whole situation is an acquaintance with the national expectation of the greater Moses." They quote to Jesus strkjv@Exodus:16:15| (of. strkjv@Numbers:11:7; strkjv@21:5; strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:3|). Their plea is that Moses gave us bread "from heaven" (\ek tou ouranou\). Can Jesus equal that deed of Moses?

rwp@John:6:39 @{That of all that which} (\hina pƒn ho\). Literally, "That all which" (see verse 37| for \pan ho\), but there is a sharp anacoluthon with \pƒn\ left as _nominativus pendens_. {I should lose nothing} (\mˆ apoles“ ex autou\). Construed with \hina\, "that I shall not lose anything of it." \Apoles“\, from \apollumi\, can be either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive as is true also of \anastˆs“\ (from \anistˆmi\), "I shall raise up." {At the last day} (\tˆi eschatˆi hemerƒi\). Locative case without \en\. Only in John, but four times here (39,40,44,54|) "with the majesty of a solemn refrain." In strkjv@7:37| it is the last day of the feast of tabernacles, but in strkjv@11:24; strkjv@12:48| of the day of judgment as here. Christ is the Agent of the general resurrection in strkjv@5:28| as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:22| while here only the resurrection of the righteous is mentioned.

rwp@John:6:51 @{The living bread} (\ho artos ho z“n\). "The bread the living." Repetition of the claim in 35,41,48|, but with a slight change from \z“ˆs\ to \z“n\ (present active participle of \za“\). It is alive and can give life. See strkjv@4:10| for living water. In strkjv@Revelation:1:17| Jesus calls himself the Living One (\ho z“n\). {For ever} (\eis ton ai“na\). Eternally like \ai“nion\ with \z“ˆn\ in 47|. {I shall give} (\eg“ d“s“\). Emphasis on \eg“\ (I). Superior so to Moses. {Is my flesh} (\hˆ sarx mou estin\). See on ¯1:14| for \sarx\ the Incarnation. This new idea creates far more difficulty to the hearers who cannot grasp Christ's idea of self-sacrifice. {For the life of the world} (\huper tˆs tou kosmou z“ˆs\). Over, in behalf of, \huper\ means, and in some connexions instead of as in strkjv@11:50|. See strkjv@1:30| for the Baptist's picture of Christ as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. See also strkjv@3:17; strkjv@4:42; strkjv@1John:3:16; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@Galatians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:8|. Jesus has here presented to this Galilean multitude the central fact of his atoning death for the spiritual life of the world.

rwp@John:6:54 @{He that eateth} (\ho tr“g“n\). Present active participle for continual or habitual eating like \pisteuete\ in verse 29|. The verb \tr“g“\ is an old one for eating fruit or vegetables and the feeding of animals. In the N.T. it occurs only in strkjv@John:6:54,56,58; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@Matthew:24:38|. Elsewhere in the Gospels always \esthi“\ or \ephagon\ (defective verb with \esthi“\). No distinction is made here between \ephagon\ (48,50,52,53,58|) and \tr“g“\ (54,56,57,58|). Some men understand Jesus here to be speaking of the Lord's Supper by prophetic forecast or rather they think that John has put into the mouth of Jesus the sacramental conception of Christianity by making participation in the bread and wine the means of securing eternal life. To me that is a violent misinterpretation of the Gospel and an utter misrepresentation of Christ. It is a grossly literal interpretation of the mystical symbolism of the language of Jesus which these Jews also misunderstood. Christ uses bold imagery to picture spiritual appropriation of himself who is to give his life-blood for the life of the world (51|). It would have been hopeless confusion for these Jews if Jesus had used the symbolism of the Lord's Supper. It would be real dishonesty for John to use this discourse as a propaganda for sacramentalism. The language of Jesus can only have a spiritual meaning as he unfolds himself as the true manna.

rwp@John:7:3 @{His brethren} (\hoi adelphoi autou\). "His brothers" (half-brothers actually), who "were not believing on him" (\oude episteuon eis auton\) as stated in verse 5|. They were hostile to the Messianic assumptions of Jesus, a natural attitude as one can well see, though at first they were friendly (2:12|). {Depart hence} (\metabˆthi enteuthen\). Second aorist active imperative of \metabain“\, to pass to another place (5:24; strkjv@13:1|). It was impertinence on their part. {That thy disciples also may behold} (\hina kai hoi mathˆtai sou the“rˆsousin\). Final clause with \hina\ and the future active indicative of \the“re“\. Jesus had many disciples in Judea at the start (2:23; strkjv@4:1|) and had left it because of the jealousy of the Pharisees over his success (4:3|). The brothers may have heard of the great defection in the synagogue in Capernaum (6:66|), but the advice is clearly ironical. {Which thou doest} (\ha poieis\). To what works they refer by this language we do not know. But Jesus had been away from Galilee for some months and from Judea for a year and a half. Perhaps the brothers of Jesus may actually have been eager to rush Jesus into the hostile atmosphere of Jerusalem again.

rwp@John:7:17 @{If any man willeth to do} (\ean tis thelˆi poiein\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and present active subjunctive \thelˆi\ not used as a mere auxiliary verb for the future "will do," but with full force of \thel“\, to will, to wish. See the same use of \thel“\ in strkjv@5:40| "and yet ye are not willing to come" (\kai ou thelete elthein\). {He shall know} (\gn“setai\). Future middle indicative of \gin“sk“\. Experimental knowledge from willingness to do God's will. See this same point by Jesus in strkjv@5:46; strkjv@18:37|. There must be moral harmony between man's purpose and God's will. "If there be no sympathy there can be no understanding" (Westcott). Atheists of all types have no point of contact for approach to the knowledge of Christ. This fact does not prove the non-existence of God, but simply their own isolation. They are out of tune with the Infinite. For those who love God it is also true that obedience to God's will brings richer knowledge of God. Agnostic and atheistic critics are disqualified by Jesus as witnesses to his claims. {Of God} (\ek tou theou\). Out of God as source. {From myself} (\ap' emautou\). Instead of from God.

rwp@John:7:38 @{He that believeth on me} (\ho pisteu“n eis eme\). Nominative absolute as is not uncommon. {The scripture} (\hˆ graphˆ\). No precise passage can be quoted, though similar idea in several (Isaiah:55:1; strkjv@58:11; strkjv@Zechariah:13:1; strkjv@14:8; strkjv@Ezekiel:47:1; strkjv@Joel:3:18|). Chrysostom confines it to strkjv@Isaiah:28:16| by punctuation (only the nominative absolute as the Scripture). {Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water} (\potamoi ek tˆs koilias autou reusousin hudatos z“ntos\). Some ancient Western writers connect \pinet“\ of verse 37| with \ho pisteu“n\ in verse 38|. By this arrangement \autou\ (his) with \koilias\ is made to refer to Christ, not to the believer. Burney argues that \koilia\ is a mistranslation of the Aramaic (fountain, not belly) and that the reference is to strkjv@Ezekiel:47:1|. C.C. Torrey refers to strkjv@Zechariah:14:8|. But the Eastern writers refer \autou\ (his) to the believer who not only quenches in Christ his own thirst, but becomes a source of new streams for others (John:4:14|). It is a difficult question and Westcott finally changed his view and held \autou\ to refer to Christ. \Reusousin\ is future active indicative of \re“\, old verb, to flow, here only in the N.T.

rwp@John:8:11 @{No man, Lord} (\Oudeis, Kurie\). "No one, Sir." She makes no excuse for her sin. Does she recognize Jesus as "Lord"? {Neither do I condemn thee} (\Oude eg“ se katakrin“\). Jesus does not condone her sin. See strkjv@8:15| for "I do not judge (condemn) any one." But he does give the poor woman another chance. {Henceforth sin no more} (\apo tou nun mˆketi hamartane\). See also strkjv@5:14| where this same language is used to the impotent man. It literally means (prohibition with present active imperative): "Henceforth no longer go on sinning." One can only hope that the woman was really changed in heart and life. Jesus clearly felt that even a wicked woman can be saved.

rwp@John:8:12 @{Again therefore} (\palin oun\). This language fits in better with strkjv@7:52| than with strkjv@8:11|. Just suppose Jesus is in the temple on the following day. {Unto them} (\autois\). The Pharisees and crowds in the temple after the feast was past. {I am the light of the world} (\eg“ eimi to ph“s tou kosmou\). Jesus had called his followers "the light of the world" (Matthew:5:14|), but that was light reflected from him. Already Jesus (the Logos) had been called the true light of men (1:9; strkjv@3:19|). The Psalmist calls God his Light (27:1|). Songs:Isaiah:60:19|. At the feast of tabernacles in the Court of the Women where Jesus was on this day (8:20|) there were brilliant candelabra and there was the memory of the pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night. But with all this background this supreme and exclusive claim of Jesus (repeated in strkjv@9:5|) to being the light of the whole world (of Gentiles as well as of Jews) startled the Pharisees and challenged their opposition. {Shall have the light of life} (\hexei to ph“s tˆs z“ˆs\). The light which springs from and issues in life (Westcott). Cf. strkjv@6:33,51| about Jesus being the Bread of Life. In this sublime claim we come to a decisive place. It will not do to praise Jesus and deny his deity. Only as the Son of God can we justify and accept this language which otherwise is mere conceit and froth.

rwp@John:8:13 @{Of thyself} (\peri seautou\). This technical objection was according to the rules of evidence among the rabbis. "No man can give witness for himself" (_Mishnah, Ketub_. 11. 9). Hence, they say, "not true" (\ouk alˆthes\), not pertinent. "They were still in the region of pedantic rules and external tests." In strkjv@John:5:31| Jesus acknowledged this technical need of further witness outside of his own claims (John:19-30|) and proceeded to give it (John:32-47|) in the testimony of the Baptist, of the Father, of his works, of the Scriptures, and of Moses in particular.

rwp@John:8:14 @{Even if} (\kan\). That is \kai ean\, a condition of the third class with the present active subjunctive \martur“\. Jesus means that his own witness concerning himself is true (\alˆthes\) even if it contravenes their technical rules of evidence. He can and does tell the truth all by himself concerning himself. {For I know whence I came and whither I go} (\hoti oida pothen ˆlthon kai pou hupag“\). In this terse sentence with two indirect questions Jesus alludes to his pre-existence with the Father before his Incarnation as in strkjv@17:5| and to the return to the Father after the death and resurrection as in strkjv@13:3; strkjv@14:2f|. He again puts both ideas together in one crisp clause in strkjv@16:28| for the apostles who profess to understand him then. But here these Pharisees are blind to the words of Jesus. "But ye know not whence I come nor whither I go" (\humeis de ouk oidate pothen erchomai ˆ pou hupag“\). He had spoken of his heavenly destiny (7:33|). Jesus alone knew his personal consciousness of his coming from, fellowship with, and return to the Father. Stier (_Words of the Lord Jesus_) argues that one might as well say to the sun, if claiming to be the sun, that it was night, because it bore witness of itself. The answer is the shining of the sun.

rwp@John:8:24 @{For except ye believe} (\ean gar mˆ pisteusˆte\). Negative condition of third class with \ean mˆ\ and ingressive aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "For unless ye come to believe." {That I am he} (\hoti eg“ eimi\). Indirect discourse, but with no word in the predicate after the copula \eimi\. Jesus can mean either "that I am from above" (verse 23|), "that I am the one sent from the Father or the Messiah" (7:18,28|), "that I am the Light of the World" (8:12|), "that I am the Deliverer from the bondage of sin" (8:28,31f.,36|), "that I am" without supplying a predicate in the absolute sense as the Jews (Deuteronomy:32:39|) used the language of Jehovah (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:43:10| where the very words occur \hina pisteusˆte--hoti eg“ eimi\). The phrase \eg“ eimi\ occurs three times here (8:24,28,58|) and also in strkjv@13:19|. Jesus seems to claim absolute divine being as in strkjv@8:58|.

rwp@John:8:44 @{Ye are of your father the devil} (\humeis ek tou patros tou diabolou\). Certainly they can "understand" (\gin“skete\ in 43|) this "talk" (\lalian\) though they will be greatly angered. But they had to hear it (\akouein\ in 43|). It was like a bombshell in spite of the preliminary preparation. {Your will to do} (\thelete poiein\). Present active indicative of \thel“\ and present active infinitive, "Ye wish to go on doing." This same idea Jesus presents in strkjv@Matthew:13:38| (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and strkjv@23:15| (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also strkjv@1John:3:8| for "of the devil" (\ek tou diabolou\) for the one who persists in sinning. In strkjv@Revelation:12:9| the devil is one who leads all the world astray. The Gnostic view that Jesus means "the father of the devil" is grotesque. Jesus does not, of course, here deny that the Jews, like all men, are children of God the Creator, like Paul's offspring of God for all men in strkjv@Acts:17:28|. What he denies to these Pharisees is that they are spiritual children of God who do his will. They do the lusts and will of the devil. The Baptist had denied this same spiritual fatherhood to the merely physical descendants of Abraham (Matthew:3:9|). He even called them "broods of vipers" as Jesus did later (Matthew:12:34|). {A murderer} (\anthr“poktonos\). Old and rare word (Euripides) from \anthr“pos\, man, and \ktein“\, to kill. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1John:3:15|. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. {Stood not in the truth} (\en tˆi alˆtheiƒi ouk estˆken\). Since \ouk\, not \ouch\, is genuine, the form of the verb is \esteken\ the imperfect of the late present stem \stˆk“\ (Mark:11:25|) from the perfect active \hestˆka\ (intransitive) of \histˆmi\, to place. {No truth in him} (\ouk estin alˆtheia en aut“i\). Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. {When he speaketh a lie} (\hotan lalˆi to pseudos\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present active subjunctive of \lale“\. But note the article \to\: "Whenever he speaks the lie," as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence "he speaks out of his own" (\ek t“n idi“n lalei\) like a fountain bubbling up (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:34|). {For he is a liar} (\hoti pseustˆs estin\). Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood (\pseudos\). See strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@Romans:3:4|. Common word in John because of the emphasis on \alˆtheia\ (truth). {And the father thereof} (\kai ho patˆr autou\). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. {Autou} in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, "because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar," making "one," not the devil, the subject of "whenever he speaks," a very doubtful expression.

rwp@John:8:48 @{Thou art a Samaritan and hast a demon} (\Samareitˆs ei su kai daimonion echeis\). On the spur of the moment in their rage and fury they can think of no meaner things to say. They know, of course, that Jesus was not a Samaritan, but he had acted like a Samaritan in challenging their peculiar spiritual privileges (4:9,39|). The charge of having a demon was an old one by the Pharisees (Matthew:12:24|) and it is repeated later (John:10:20|).

rwp@John:8:54 @{If I glorify myself} (\ean eg“ doxas“ emauton\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive (or future active indicative) of \doxaz“\. {It is my Father that glorifieth me} (\estin ho patˆr mou ho doxaz“n me\). The position and accent of \estin\ mean: "Actually my Father is the one," etc. {Of whom ye say} (\hon humeis legete\). The accusative of the person (\hon\) with \legete\ is regular (cf. strkjv@10:36|). {Your God} (\theos hum“n\). Songs:Aleph B D and apparently correct, though A C L W Delta Theta have \hˆm“n\ (our God). The \hoti\ can be taken as recitative (direct quotation, \hˆm“n\, our) or declarative (indirect, that, and so \hum“n\). The Jews claimed God as their peculiar national God as they had said in 41|. Songs:Jesus turns this confession and claim against them.

rwp@John:8:55 @{And ye have not known him} (\kai ouk egn“kate auton\). Adversative use again of \kai\="and yet." Perfect active indicative of \gin“sk“\, the verb for experiential knowledge. This was true of the \kosmos\ (1:10; strkjv@17:25|) and of the hostile Jews (16:3|). Jesus prays that the world may know (17:23|) and the handful of disciples had come to know (17:25|). {But I know him} (\eg“ de oida auton\). Equipped by eternal fellowship to reveal the Father (1:1-18|). This peculiar intimate knowledge Jesus had already claimed (7:29|). Jesus used \oida\ (8:19; strkjv@15:21|) or \gin“sk“\ (17:23,25|) for the knowledge of the Father. No undue distinction can be drawn here. {And if I should say} (\kan eip“\). Third-class condition (concession), "even if I say," with \kai ean\ (\kan\) and second aorist active subjunctive. "Suppose I say." {I shall be like you a liar} (\esomai homoios humin pseustˆs\). Apodosis of the condition. \Homoios\ (like) is followed by the associative-instrumental case \humin\. The word \pseustˆs\ (liar), in spite of the statement that they are the children of the devil, the father of lying (8:44|), comes with a sudden jolt because it is a direct charge. This word liar is not considered polite today in public speech when hurled at definite individuals. There is a rather free use of the word in strkjv@1John:2:4,22; strkjv@4:20; strkjv@5:10|. It is not hard to imagine the quick anger of these Pharisees.

rwp@John:9:3 @{But that the works of God should be made manifest in him} (\all' hina phaner“thˆi ta erga tou theou en aut“i\). Jesus denies both alternatives, and puts God's purpose (\all' hina\ with first aorist subjunctive of \phanero“\) as the true solution. It is sometimes true that disease is the result of personal sin as in the man in strkjv@5:14| and parents can hand on the effects of sin to the third and fourth generations, but there are cases free from blame like this. There is comfort for many sufferers in the words of Jesus here.

rwp@John:9:16 @{Because he keepeth not the sabbath} (\hoti to sabbaton ou tˆrei\). This is reason (causal \hoti\) enough. He violates our rules about the Sabbath and therefore is a Sabbath-breaker as charged when here before (5:10,16,18|). Hence he is not "from God" (\para theou\). Songs:some. {How can a man that is a sinner do such signs?} (\P“s dunatai anthr“pos hamart“los toiauta sˆmeia poiein;\). This was the argument of Nicodemus, himself a Pharisee and one of the Sanhedrin, long ago (3:2|). It was a conundrum for the Pharisees. No wonder there was "a division" (\schisma\, schism, split, from \schiz“\) as in strkjv@7:43; strkjv@10:19|.

rwp@John:9:24 @{A second time} (\ek deuterou\). He had given the Pharisees the facts the first time (9:15|). It was really the third time (see \palin\ in strkjv@9:17|). Now it was like a joke unless the Pharisees meant to imply that his previous story was untrue. {Give glory to God} (\dos doxan t“i the“i\). Second aorist active imperative of \did“mi\ (cf. \sches, hes\). This phrase does not mean gratitude to God as in strkjv@Luke:17:18|. It is rather an adjuration to speak the truth (Joshua:7:19; strkjv@1Samuel:6:5|) as if he had not done it before. Augustine says: "_Quid est Daniel:gloriam Deo? Nega quod accepisti._" Is a sinner (\hamart“los estin\). They can no longer deny the fact of the cure since the testimony of the parents (9:19|) and now wish the man to admit that he was lying in saying that Jesus healed him. He must accept their ecclesiastical authority as proving that Jesus had nothing to do with the cure since Jesus is a sinner. They wish to decide the fact by logic and authority like all persecutors through the ages. Recall the Pharisaic distinction between \dikaios\ (righteous) and \hamart“los\ (sinner).

rwp@John:10:9 @{The door} (\hˆ thura\). Repeated from verse 7|. {By me if any man enter in} (\di' emou ean tis eiselthˆi\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\. Note proleptic and emphatic position of \di' emou\. One can call this narrow intolerance, if he will, but it is the narrowness of truth. If Jesus is the Son of God sent to earth for our salvation, he is the only way. He had already said it in strkjv@5:23|. He will say it again more sharply in strkjv@14:6|. It is unpalatable to the religious dogmatists before him as it is to the liberal dogmatists today. Jesus offers the open door to "any one" (\tis\) who is willing (\thelei\) to do God's will (7:17|). {He shall be saved} (\s“thˆsetai\). Future passive of \s“z“\, the great word for salvation, from \s“s\, safe and sound. The sheep that comes into the fold through Jesus as the door will be safe from thieves and robbers for one thing. He will have entrance (\eisleusetai\) and outgo (\exeleusetai\), he will be at home in the daily routine (cf. strkjv@Acts:1:21|) of the sheltered flock. {And shall find pasture} (\kai nomˆn heurˆsei\). Future (linear future) indicative of \heurisk“\, old word from \nem“\, to pasture. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:2:17| (in sense of growth). This same phrase occurs in strkjv@1Chronicles:4:40|. The shepherd leads the sheep to pasture, but this phrase pictures the joy of the sheep in the pasture provided by the shepherd.

rwp@John:10:28 @{And I give unto them eternal life} (\kag“ did“mi autois z“ˆn ai“nion\). This is the gift of Jesus now to his sheep as stated in strkjv@6:27,40| (cf. strkjv@1John:2:25; strkjv@5:11|). {And they shall never perish} (\kai ou mˆ apol“ntai\). Emphatic double negative with second aorist middle (intransitive) subjunctive of \apollumi\, to destroy. The sheep may feel secure (3:16; strkjv@6:39; strkjv@17:12; strkjv@18:9|). {And no one shall snatch them out of my hand} (\kai ouch harpasei tis auta ek tˆs cheiros mou\). Jesus had promised this security in Galilee (6:37,39|). No wolf, no thief, no bandit, no hireling, no demon, not even the devil can pluck the sheep out of my hand. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:3:3| (Your life is hid together with Christ in God).

rwp@John:10:35 @{If he called them gods} (\ei ekeinous eipen theous\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. The conclusion (verse 36|) is \humeis legete\; ({Do ye say?}). As Jews (and rabbis) they are shut out from charging Jesus with blasphemy because of this usage in the O.T. It is a complete _ad hominem_ argument. To be sure, it is in strkjv@Psalms:82:6| a lower use of the term \theos\, but Jesus did not call himself "Son of Jahweh," but "\huios theou\" which can mean only "Son of _Elohim_." It must not be argued, as some modern men do, that Jesus thus disclaims his own deity. He does nothing of the kind. He is simply stopping the mouths of the rabbis from the charge of blasphemy and he does it effectually. The sentence is quite involved, but can be cleared up. {To whom the word of God came} (\pros hous ho logos tou theou egeneto\). The relative points to \ekeinous\, before. These judges had no other claim to the term \theoi\ (_elohim_). {And the scripture cannot be broken} (\kai ou dunatai luthˆnai hˆ graphˆ\). A parenthesis that drives home the pertinency of the appeal, one that the Pharisees had to accept. \Luthˆnai\ is first aorist passive infinitive of \lu“\, to loosen, to break.

rwp@John:11:9 @{In the day} (\tˆs hˆmeras\). Genitive of time, within the day, the twelve-hour day in contrast with night. The words of Jesus here illustrate what he had said in strkjv@9:4|. It is not blind fatalism that Jesus proclaims, but the opposite of cowardice. He has full confidence in the Father s purpose about his "hour" which has not yet come. Jesus has courage to face his enemies again to do the Father's will about Lazarus. {If a man walk in the day} (\ean tis peripatˆi en tˆi hˆmerƒi\). Condition of the third class, a conceived case and it applies to Jesus who walks in the full glare of noonday. See strkjv@8:12| for the contrast between walking in the light and in the dark. {He stumbleth not} (\ou proskoptei\). He does not cut (or bump) against this or that obstacle, for he can see. \Kopt“\ is to cut and pros, against.

rwp@John:11:33 @{When Jesus therefore saw her weeping} (\Iˆsous oun h“s eiden autˆn klaiousan\). Proleptic position of "Jesus," "Jesus therefore when he saw." She was weeping at the feet of Jesus, not at the tomb. {And the Jews also weeping} (\kai tous Ioudaious klaiontas\). Mary's weeping was genuine, that of the Jews was partly perfunctory and professional and probably actual "wailing" as the verb \klai“\ can mean. \Klai“\ is joined with \alalaz“\ in strkjv@Mark:5:38|, with \ololuz“\ in strkjv@James:5:1|, with \thorube“\ in strkjv@Mark:5:39|, with \penthe“\ in strkjv@Mark:16:10|. It was an incongruous combination. {He groaned in the spirit} (\enebrimˆsato t“i pneumati\). First aorist middle indicative of \embrimaomai\, old verb (from \en\, and \brimˆ\, strength) to snort with anger like a horse. It occurs in the LXX (Daniel:11:30|) for violent displeasure. The notion of indignation is present in the other examples of the word in the N.T. (Mark:1:43; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@Matthew:9:30|). Songs:it seems best to see that sense here and in verse 38|. The presence of these Jews, the grief of Mary, Christ's own concern, the problem of the raising of Lazarus--all greatly agitated the spirit of Jesus (locative case \t“i pneumati\). He struggled for self-control. {Was troubled} (\etaraxen heauton\). First aorist active indicative of \tarass“\, old verb to disturb, to agitate, with the reflexive pronoun, "he agitated himself" (not passive voice, not middle). "His sympathy with the weeping sister and the wailing crowd caused this deep emotion" (Dods). Some indignation at the loud wailing would only add to the agitation of Jesus.

rwp@John:11:35 @{Jesus wept} (\edakrusen ho Iˆsous\). Ingressive first aorist active indicative of \dakru“\, old verb from \dakru\ or \dakruon\, a tear (Acts:20:19|), only here in N.T. It never means to wail, as \klai“\ sometimes does. "Jesus burst into tears." \Klai“\ is used of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:19:41|. See strkjv@Hebrews:5:7| "with strong crying and tears" (\meta kraugˆs kai dakru“n\). Apparently this was as Jesus started towards (see verse 38|) the tomb. In a sense it was a reaction from the severe strain in verse 33|, but chiefly it was the sheer human sympathy of his heart with Martha and Mary touched with the feeling of our common weakness (Hebrews:4:15|). Often all that we can do is to shed tears in grief too deep for words. Jesus understood and understands. This is the shortest verse in the Bible, but no verse carries more meaning in it.

rwp@John:11:38 @{Again groaning in himself} (\palin embrim“menos en heaut“i\). Direct reference to the use of this same word (present middle participle here) in verse 33|, only with \en heaut“i\ (in himself) rather than \t“i pneumati\ (in his spirit), practically the same idea. The speculation concerning his power stirred the depths of his nature again. {Cometh to the tomb} (\erchetai eis to mnˆmeion\). Vivid historical present. {A cave} (\spˆlaion\). Old word (from \speos\, cavern). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:21:13|. {Lay against it} (\epekeito ep' aut“i\). Imperfect middle of \epikeimai\, old verb to lie upon as in strkjv@21:9| and figuratively (1Corinthians:9:16|). Note repetition of \epi\ with locative case. The use of a cave for burial was common (Genesis:23:19|). Either the body was let down through a horizontal opening (hardly so here) or put in a tomb cut in the face of the rock (if so, \epi\ can mean "against"). The stones were used to keep away wild animals from the bodies.

rwp@John:11:50 @{That it is expedient for you} (\hoti sumpherei humin\). Indirect discourse with present active indicative of \sumpher“\ used with the \hina\ clause as subject. It means to bear together, to be profitable, with the dative case as here (\humin\, for you). It is to your interest and that is what they cared most for. {That one man die} (\hina heis anthr“pos apothanˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\ as subject clause with \sumpherei\. See strkjv@16:7; strkjv@18:7| for the same construction. {For the people} (\huper tou laou\). \Huper\ simply means _over_, but can be in behalf of as often, and in proper context the resultant idea is "instead of" as the succeeding clause shows and as is clearly so in strkjv@Galatians:3:13| of the death of Christ and naturally so in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:6|. In the papyri \huper\ is the usual preposition used of one who writes a letter for one unable to write. {And that the whole nation perish not} (\kai mˆ holon to ethnos apolˆtai\). Continuation of the \hina\ construction with \mˆ\ and the second aorist subjunctive of \apollumi\. What Caiaphas has in mind is the giving of Jesus to death to keep the nation from perishing at the hands of the Romans. Politicians are often willing to make a sacrifice of the other fellow.

rwp@John:12:7 @{Suffer her to keep it against the day of my burying} (\Aphes autˆn, hina eis tˆn hˆmeran tou entaphiasmou mou tˆrˆsˆi auto\). This reading (\hina tˆrˆsˆi\, purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \tˆre“\) rather than that of the Textus Receptus (just \tetˆreken\, perfect active indicative) is correct. It is supported by Aleph B D L W Theta. The \hina\ can be rendered as above after \aphes\ according to _Koin‚_ idiom or more probably: "Let her alone: it was that," etc. (supplying "it was"). Either makes good sense. The word \entaphiasmos\ is a later and rare substantive from the late verb \entaphiaz“\, to prepare for burial (Matthew:26:12; strkjv@John:19:40|), and means preparation for burial. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:14:8|. "Preparation for my burial" is the idea here and in Mark. The idea of Jesus is that Mary had saved this money to use in preparing his body for burial. She is giving him the flowers before the funeral. We can hardly take it that Mary did not use all of the ointment for Mark (Mark:14:3|) says that she broke it and yet he adds (Mark:14:8|) what John has here. It is a paradox, but Jesus is fond of paradoxes. Mary has kept this precious gift by giving it now beforehand as a preparation for my burial. We really keep what we give to Christ. This is Mary's glory that she had some glimmering comprehension of Christ's death which none of the disciples possessed.

rwp@John:12:19 @{The Pharisees therefore laid among themselves} (\hoi oun Pharisaioi eipan pros heautous\). Graphic picture of the predicament of the Pharisees standing off and watching the enthusiastic crowds sweep by. As people usually do, they blame each other for the defeat of their plots against Jesus and for his final victory, as it seemed. {Behold how ye prevail nothing} (\the“reite hoti ouk “pheleite ouden\). It was a pathetic confession of failure because the rest of the plotters had bungled the whole thing. "Ye help nothing at all" by your plots and plans. {Lo, the world is gone after him} (\ide ho kosmos opis“ autou apˆlthen\). Exclamatory use of \ide\ and timeless aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\. The "world" is a bunch of fools, they feel, but see for yourselves. And the Sanhedrin had advertised to "find" Jesus! They can find him now!

rwp@John:12:23 @{The hour is come} (\elˆluthen hˆ h“ra\). The predestined hour, seen from the start (2:4|), mentioned by John (7:30; strkjv@8:20|) as not yet come and later as known by Jesus as come (13:1|), twice again used by Jesus as already come (in the prayer of Jesus, strkjv@17:1; strkjv@Mark:14:41|, just before the betrayal in the Garden). The request from the Greeks for this interview stirs the heart of Jesus to its depths. {That the Son of man should be glorified} (\hina doxasthˆi ho huios tou anthr“pou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ (not in the sense of \hote\, when) and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \doxaz“\, same sense as in strkjv@12:16, strkjv@13:31|. The Cross must come before Greeks can really come to Jesus with understanding. But this request shows that interest in Jesus now extends beyond the Jewish circles.

rwp@John:12:32 @{And I, if I be lifted from the earth} (\kag“ an hups“th“ ek tˆs gˆs\). Note proleptic position of \eg“\ (I). Condition of third class (undetermined with prospect) with \an\ (=\ean\ here) with first aorist passive subjunctive of \hupso“\, the verb used in strkjv@3:14| of the brazen serpent and of the Cross of Christ as here and also in strkjv@8:28|. Westcott again presses \ek\ instead of \apo\ to make it refer to the ascension rather than to the Cross, a wrong interpretation surely. {Will draw all men unto myself} (\pantas helkus“ pros emauton\). Future active of \helku“\, late form of \helk“\, to draw, to attract. Jesus had already used this verb of the Father's drawing power (6:44|). The magnetism of the Cross is now known of all men, however little they understand the mystery of the Cross. By "all men" (\pantas\) Jesus does not mean every individual man, for some, as Simeon said (Luke:2:34|) are repelled by Christ, but this is the way that Greeks (verse 22|) can and will come to Christ, by the way of the Cross, the only way to the Father (14:6|).

rwp@John:13:12 @{Sat down again} (\anepesen palin\). Second aorist active indicative of \anapipt“\, old compound verb to fall back, to lie down, to recline. \Palin\ (again) can be taken either with \anepesen\, as here, or with \eipen\ (he said again). {Know ye what I have done to you?} (\gin“skete ti pepoiˆka humin;\). "Do ye understand the meaning of my act?" Perfect active indicative of \poie“\ with dative case (\humin\). It was a searching question, particularly to Simon Peter and Judas.

rwp@John:13:37 @{"Why can I not follow thee even now?"} (\dia ti ou dunamai soi akolouthein arti;\). The use of \arti\ (right now, this minute) instead of \nun\ (at this time, verse 36|) illustrates the impatience of Peter. {I will lay down my life for thee} (\ten psuchˆn mou huper sou thˆs“\). Future active indicative of \tithˆmi\. Peter, like the rest, had not yet grasped the idea of the death of Christ, but, like Thomas (11:16|), he is not afraid of danger. He had heard Christ's words about the good shepherd (10:11|) and knew that such loyalty was the mark of a good disciple.

rwp@John:14:27 @{My peace} (\eirˆnˆn tˆn emˆn\). This is Christ's bequest to the disciples before he goes, the _shalom_ of the orient for greeting and parting, used by Jesus in his appearances after the resurrection (20:19,21,26|) as in strkjv@2John:1:3; strkjv@3John:1:14|, but here and in strkjv@16:33| in the sense of spiritual peace such as only Christ can give and which his Incarnation offers to men (Luke:2:14|). {Neither let it be fearful} (\medˆ deiliat“\). Added to the prohibition in verse 1|, only N.T. example of \deilia“\ (rare word in Aristotle, in a papyrus of one condemned to death), common in LXX, like palpitating of the heart (from \deilos\).

rwp@John:16:15 @{Therefore said I} (\dia touto eipon\). Jesus explains how and why the Holy Spirit can and will reveal to the disciples what they need to know further concerning him. They had failed so far to understand Christ's words about his death and resurrection. The Holy Spirit as Guide and Teacher will teach them what they can only receive and understand after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus.

rwp@John:17:10 @{Are} (\estin\). Singular number in the Greek (is), not the plural \eisin\ (are), emphasizing the unity of the whole as in strkjv@16:15|. "This no creature can say in reference to God" (Luther). {I am glorified in them} (\dedoxasmai en autois\). "I stand glorified (perfect passive indicative of \doxaz“\) in the disciples" (\en autois\), in spite of all their shortcomings and failings. There is comfort for us in this.

rwp@John:17:14 @{Not of the world} (\ouk ek tou kosmou\). They are "in the world" (\en t“i kosm“i\, verse 13|) still and Christ sends them "into the world" (\eis ton kosmon\, verse 18|), but they must not be like the world nor get their spirit, standards, and message "out of the world," else they can do the world no good. These verses (14-19|) picture the Master's ideal for believers and go far towards explaining the failure of Christians in winning the world to Christ. Too often the world fails to see the difference or the gain by the change.

rwp@John:17:15 @{Shouldest take} (\arˆis\). First aorist active subjunctive of \air“\ (liquid verb). {From the evil one} (\ek tou ponˆrou\). Ablative case with \ek\, but can mean the evil man, Satan, or the evil deed. See same ambiguity in strkjv@Matthew:6:13|. But in strkjv@1John:5:18| \ho ponˆros\ is masculine (the evil one). Cf. strkjv@Revelation:3:10|.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE RELATION TO II PETER Beyond a doubt one of these Epistles was used by the other, as one can see by comparing particularly strkjv@Jude:1:3-18| and strkjv@2Peter:2:1-18|. As already said concerning II Peter, scholars are greatly divided on this point, and in our present state of knowledge it does not seem possible to reach a solid conclusion. The probability is that not much time elapsed between them. Mayor devotes a whole chapter to the discussion of the relation between II Peter and Jude:and reaches the conclusion "that in Jude:we have the first thought, in Peter the second thought." That is my own feeling, but it is all so subjective that I have no desire to urge the point unduly. Bigg is equally positive that II Peter comes before Jude.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE DATE This really turns on the genuineness of the Epistle. There is no clear indication of the date, for the Gnostics described can belong to the first or to the second century. If it was used by II Peter, that would place it slightly before that Epistle. The date suggested, 65 to 67 A.D., is purely conjectural.

rwp@Jude:1:25 @{To the only God our Saviour} (\mon“i the“i s“tˆri hˆm“n\). Dative in the noble doxology. See strkjv@Romans:16:27|, \mon“i soph“i the“i\ (to the alone wise God), where also we have \dia Iˆsou Christou\, but without \tou kuriou hˆm“n\ (our Lord) as here. \S“tˆr\ is used of God eight times in the N.T., six of them in the Pastoral Epistles. \Doxa\ (glory) to God or Christ in all the doxologies except strkjv@1Timothy:6:16|. \Megalosunˆ\ (Majesty) is a late LXX word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1|. {Before all time} (\pro pantos tou ai“nos\). Eternity behind us. See same idea in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \pro t“n ai“n“n\. {Now} (\nun\). The present. {For ever more} (\eis pantas tous ai“nas\). "Unto all the ages." All the future. As complete a statement of eternity as can be made in human language.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE GOSPEL OF LUKE BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is not room here for a full discussion of all the interesting problems raised by Luke as the author of the Gospel and Acts. One can find them ably handled in the Introduction to Plummer's volume on Luke's Gospel in the _International and Critical Commentary_, in the Introduction to Ragg's volume on Luke's Gospel in the _Westminster Commentaries_, in the Introduction to Easton's _Gospel According to St. Luke_, Hayes' _Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_, Ramsay's _Luke the Physician_, Harnack's _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake's _Beginnings of Christianity_, Carpenter's _Christianity According to St. Luke_, Cadbury's _The Making of Luke-Acts_, McLachlan's _St. Luke: The Man and His Work_, Robertson's _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, to go no further. It is a fascinating subject that appeals to scholars of all shades of opinion.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL In his Preface or Prologue (Luke:1:1-4|) the author tells us that he had two kinds of sources, oral and written, and that they were many, how many we have no way of telling. It is now generally accepted that we know two of his written sources, Mark's Gospel and Q or the Logia of Jesus (written by Matthew, Papias says). Mark is still preserved and it is not difficult for any one by the use of a harmony of the Gospels to note how Luke made use of Mark, incorporating what he chose, adapting it in various ways, not using what did not suit his purposes. The other source we only know in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke, that is the material common to both, but not in Mark. This also can be noted by any one in a harmony. Only it is probable that this source was more extensive than just the portions used by both Matthew and Luke. It is probable that both Matthew and Luke each used portions of the Logia not used by the other. But there is a large portion of Luke's Gospel which is different from Mark and Matthew. Some scholars call this source L. There is little doubt that Luke had another document for the material peculiar to him, but it is also probable that he had several others. He spoke of "many." This applies especially to chapters 9 to 21. But Luke expressly says that he had received help from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," in oral form this means. It is, then, probable that Luke made numerous notes of such data and used them along with the written sources at his command. This remark applies particularly to chapters 1 and 2 which have a very distinct Semitic (Aramaic) colouring due to the sources used. It is possible, of course, that Mary the mother of Jesus may have written a statement concerning these important matters or that Luke may have had converse with her or with one of her circle. Ramsay, in his volume, _Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?_ shows the likelihood of Luke's contact with Mary or her circle during these two years at Caesarea. Luke handles the data acquired with care and skill as he claims in his Prologue and as the result shows. The outcome is what Renan called the most beautiful book in the world.

rwp@Luke:2:51 @{He was subject unto them} (\ˆn hupotassomenos autois\). Periphrastic imperfect passive. He continued subject unto them, this wondrous boy who really knew more than parents and rabbis, this gentle, obedient, affectionate boy. The next eighteen years at Nazareth (Luke:3:23|) he remained growing into manhood and becoming the carpenter of Nazareth (Mark:6:3|) in succession to Joseph (Matthew:13:55|) who is mentioned here for the last time. Who can tell the wistful days when Jesus waited at Nazareth for the Father to call him to his Messianic task? {Kept} (\dietˆrei\). Imperfect active. Ancient Greek word (\diatˆre“\), but only here and strkjv@Acts:15:29| in the N.T. though in strkjv@Genesis:37:11|. She kept thoroughly (\dia\) all these recent sayings (or things, \rhˆmata\). In strkjv@2:19| \sunetˆrei\ is the word used of Mary after the shepherds left. These she kept pondering and comparing all the things. Surely she has a full heart now. Could she foresee how destiny would take Jesus out beyond her mother's reach?

rwp@Luke:3:14 @{Soldiers also} (\kai strateuomenoi\). Men on service, _militantes_ rather than _milites_ (Plummer). Songs:Paul in strkjv@2Timothy:2:4|. An old word like \strati“tˆs\, soldier. Some of these soldiers acted as police to help the publicans. But they were often rough and cruel. {Do violence to no man} (\mˆdena diaseisˆte\). Here only in the N.T., but in the LXX and common in ancient Greek. It means to shake (seismic disturbance, earthquake) thoroughly (\dia\) and so thoroughly to terrify, to extort money or property by intimidating (3Macc. strkjv@7:21). The Latin employs _concutere_, so. It was a process of blackmail to which Socrates refers (Xenophon, _Memorabilia_, ii. 9,1). This was a constant temptation to soldiers. Might does not make right with Jesus. {Neither exact anything wrongfully} (\mˆde sukophantˆsˆte\). In Athens those whose business it was to inform against any one whom they might find exporting figs out of Attica were called fig-showers or sycophants (\sukophantai\). From \sukon\, fig, and \phain“\, show. Some modern scholars reject this explanation since no actual examples of the word meaning merely a fig-shower have been found. But without this view it is all conjectural. From the time of Aristophanes on it was used for any malignant informer or calumniator. These soldiers were tempted to obtain money by informing against the rich, blackmail again. Songs:the word comes to mean to accuse falsely. The sycophants came to be a regular class of informers or slanderers in Athens. Socrates is quoted by Xenophon as actually advising Crito to employ one in self-defence, like the modern way of using one gunman against another. Demosthenes pictures a sycophant as one who "glides about the market like a scorpion, with his venomous sting all ready, spying out whom he may surprise with misfortune and ruin and from whom he can most easily extort money, by threatening him with an action dangerous in its consequences" (quoted by Vincent). The word occurs only in Luke in the N.T., here and in strkjv@Luke:19:8| in the confession of Zaccheus. It occurs in the LXX and often in the old Greek. {Be content with your wages} (\arkeisthe tois ops“niois hum“n\). Discontent with wages was a complaint of mercenary soldiers. This word for wages was originally anything cooked (\opson\, cooked food), and bought (from \“neomai\, to buy). Hence, "rations," "pay," wages. \Opsarion\, diminutive of \opson\, was anything eaten with bread like broiled fish. Songs:\ops“nion\ comes to mean whatever is bought to be eaten with bread and then a soldier's pay or allowance (Polybius, and other late Greek writers) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:7|. Paul uses the singular of a preacher's pay (2Corinthians:11:8|) and the plural of the wages of sin (Romans:6:23|) = death (death is the diet of sin).

rwp@Luke:3:23 @{Jesus Himself} (\autos Iˆsous\). Emphatic intensive pronoun calling attention to the personality of Jesus at this juncture. When he entered upon his Messianic work. {When he began to teach} (\archomenos\). The words "to teach" are not in the Greek text. The Authorized Version "began to be about thirty years of age," is an impossible translation. The Revised Version rightly supplies "to teach" (\didaskein\) after the present participle \archomenos\. Either the infinitive or the participle can follow \archomai\, usually the infinitive in the _Koin‚_. It is not necessary to supply anything (Acts:1:22|). {Was about thirty years of age} (\ˆn h“sei et“n triakonta\). Tyndale has it right "Jesus was about thirty yere of age when he beganne." Luke does not commit himself definitely to precisely thirty years as the age of Christ. The Levites entered upon full service at that age, but that proves nothing about Jesus. God's prophets enter upon their task when the word of God comes to them. Jesus may have been a few months under or over thirty or a year or two less or more. {Being Son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli} (\“n huios h“s enomizeto I“sˆph tou Helei\). For the discussion of the genealogy of Jesus see on ¯Matthew:1:1-17|. The two genealogies differ very widely and many theories have been proposed about them. At once one notices that Luke begins with Jesus and goes back to Adam, the Son of God, while Matthew begins with Abraham and comes to "Joseph the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ" (Matthew:1:16|). Matthew employs the word "begot" each time, while Luke has the article \tou\ repeating \huiou\ (Son) except before Joseph. They agree in the mention of Joseph, but Matthew says that "Jacob begat Joseph" while Luke calls "Joseph the son of Heli." There are other differences, but this one makes one pause. Joseph, of course, did not have two fathers. If we understand Luke to be giving the real genealogy of Jesus through Mary, the matter is simple enough. The two genealogies differ from Joseph to David except in the cases of Zorobabel and Salathiel. Luke evidently means to suggest something unusual in his genealogy by the use of the phrase "as was supposed" (\h“s enomizeto\). His own narrative in strkjv@Luke:1:26-38| has shown that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. Plummer objects that, if Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Mary, \huios\ must be used in two senses here (son as was supposed of Joseph, and grandson through Mary of Heli). But that is not an unheard of thing. In neither list does Matthew or Luke give a complete genealogy. Just as Matthew uses "begat" for descent, so does Luke employ "son" in the same way for descendant. It was natural for Matthew, writing for Jews, to give the legal genealogy through Joseph, though he took pains to show in strkjv@Matthew:1:16,18-25| that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. It was equally natural for Luke, a Greek himself and writing for the whole world, to give the actual genealogy of Jesus through Mary. It is in harmony with Pauline universality (Plummer) that Luke carries the genealogy back to Adam and does not stop with Abraham. It is not clear why Luke adds "the Son of God" after Adam (3:38|). Certainly he does not mean that Jesus is the Son of God only in the sense that Adam is. Possibly he wishes to dispose of the heathen myths about the origin of man and to show that God is the Creator of the whole human race, Father of all men in that sense. No mere animal origin of man is in harmony with this conception.

rwp@Luke:4:1 @{Full of the Holy Spirit} (\plˆrˆs pneumatos hagiou\). An evident allusion to the descent of the Holy Spirit on Jesus at his baptism (Luke:3:21f.|). The distinctness of the Persons in the Trinity is shown there, but with evident unity. One recalls also Luke's account of the overshadowing of Mary by the Holy Spirit (1:35|). strkjv@Matthew:4:1| says that "Jesus was led of the Spirit" while strkjv@Mark:1:12| states that "the Spirit driveth him forth" which see for discussion. "Jesus had been endowed with supernatural power; and He was tempted to make use of it in furthering his own interests without regard to the Father's will" (Plummer). {Was led by the Spirit} (\ˆgeto en toi pneumati\). Imperfect passive, continuously led. \En\ may be the instrumental use as often, for strkjv@Matthew:4:1| has here \hupo\ of direct agency. But Matthew has the aorist passive \anˆchthˆ\ which may be ingressive as he has \eis tˆn erˆmon\ (into the wilderness) while Luke has \en t“i erˆm“i\ (in the wilderness). At any rate Luke affirms that Jesus was now continuously under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Hence in this same sentence he mentions the Spirit twice. {During the forty days} (\hˆmerƒs tesserakonta\). Accusative of duration of time, to be connected with "led" not with "tempted." He was led in the Spirit during these forty days (cf. strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:2|, forty years). The words are amphibolous also in strkjv@Mark:1:13|. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| seems to imply that the three recorded temptations came at the close of the fasting for forty days. That can be true and yet what Luke states be true also. These three may be merely specimens and so "representative of the struggle which continued throughout the whole period" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:4:29 @{They rose up and cast him forth} (\anastantes exebalon\). Second aorist ingressive active participle and second aorist effective active indicative. A movement towards lynching Jesus. {Unto the brow of the hill} (\hˆos ophruos tou orous\). Eyebrow (\ophrus\), in Homer, then any jutting prominence. Only here in the N.T. Hippocrates speaks of the eyebrow hanging over. {Was built} (\“ikodomˆto\). Past perfect indicative, stood built. {That they might throw him down headlong} (\h“ste katakrˆmnisai auton\). Neat Greek idiom with \h“ste\ for intended result, "so as to cast him down the precipice." The infinitive alone can convey the same meaning (Matthew:2:2; strkjv@20:28; strkjv@Luke:2:23|). \Krˆmnos\ is an overhanging bank or precipice from \kremannumi\, to hang. \Kata\ is down. The verb occurs in Xenophon, Demosthenes, LXX, Josephus. Here only in the N.T. At the southwest corner of the town of Nazareth such a cliff today exists overhanging the Maronite convent. Murder was in the hearts of the people. By pushing him over they hoped to escape technical guilt.

rwp@Luke:4:36 @{Amazement came} (\egeneto thambos\). Mark has \ethambˆthˆsan\. {They spake together one with another} (\sunelaloun pros allˆlous\). Imperfect indicative active and the reciprocal pronoun. Mark has simply the infinitive \sunzˆtein\ (question). {For} (\hoti\). We have here an ambiguous \hoti\ as in strkjv@1:45|, which can be either the relative "that" or the casual \hoti\ "because" or "for," as the Revised Version has it. Either makes good sense. Luke adds here \dunamei\ (with power) to Mark's "authority" (\exousian\). {And they come out} (\exerchontai\). Songs:Luke where Mark has "and they obey him" (\kai upakouousin aut“i\).

rwp@Luke:5:25 @{Whereon he lay} (\eph' ho katekeito\). Imperfect, upon which he had been lying down. Luke uses this phrase instead of repeating \klinidion\ (verse 24|). {Glorifying God} (\doxaz“n ton theon\). As one can well imagine.

rwp@Luke:6:18 @{With unclean spirits} (\apo pneumat“n akathart“n\). In an amphibolous position for it can be construed with "troubled," (present passive participle \enochloumenoi\) or with "were healed" (imperfect passive, \etherapeuonto\). The healings were repeated as often as they came. Note here both verbs, \iaomai\ and \therapeu“\, used of the miraculous cures of Jesus. \Therapeu“\ is the verb more commonly employed of regular professional cures, but no such distinction is made here.

rwp@Luke:6:19 @{Sought to touch him} (\ezˆtoun haptesthai autou\). Imperfect active. One can see the surging, eager crowd pressing up to Jesus. Probably some of them felt that there was a sort of virtue or magic in touching his garments like the poor woman in strkjv@Luke:8:43f|. (Mark:5:23; strkjv@Matthew:9:21|). {For power came forth from him} (\hoti dunamis par' autou exˆrcheto\). Imperfect middle, {power was coming out from him}. This is the reason for the continual approach to Jesus. {And healed them all} (\kai iƒto pantas\). Imperfect middle again. Was healing all, kept on healing all. The preacher today who is not a vehicle of power from Christ to men may well question why that is true. Undoubtedly the failure to get a blessing is one reason why many people stop going to church. One may turn to Paul's tremendous words in strkjv@Phillipians:4:13|: "I have strength for all things in him who keeps on pouring power into me" (\panta ischu“ en t“i endunamounti me\). It was at a time of surpassing dynamic spiritual energy when Jesus delivered this greatest of all sermons so far as they are reported to us. The very air was electric with spiritual power. There are such times as all preachers know.

rwp@Luke:6:20 @{And he lifted up his eyes} (\kai autos eparas tous opthalmous autou\). First aorist active participle from \epair“\. Note also Luke's favourite use of \kai autos\ in beginning a paragraph. Vivid detail alone in Luke. Jesus looked the vast audience full in the face. strkjv@Matthew:5:2| mentions that "he opened his mouth and taught them" (began to teach them, inchoative imperfect, \edidasken\). He spoke out so that the great crowd could hear. Some preachers do not open their mouths and do not look up at the people, but down at the manuscript and drawl along while the people lose interest and even go to sleep or slip out. {Ye poor} (\hoi pt“choi\). {The poor}, but "yours" (\humetera\) justifies the translation "ye." Luke's report is direct address in all the four beatitudes and four woes given by him. It is useless to speculate why Luke gives only four of the eight beatitudes in Matthew or why Matthew does not give the four woes in Luke. One can only say that neither professes to give a complete report of the sermon. There is no evidence to show that either saw the report of the other. They may have used a common source like Q (the Logia of Jesus) or they may have had separate sources. Luke's first beatitude corresponds with Matthew's first, but he does not have "in spirit" after "poor." Does Luke represent Jesus as saying that poverty itself is a blessing? It can be made so. Or does Luke represent Jesus as meaning what is in Matthew, poverty of spirit? {The kingdom of God} (\hˆ basileia tou theou\). strkjv@Matthew:5:3| has "the kingdom of heaven" which occurs alone in Matthew though he also has the one here in Luke with no practical difference. The rabbis usually said "the kingdom of heaven." They used it of the political Messianic kingdom when Judaism of the Pharisaic sort would triumph over the world. The idea of Jesus is in the sharpest contrast to that conception here and always. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of the meaning of the word "kingdom." It is the favourite word of Jesus for the rule of God in the heart here and now. It is both present and future and will reach a glorious consummation. Some of the sayings of Christ have apocalyptic and eschatological figures, but the heart of the matter is here in the spiritual reality of the reign of God in the hearts of those who serve him. The kingdom parables expand and enlarge upon various phases of this inward life and growth.

rwp@Luke:7:11 @{Soon afterwards} (\en toi hexˆs\). According to this reading supply \chron“i\, time. Other MSS. read \tˆi hexˆs\ (supply \hˆmerƒi\, day). \Hexˆs\ occurs in Luke and Acts in the N.T. though old adverb of time. {That} (\Hoti\). Not in the Greek, the two verbs \egeneto\ and \eporeuthˆ\ having no connective (asyndeton). {Went with him} (\suneporeuonto aut“i\). Imperfect middle picturing the procession of disciples and the crowd with Jesus. Nain is not mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. There is today a hamlet about two miles west of Endor on the north slope of Little Hermon. There is a burying-place still in use. Robinson and Stanley think that the very road on which the crowd with Jesus met the funeral procession can be identified.

rwp@Luke:7:33 @{John the Baptist is come} (\elˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative where strkjv@Matthew:11:18| has \ˆlthen\ second aorist active indicative. Songs:as to verse 34|. Luke alone has "bread" and "wine." Otherwise these verses like strkjv@Matthew:11:18,19|, which see for discussion of details. There are actually critics today who say that Jesus was called the friend of sinners and even of harlots because he loved them and their ways and so deserved the slur cast upon him by his enemies. If men can say that today we need not wonder that the Pharisees and lawyers said it then to justify their own rejection of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:7:37 @{A woman which was in the city, a sinner} (\gunˆ hˆtis en tˆi polei hamart“los\). Probably in Capernaum. The use of \hˆtis\ means "Who was of such a character as to be" (cf. strkjv@8:3|) and so more than merely the relative \hˆ\, who, that is, "who was a sinner in the city," a woman of the town, in other words, and known to be such. \Hamart“los\, from \hamartan“\, to sin, means devoted to sin and uses the same form for feminine and masculine. It is false and unjust to Mary Magdalene, introduced as a new character in strkjv@Luke:8:2|, to identify this woman with her. Luke would have no motive in concealing her name here and the life of a courtesan would be incompatible with the sevenfold possession of demons. Still worse is it to identify this courtesan not only with Mary Magdalene, but also with Mary of Bethany simply because it is a Simon who gives there a feast to Jesus when Mary of Bethany does a beautiful deed somewhat like this one here (Mark:14:3-9; strkjv@Matthew:26:6-13; strkjv@John:12:2-8|). Certainly Luke knew full well the real character of Mary of Bethany (10:38-42|) so beautifully pictured by him. But a falsehood, once started, seems to have more lives than the cat's proverbial nine. The very name Magdalene has come to mean a repentant courtesan. But we can at least refuse to countenance such a slander on Mary Magdalene and on Mary of Bethany. This sinful woman had undoubtedly repented and changed her life and wished to show her gratitude to Jesus who had rescued her. Her bad reputation as a harlot clung to her and made her an unwelcome visitor in the Pharisee's house. {When she knew} (\epignousa\). Second aorist active participle from \epigin“sk“\, to know fully, to recognize. She came in by a curious custom of the time that allowed strangers to enter a house uninvited at a feast, especially beggars seeking a gift. This woman was an intruder whereas Mary of Bethany was an invited guest. "Many came in and took their places on the side seats, uninvited and yet unchallenged. They spoke to those at table on business or the news of the day, and our host spoke freely to them" (Trench in his _Parables_, describing a dinner at a Consul's house at Damietta). {He was sitting at meat} (\katakeitai\). Literally, he is reclining (present tense retained in indirect discourse in Greek). {An alabaster cruse of ointment} (\alabastron murou\). See on ¯Matthew:26:7| for discussion of \alabastron\ and \murou\.

rwp@Luke:7:38 @{Standing behind at his feet} (\stƒsa opis“ para tous podas autou\). Second aorist active participle from \histˆmi\ and intransitive, first aorist \estˆsa\ being transitive. The guest removed his sandals before the meal and he reclined on the left side with the feet outward. She was standing beside (\para\) his feet {weeping} (\klaiousa\). She was drawn irresistibly by gratitude to Jesus and is overcome with emotion before she can use the ointment; her tears (\tois dakrusin\, instrumental case of \dakru\) take the place of the ointment. {Wiped them with the hair of her head} (\tais thrixin tˆs kephalˆs autˆs exemassen\). Inchoative imperfect of an old verb \ekmass“\, to rub out or off, began to wipe off, an act of impulse evidently and of embarrassment. "Among the Jews it was a shameful thing for a woman to let down her hair in public; but she makes this sacrifice" (Plummer). Songs:Mary of Bethany wiped the feet of Jesus with her hair (John:12:3|) with a similar sacrifice out of her great love for Jesus. This fact is relied on by some to prove that Mary of Bethany had been a woman of bad character, surely an utter failure to recognize Mary's motive and act. {Kissed} (\katephilei\). Imperfect active of \kataphile“\, to kiss repeatedly (force of \kata\), and accented by the tense of continued action here. The word in the N.T. occurs here, of the prodigal's father (15:20|), of the kiss of Judas (Mark:14:45; strkjv@Matthew:26:49|), of the Ephesian elders (Acts:20:37|). " Kissing the feet was a common mark of deep reverence, especially to leading rabbis" (Plummer). {Anointed them with the ointment} (\ˆleiphen t“i mur“i\). Imperfect active again of \aleiph“\, a very common verb. \Chri“\ has a more religious sense. The anointing came after the burst of emotional excitement.

rwp@Luke:8:11 @{Is this} (\estin de hautˆ\). Means this. Jesus now proceeds to interpret his own parable. {The seed is the word of God} (\ho sporos estin ho logos tou theou\). The article with both subject and predicate as here means that they are interchangeable and can be turned round: The word of God is the seed. The phrase "the word of God" does not appear in Matthew and only once in Mark (Mark:7:13|) and John (John:10:35|), but four times in Luke (5:1; strkjv@8:11,21; strkjv@11:28|) and twelve times in Acts. In strkjv@Mark:4:14| we have only "the word." In strkjv@Mark:3:31| we have "the will of God," and in strkjv@Matthew:12:46| "the will of my Father" where strkjv@Luke:8:21| has "the word of God." This seems to show that Luke has the subjective genitive here and means the word that comes from God.

rwp@Luke:8:12 @{Those by the wayside} (\hoi para tˆn hodon\). As in strkjv@Mark:4:15; strkjv@Matthew:13:19| so here the people who hear the word = the seed are discussed by metonymy. {The devil} (\ho diabolos\). The slanderer. Here strkjv@Mark:4:15| has Satan. {From their heart} (\apo tˆs kardias aut“n\). Here Mark has "in them." It is the devil's business to snatch up the seed from the heart before it sprouts and takes root. Every preacher knows how successful the devil is with his auditors. strkjv@Matthew:13:19| has it "sown in the heart." {That they may not believe and be saved} (\hina mˆ pisteusantes s“th“sin\). Peculiar to Luke. Negative purpose with aorist active participle and first aorist (ingressive) passive subjunctive. Many reasons are offered today for the failure of preachers to win souls. Here is the main one, the activity of the devil during and after the preaching of the sermon. No wonder then that the sower must have good seed and sow wisely, for even then he can only win partial success.

rwp@Luke:8:39 @{Throughout the whole city} (\kath' holˆn tˆn polin\). strkjv@Mark:5:20| has it "in Decapolis." He had a great story to tell and he told it with power. The rescue missions in our cities can match this incident with cases of great sinners who have made witnesses for Christ.

rwp@Luke:9:28 @{About eight days} (\h“sei hˆmerai okt“\). A _nominativus pendens_ without connexion or construction. strkjv@Mark:9:2| (Matthew:17:1|) has "after six days" which agrees with the general statement. {Into the mountain} (\eis to oros\). Probably Mount Hermon because we know that Jesus was near Caesarea Philippi when Peter made the confession (Mark:8:27; strkjv@Matthew:16:13|). Hermon is still the glory of Palestine from whose heights one can view the whole of the land. It was a fit place for the Transfiguration. {To pray} (\proseuxasthai\). Peculiar to Luke who so often mentions Christ's habit of prayer (cf. strkjv@3:21|). See also verse 29| "as he was praying" (\en t“i proseuchesthai\, one of Luke's favourite idioms). {His countenance was altered} (\egeneto to eidos tou pros“pou autou heteron\). Literally, "the appearance of his face became different." strkjv@Matthew:17:2| says that "his face did shine as the sun." Luke does not use the word "transfigured" (\metemorph“thˆ\) in strkjv@Mark:9:2; strkjv@Matthew:17:2|. He may have avoided this word because of the pagan associations with this word as Ovid's \Metamorphoses\. {And his raiment became white and dazzling} (\kai ho himatismos autou leukos exastrapt“n\). Literally, {And his raiment white radiant}. There is no _and_ between "white" and "dazzling." The participle \exastrapt“n\ is from the compound verb meaning to flash (\astrapt“\) out or forth (\ex\). The simple verb is common for lightning flashes and bolts, but the compound in the LXX and here alone in the N.T. See strkjv@Mark:9:3| "exceeding white" and strkjv@Matthew:17:2| "white as the light."

rwp@Luke:9:32 @{Were heavy with sleep} (\ˆsan bebarˆmenoi hupn“i\). Periphrastic past perfect of \bare“\, a late form for the ancient \barun“\ (not in N.T. save Textus Receptus in strkjv@Luke:21:34|). This form, rare and only in passive (present, aorist, perfect) in the N.T., is like \barun“\, from \barus\, and that from \baros\, weight, burden (Galatians:6:2|). \Hupn“i\ is in the instrumental case. They had apparently climbed the mountain in the early part of the night and were now overcome with sleep as Jesus prolonged his prayer. Luke alone tells of their sleep. The same word is used of the eyes of these three disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matthew:26:43|) and of the hearts of many (Luke:21:34|). {But when they were fully awake} (\diagrˆgorˆsantes de\). First aorist active participle of this late (Herodian) and rare compound verb (here alone in the N.T.), \diagrˆgore“\ (Luke is fond of compounds with \dia\). The simple verb \grˆgore“\ (from the second perfect active \egrˆgora\) is also late, but common in the LXX and the N.T. The effect of \dia\ can be either to remain awake in spite of desire to sleep (margin of Revised Version) or to become thoroughly awake (ingressive aorist tense also) as Revised Version has it. This is most likely correct. The Syriac Sinaitic has it "When they awoke." Certainly they had been through a strain. {His glory} (\tˆn doxan autou\). See also verse 26| in the words of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:9:60 @{Leave the dead to bury their own dead} (\aphes tous nekrous thapsai tous heaut“n nekrous\). This paradox occurs so in strkjv@Matthew:8:22|. The explanation is that the spiritually dead can bury the literally dead. For such a quick change in the use of the same words see strkjv@John:5:21-29| (spiritual resurrection from sin in strkjv@John:5:21-27|, bodily resurrection from the grave, strkjv@John:5:28,29|) and strkjv@John:11:25f|. The harshness of this proverb to the scribe probably is due to the fact that he was manifestly using his aged father as an excuse for not giving Christ active service. {But go thou and publish abroad the kingdom of God} (\su de apelth“n diaggelle tˆn basileian tou theou\). The scribe's duty is put sharply (\But do thou, su de\). Christ called him to preach, and he was using pious phrases about his father as a pretext. Many a preacher has had to face a similar delicate problem of duty to father, mother, brothers, sisters and the call to preach. This was a clear case. Jesus will help any man called to preach to see his duty. Certainly Jesus does not advocate renunciation of family duties on the part of preachers.

rwp@Luke:10:1 @{Appointed} (\anedeixen\). First aorist active indicative of \anadeiknumi\, an old verb, not only common, but in LXX. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:1:24|. Cf. \anadeixis\ in strkjv@Luke:1:80|. To show forth, display, proclaim, appoint. {Seventy others} (\heterous hebdomˆkonta kai\). The "also" (\kai\) and the "others" point back to the mission of the Twelve in Galilee (9:1-6|). Some critics think that Luke has confused this report of a mission in Judea with that in Galilee, but needlessly so. What earthly objection can there be to two similar missions? B D Syr. Cur. and Syr. Sin. have "seventy-two." The seventy elders were counted both ways and the Sanhedrin likewise and the nations of the earth. It is an evenly balanced point. {Two and two} (\ana duo\). For companionship as with the Twelve though strkjv@Mark:6:7| has it \duo\ (vernacular idiom). B K have here \ana duo\, a combination of the idiom in strkjv@Mark:6:7| and that here. {He himself was about to come} (\ˆmellen autos erchesthai\). Imperfect of \mell“\ with present infinitive and note \autos\. Jesus was to follow after and investigate the work done. This was only a temporary appointment and no names are given, but they could cover a deal of territory.

rwp@Luke:10:5 @{First say} (\pr“ton legete\). Say first. The adverb \pr“ton\ can be construed with "enter" (\eiselthˆte\), but probably with \legete\ is right. The word spoken is the usual oriental salutation.

rwp@Luke:10:22 @{Knoweth who the Son is} (\gin“skei tis estin ho huios\). Knows by experience, \gin“skei\. Here strkjv@Matthew:11:27| has \epigin“skei\ (fully knows) and simply \ton huion\ (the Son) instead of the "who" (\tis\) clause. Songs:also in "who the Father is" (\tis estin ho pater\). But the same use and contrast of "the Father," "the Son." in both Matthew and Luke, "an aerolite from the Johannean heaven" (Hase). No sane criticism can get rid of this Johannine bit in these Gospels written long before the Fourth Gospel was composed. We are dealing here with the oldest known document about Christ (the Logia) and the picture is that drawn in the Fourth Gospel (see my _The Christ of the Logia_). It is idle to try to whittle away by fantastic exegesis the high claims made by Jesus in this passage. It is an ecstatic prayer in the presence of the Seventy under the rapture of the Holy Spirit on terms of perfect equality and understanding between the Father and the Son in the tone of the priestly prayer in strkjv@John:17|. We are justified in saying that this prayer of supreme Fellowship with the Father in contemplation of final victory over Satan gives us a glimpse of the prayers with the Father when the Son spent whole nights on the mountain alone with the Father. Here is the Messianic consciousness in complete control and with perfect confidence in the outcome. Here as in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| by the use of {willeth to reveal him} (\boulˆtai apokalupsai\). The Son claims the power to reveal the Father "to whomsoever he wills" (\h“i an boulˆtai\, indefinite relative and present subjunctive of \boulomai\, to will, not the future indicative). This is divine sovereignty most assuredly. Human free agency is also true, but it is full divine sovereignty in salvation that is here claimed along with possession (\paredothˆ\, timeless aorist passive indicative) of all power from the Father. Let that supreme claim stand.

rwp@Luke:10:28 @{Thou hast answered right} (\orth“s apekrithˆs\). First aorist passive indicative second singular with the adverb \orth“s\. The answer was correct so far as the words went. In strkjv@Mark:12:34| Jesus commends the scribe for agreeing to his interpretation of the first and the second commandments. That scribe was "not far from the kingdom of God," but this lawyer was "tempting" Jesus. {Do this and thou shalt live} (\touto poiei kai zˆsˆi\). Present imperative (keep on doing this forever) and the future indicative middle as a natural result. There was only one trouble with the lawyer's answer. No one ever did or ever can "do" what the law lays down towards God and man always. To slip once is to fail. Songs:Jesus put the problem squarely up to the lawyer who wanted to know {by doing what}. Of course, if he kept the law {perfectly always}, he would inherit eternal life.

rwp@Luke:11:49 @{The wisdom of God} (\hˆ sophia tou theou\). In strkjv@Matthew:23:34| Jesus uses "I send" (\eg“ apostell“\) without this phrase "the wisdom of God." There is no book to which it can refer. Jesus is the wisdom of God as Paul shows (1Corinthians:1:30|), but it is hardly likely that he so describes himself here. Probably he means that God in his wisdom said, but even so "Jesus here speaks with confident knowledge of the Divine counsels" (Plummer). See strkjv@Luke:10:22; strkjv@15:7,10|. Here the future tense occurs, "I will send" (\apostel“\). {Some of them} (\ex aut“n\). No "some" (\tinas\) in the Greek, but understood. They will act as their fathers did. They will kill and persecute.

rwp@Luke:12:4 @{Unto you my friends} (\humin tois philois\). As opposed to the Pharisees and lawyers in strkjv@11:43,46,53|. {Be not afraid of} (\mˆ phobˆthˆte apo\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \mˆ\, ingressive aorist, do not become afraid of, with \apo\ and the ablative like the Hebrew _min_ and the English "be afraid of," a translation Hebraism as in strkjv@Matthew:10:28| (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 102). {Have no more that they can do} (\mˆ echont“n perissoteron ti poiˆsai\). Luke often uses the infinitive thus with \ech“\, a classic idiom (7:40,42; strkjv@12:4,50; strkjv@14:14; strkjv@Acts:4:14|, etc.).

rwp@Luke:12:22 @{Unto his disciples} (\pros tous mathˆtas autou\). Songs:Jesus turns from the crowd to the disciples (verses 22-40|, when Peter interrupts the discourse). From here to the end of the chapter Luke gives material that appears in Matthew, but not in one connection as here. In Matthew part of it is in the charge to the Twelve on their tour in Galilee, part in the eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives. None of it is in Mark. Hence Q or the Logia seems to be the source of it. The question recurs again whether Jesus repeated on other occasions what is given here or whether Luke has here put together separate discourses as Matthew is held by many to have done in the Sermon on the Mount. We have no way of deciding these points. We can only say again that Jesus would naturally repeat his favourite sayings like other popular preachers and teachers. Songs:Luke:12:22-31| corresponds to strkjv@Matthew:6:25-33|, which see for detailed discussion. The parable of the rich fool was spoken to the crowd, but this exhortation to freedom from care (22-31|) is to the disciples. Songs:the language in strkjv@Luke:12:22| is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:6:25|. See there for \mˆ merimnƒte\ (stop being anxious) and the deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question (\phagˆte, endusˆsthe\). Songs:verse 23| here is the same in strkjv@Matthew:6:25| except that there it is a question with \ouch\ expecting the affirmative answer, whereas here it is given as a reason (\gar\, for) for the preceding command.

rwp@Luke:12:45 @{Shall say} (\eipˆi\). Second aorist subjunctive, with \ean\, condition of the third class, undetermined, but with prospect of being determined. {Delayeth} (\chronizei\). From \chronos\, time, spends time, lingers. {Shall begin} (\arxˆtai\). First aorist middle subjunctive with \ean\ and the same condition as \eipˆi\, above. {The menservants} (\tous paidas\) {and the maidservants} (\kai tas paidiskas\). \Paidiskˆ\ is a diminutive of \pais\ for a young female slave and occurs in the papyri, orginally just a damsel. Here \pais\ can mean slave also though strictly just a boy.

rwp@Luke:12:49 @{I came to cast fire} (\Pur ˆlthon balein\). Suddenly Jesus lets the volcano in his own heart burst forth. The fire was already burning. "Christ came to set the world on fire, and the conflagration had already begun" (Plummer). The very passion in Christ's heart would set his friends on fire and his foes in opposition as we have just seen (Luke:11:53f.|). It is like the saying of Jesus that he came to bring not peace, but a sword, to bring cleavage among men (Matthew:10:34-36|). {And what will I, if it is already kindled?} (\kai ti thel“ ei ˆdˆ anˆphthˆ;\). It is not clear what this passage means. Probably \ti\ is be taken in the sense of "how" (\p“s\). How I wish. Then \ei\ can be taken as equal to \hoti\. How I wish that it were already kindled. \Anˆphthˆ\ is first aorist passive of \anapt“\, to set fire to, to kindle, to make blaze. Probably Luke means the conflagration to come by his death on the Cross for he changes the figure and refers to that more plainly.

rwp@Luke:13:23 @{Are they few that be saved?} (\ei oligoi hoi s“zomenoi;\). Note use of \ei\ as an interrogative which can be explained as ellipsis or as \ei=ˆ\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024). This was an academic theological problem with the rabbis, the number of the elect.

rwp@Luke:15:32 @{It was meet} (\edei\). Imperfect tense. It expressed a necessity in the father's heart and in the joy of the return that justifies the feasting. \Euphranthˆnai\ is used again (first aorist passive infinitive) and \charˆnai\ (second aorist passive infinitive) is more than mere hilarity, deep-seated joy. The father repeats to the elder son the language of his heart used in verse 24| to his servants. A real father could do no less. One can well imagine how completely the Pharisees and scribes (verse 2|) were put to silence by these three marvellous parables. The third does it with a graphic picture of their own attitude in the case of the surly elder brother. Luke was called a painter by the ancients. Certainly he has produced a graphic pen picture here of God's love for the lost that justifies forever the coming of Christ to the world to seek and to save the lost. It glorifies also soul-saving on the part of his followers who are willing to go with Jesus after the lost in city and country, in every land and of every race.

rwp@Luke:16:8 @{His lord commended} (\epˆinesen ho kurios\). The steward's lord praised him though he himself had been wronged again (see verse 1| "wasting his goods"). {The unrighteous steward} (\ton oikonomon tˆs adikias\). Literally, the steward of unrighteousness. The genitive is the case of genus, species, the steward distinguished by unrighteousness as his characteristic. See "the mammon of unrighteousness" in verse 9|. See "the forgetful hearer" in strkjv@James:1:25|. It is a vernacular idiom common to Hebrew, Aramaic, and the _Koin‚_. {Wisely} (\phronim“s\). An old adverb, though here alone in the N.T. But the adjective \phronimos\ from which it comes occurs a dozen times as in strkjv@Matthew:10:16|. It is from \phrone“\ and that from \phrˆn\, the mind (1Corinthians:14:20|), the discerning intellect. Perhaps "shrewdly" or "discreetly" is better here than "wisely." The lord does not absolve the steward from guilt and he was apparently dismissed from his service. His shrewdness consisted in finding a place to go by his shrewdness. He remained the steward of unrighteousness even though his shrewdness was commended. {For} (\hoti\). Probably by this second \hoti\ Jesus means to say that he cites this example of shrewdness because it illustrates the point. "This is the moral of the whole parable. Men of the world in their dealings with men like themselves are more prudent than the children of light in their intercourse with one another" (Plummer). We all know how stupid Christians can be in their co-operative work in the kingdom of God, to go no further. {Wiser than} (\phronim“teroi huper\). Shrewder beyond, a common Greek idiom.

rwp@Luke:16:10 @{Faithful in a very little} (\pistos en elachist“i\). Elative superlative. One of the profoundest sayings of Christ. We see it in business life. The man who can be trusted in a very small thing will be promoted to large responsibilities. That is the way men climb to the top. Men who embezzle in large sums began with small sums. Verses 10-13| here explain the point of the preceding parables.

rwp@Luke:16:16 @{Entereth violently into it} (\eis autˆn biazetai\). A corresponding saying occurs in strkjv@Matthew:11:12| in a very different context. In both the verb \biazetai\, occurs also, but nowhere else in the N.T. It is present middle here and can be middle or passive in Matthew, which see. It is rare in late prose. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 258) cites an inscription where \biazomai\ is reflexive middle and used absolutely. Here the meaning clearly is that everyone forces his way into the kingdom of God, a plea for moral enthusiasm and spiritual passion and energy that some today affect to despise.

rwp@Luke:16:21 @{With the crumbs that fell} (\apo t“n piptont“n\). From the things that fell from time to time. The language reminds one of strkjv@Luke:15:16| (the prodigal son) and the Syro-Phoenician woman (Mark:7:28|). Only it does not follow that this beggar did not get the scraps from the rich man's table. Probably he did, though nothing more. Even the wild street dogs would get them also. {Yea, even the dogs} (\alla kai hoi kunes\). For \alla kai\ see also strkjv@12:7; strkjv@24:22|. \Alla\ can mean "yea," though it often means "but." Here it depends on how one construes Luke's meaning. If he means that he was dependent on casual scraps and it was so bad that even the wild dogs moreover were his companions in misery, the climax came that he was able to drive away the dogs. The other view is that his hunger was unsatisfied, but even the dogs increased his misery. {Licked his sores} (\epeleichon ta helkˆ autou\). Imperfect active of \epileich“\, a late vernacular _Koin‚_ verb, to lick over the surface. It is not clear whether the licking of the sores by the dogs added to the misery of Lazarus or gave a measure of comfort, as he lay in his helpless condition. "Furrer speaks of witnessing dogs and lepers waiting together for the refuse" (Bruce). It was a scramble between the dogs and Lazarus.

rwp@Luke:18:27 @{The impossible with men possible with God} (\ta adunata para anthr“pois dunata para t“i the“i\). Paradoxical, but true. Take your stand "beside" (\para\) God and the impossible becomes possible. Clearly then Jesus meant the humanly impossible by the parabolic proverb about the camel going through the needle's eye. God can break the grip of gold on a man's life, but even Jesus failed with this young ruler.

rwp@Luke:20:20 @{They watched him} (\paratˆrˆsantes\). First aorist active participle of \paratˆre“\, a common Greek verb to watch on the side or insidiously or with evil intent as in strkjv@Luke:6:7| (\paretˆrounto\) of the scribes and Pharisees. See on ¯Mark:3:2|. There is no "him" in the Greek. They were watching their chance. {Spies} (\enkathetous\). An old verbal adjective from \enkathiˆmi\, to send down in or secretly. It means liers in wait who are suborned to spy out, one who is hired to trap one by crafty words. Only here in the N.T. {Feigned themselves} (\hupokrinomenous heautous\). Hypocritically professing to be "righteous" (\dikaious\). "They posed as scrupulous persons with a difficulty of conscience" (Plummer). {That they might take hold of his speech} (\hina epilab“ntai autou logou\). Second aorist middle of \epilamban“\, an old verb for seizing hold with the hands and uses as here the genitive case. These spies are for the purpose of (\hina\) catching hold of the talk of Jesus if they can get a grip anywhere. This is their direct purpose and the ultimate purpose or result is also stated, "so as to deliver him up" (\h“ste paradounai auton\). Second aorist active infinitive of \paradid“mi\, to hand over, to give from one's side to another. The trap is all set now and ready to be sprung by these "spies." {Of the governor} (\tou hˆgemonos\). The Sanhedrin knew that Pilate would have to condemn Jesus if he were put to death. Songs:then all their plans focus on this point as the goal. Luke alone mentions this item here.

rwp@Luke:20:42 @{For David himself} (\autos gar Daueid\). This language of Jesus clearly means that he treats David as the author of strkjv@Psalms:110|. The inspiration of this Psalm is expressly stated in strkjv@Mark:12:36; strkjv@Matthew:22:43| (which see) and the Messianic character of the Psalm in all three Synoptics who all quote the LXX practically alike. Modern criticism that denies the Davidic authorship of this Psalm has to say either that Jesus was ignorant of the fact about it or that he declined to disturb the current acceptation of the Davidic authorship. Certainly modern scholars are not agreed on the authorship of strkjv@Psalms:110|. Meanwhile one can certainly be excused for accepting the natural implication of the words of Jesus here, "David himself." {In the book of the Psalms} (\en bibl“i Psalm“n\). Compare strkjv@3:4| "in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet."

rwp@Luke:21:20 @{Compassed with armies} (\kukloumenˆn hupo stratoped“n\). Present passive participle of \kuklo“\, to circle, encircle, from \kuklos\, circle. Old verb, but only four times in N.T. The point of this warning is the present tense, being encircled. It will be too late after the city is surrounded. It is objected by some that Jesus, not to say Luke, could not have spoken (or written) these words before the Roman armies came. One may ask why not, if such a thing as predictive prophecy can exist and especially in the case of the Lord Jesus. The word \stratoped“n\ (\stratos\, army, \pedon\, plain) is a military camp and then an army in camp. Old word, but only here in the N.T. {Then know} (\tote gn“te\). Second aorist active imperative of \gin“sk“\. Christians did flee from Jerusalem to Pella before it was too late as directed in strkjv@Luke:21:21; strkjv@Mark:13:14f.; strkjv@Matthew:24:16f|.

rwp@Luke:22:8 @{Peter and John} (\Petron kai I“anˆn\). strkjv@Mark:14:13| has only "two" while strkjv@Matthew:26:17| makes the disciples take the initiative. The word passover in this context is used either of the meal, the feast day, the whole period (including the unleavened bread). "Eat the passover" can refer to the meal as here or to the whole period of celebration (John:18:28|).

rwp@Luke:22:36 @{Buy a sword} (\agorasat“ machairan\). This is for defence clearly. The reference is to the special mission in Galilee (Luke:9:1-6; strkjv@Mark:6:6-13; strkjv@Matthew:9:35-11:1|). They are to expect persecution and bitter hostility (John:15:18-21|). Jesus does not mean that his disciples are to repel force by force, but that they are to be ready to defend his cause against attack. Changed conditions bring changed needs. This language can be misunderstood as it was then.

rwp@Luke:23:15 @{No nor yet} (\all' oude\). But not even. {Hath been done by him} (\estin pepragmenon aut“i\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \prass“\, common verb, to do. The case of \aut“i\ can be regarded as either the dative or the instrumental (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 534,542).

rwp@Luke:23:31 @{In the green tree} (\en hugr“i xul“i\). Green wood is hard to burn and so is used for the innocent. {In the dry} (\en t“i xˆr“i\). Dry wood kindles easily and is a symbol for the guilty. This common proverb has various applications. Here the point is that if they can put Jesus to death, being who he is, what will happen to Jerusalem when its day of judgment comes? {What shall be done} (\ti genˆtai\). Deliberative subjunctive.

rwp@Luke:23:41 @{Nothing amiss} (\ouden atopon\). Nothing out of place (\a\ privative, \topos\, place). Old word, three times in the N.T. (Luke:23:44; strkjv@Acts:28:6; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:2|). This can only mean that this robber accepts the claims of Jesus to be true. He is dying for claiming to be Messiah, as he is.

rwp@Luke:23:45 @{The sun's light failing} (\tou hˆliou ekleipontos\). Genitive absolute of the present active participle of \ekleip“\, an old verb, to leave out, omit, pass by, to fail, to die. The word was used also of the eclipse of the sun or moon. But this was impossible at this time because the moon was full at the passover. Hence many documents change this correct text to "the sun was darkened" (\eskotisthˆ ho hˆlios\) to obviate the difficulty about the technical eclipse. But the sun can be darkened in other ways. In a London fog at noon the street lights are often turned on. The Revised Version translates it correctly, "the sun's light failing." Leave the darkness unexplained. {In the midst} (\meson\). In the middle. strkjv@Mark:15:38; strkjv@Matthew:27:51| have "in two" (\eis duo\).

rwp@Luke:24:45 @{Opened he their mind} (\diˆnoixen aut“n ton noun\). The same verb as that in verses 31,32| about the eyes and the Scriptures. Jesus had all these years been trying to open their minds that they might understand the Scriptures about the Messiah and now at last he makes one more effort in the light of the Cross and the Resurrection. They can now see better the will and way of God, but they will still need the power of the Holy Spirit before they will fully know the mind of Christ.

rwp@Luke:24:52 @{Worshipped him} (\proskunˆsantes auton\). Here again we have one of Westcott and Hort's Western non-interpolations that may be genuine or not. {With great joy} (\meta charas megalˆs\). Now that the Ascension has come they are no longer in despair. Joy becomes the note of victory as it is today. No other note can win victories for Christ. The bells rang in heaven to greet the return of Jesus there, but he set the carillon of joy to ringing on earth in human hearts in all lands and for all time.

rwp@Mark:1:3 @{The voice of one crying} (\phonˆ bo“ntos\). God is coming to his people to deliver them from their captivity in Babylon. Songs:the prophet cries like a voice in the wilderness to make ready for the coming of God. When the committee from the Sanhedrin came to ask John who he was, he used this very language of Isaiah (John:1:23|). He was only a voice, but we can still hear the echo of that voice through the corridor of the centuries. {Paths straight} (\eutheias tas tribous\). Automobile highways today well illustrate the wonderful Persian roads for the couriers of the king and then for the king himself. The Roman Empire was knit together by roads, some of which survive today. John had a high and holy mission as the forerunner of the Messiah.

rwp@Mark:1:35 @{In the morning, a great while before day} (\pr“i ennucha lian\). Luke has only "when it was day" (\genomenˆs hˆmeras\). The word \pr“i\ in Mark means the last watch of the night from three to six A.M. \Ennucha lian\ means in the early part of the watch while it was still a bit dark (cf. strkjv@Mark:16:2| \lian pr“i\). {Rose up and went out} (\anastas exˆlthen\). Out of the house and out of the city, off (\apˆlthen\, even if not genuine, possibly a conflate reading from strkjv@6:32,46|). "Flight from the unexpected reality into which His ideal conception of His calling had brought Him" (H.J. Holtzmann). Gould notes that Jesus seems to retreat before his sudden popularity, to prayer with the Father "that he might not be ensnared by this popularity, or in any way induced to accept the ways of ease instead of duty." But Jesus also had a plan for a preaching tour of Galilee and "He felt He could not begin too soon. He left in the night, fearing opposition from the people" (Bruce). Surely many a popular preacher can understand this mood of Jesus when in the night he slips away to a solitary place for prayer. Jesus knew what it was to spend a whole night in prayer. He knew the blessing of prayer and the power of prayer. {And there prayed} (\k'akei prosˆucheto\). Imperfect tense picturing Jesus as praying through the early morning hours.

rwp@Mark:3:3 @{Stand forth} (\egeire eis to meson\). Step into the middle of the room where all can see. It was a bold defiance of the Christ's spying enemies. Wycliff rightly puts it: {They aspieden him}. They played the spy on Jesus. One can see the commotion among the long-bearded hypocrites at this daring act of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:3:29 @{Guilty of an eternal sin} (\enochos estin ai“niou hamartˆmatos\). The genitive of the penalty occurs here with \enochos\. In saying that Jesus had an unclean spirit (verse 30|) they had attributed to the devil the work of the Holy Spirit. This is the unpardonable sin and it can be committed today by men who call the work of Christ the work of the devil, Nietzsche may be cited as an instance in point. Those who hope for a second probation hereafter may ponder carefully how a soul that eternally sins in such an environment can ever repent. That is eternal punishment. The text here is \hamartˆmatos\ (sin), not \krise“s\ (judgment), as the Textus Receptus has it.

rwp@Mark:4:19 @{The lusts of other things} (\hai peri ta loipa epithumiai\). All the passions or longings, sensual, worldly, "pleasures of this life" (\hˆdon“n tou biou\) as Luke has it (Luke:8:14|), the world of sense drowning the world of spirit. The word \epithumia\ is not evil in itself. One can yearn (this word) for what is high and holy (Luke:22:15; strkjv@Phillipians:1:23|).

rwp@Mark:5:6 @{Ran and worshipped} (\edramen kai prosekunˆsen\). "At first perhaps with hostile intentions. The onrush of the naked yelling maniac must have tried the newly recovered confidence of the Twelve. We can imagine their surprise when, on approaching, he threw himself on his knees" (Swete).

rwp@Mark:5:13 @{And he gave them leave} (\kai epetrepsen autois\). These words present the crucial difficulty for interpreters as to why Jesus allowed the demons to enter the hogs and destroy them instead of sending them back to the abyss. Certainly it was better for hogs to perish than men, but this loss of property raises a difficulty of its own akin to the problem of tornadoes and earthquakes. The question of one man containing so many demons is difficult also, but not much more so than how one demon can dwell in a man and make his home there. One is reminded of the man out of whom a demon was cast, but the demon came back with seven other demons and took possession. Gould thinks that this man with a legion of demons merely makes a historical exaggeration. "I feel as if I were possessed by a thousand devils." That is too easy an explanation. See on ¯Matthew:8:32| for "rushed down the steep." {They were choked} (\epnigonto\). Imperfect tense picturing graphically the disappearance of pig after pig in the sea. strkjv@Luke:8:33| has \apegnigˆ\, {choked off}, constative second aorist passive indicative, treated as a whole, strkjv@Matthew:8:32| merely has "perished" (\apethanon\; died).

rwp@Mark:5:30 @{Perceiving in himself} (\epignous en heaut“i\). She thought, perhaps, that the touch of Christ's garment would cure her without his knowing it, a foolish fancy, no doubt, but one due to her excessive timidity. Jesus felt in his own consciousness. The Greek idiom more exactly means: "Jesus perceiving in himself the power from him go out" (\tˆn ex autou dunamin exelthousan\). The aorist participle here is punctiliar simply and timeless and can be illustrated by strkjv@Luke:10:18|: "I was beholding Satan fall" (\ethe“roun ton Satanƒn pesonta\), where \pesonta\ does not mean _fallen_ (\pept“kota\) as in strkjv@Revelation:9:1| nor falling (\piptonta\) but simply the constative aorist {fall} (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 684). Songs:here Jesus means to say: "I felt in myself the power from me go." Scholars argue whether in this instance Jesus healed the woman by conscious will or by unconscious response to her appeal. Some even argue that the actual healing took place after Jesus became aware of the woman's reaching for help by touching his garment. What we do know is that Jesus was conscious of the going out of power from himself. strkjv@Luke:8:46| uses \egn“n\ (personal knowledge), but Mark has \epignous\ (personal and additional, clear knowledge). One may remark that no real good can be done without the outgoing of power. That is true of mother, preacher, teacher, doctor. {Who touched my garments?} (\Tis mou hˆpsato t“n himati“n;\). More exactly, {Who touched me on my clothes}; The Greek verb uses two genitives, of the person and the thing. It was a dramatic moment for Jesus and for the timid woman. Later it was a common practice for the crowds to touch the hem of Christ's garments and be healed (Mark:6:56|). But here Jesus chose to single out this case for examination. There was no magic in the garments of Jesus. Perhaps there was superstition in the woman's mind, but Jesus honoured her darkened faith as in the case of Peter's shadow and Paul's handkerchief.

rwp@Mark:6:13 @{They cast out many demons and they anointed with oil} (\exeballon kai ˆleiphon elai“i\). Imperfect tenses, continued repetition. Alone in Mark. This is the only example in the N.T. of \aleiph“ elai“i\ used in connection with healing save in strkjv@James:5:14|. In both cases it is possible that the use of oil (olive oil) as a medicine is the basis of the practice. See strkjv@Luke:10:34| for pouring oil and wine upon the wounds. It was the best medicine of the ancients and was used internally and externally. It was employed often after bathing. The papyri give a number of examples of it. The only problem is whether \aleiph“\ in Mark and James is used wholly in a ritualistic and ceremonial sense or partly as medicine and partly as a symbol of divine healing. The very word \aleiph“\ can be translated rub or anoint without any ceremony. "Traces of a ritual use of the unction of the sick appear first among Gnostic practices of the second century" (Swete). We have today, as in the first century, God and medicine. God through nature does the real healing when we use medicine and the doctor.

rwp@Mark:6:38 @{Go and see} (\hupagete idete\). John says that Jesus asked Philip to find out what food they had (John:6:5f.|) probably after the disciples had suggested that Jesus send the crowd away as night was coming on (Mark:6:35f.|). On this protest to his command that they feed the crowds (Mark:6:37; strkjv@Matthew:14:16; strkjv@Luke:9:13|) Jesus said "Go see" how many loaves you can get hold of. Then Andrew reports the fact of the lad with five barley loaves and two fishes (John:6:8f.|). They had suggested before that two hundred pennyworth (\dˆnari“n diakosi“n\. See on ¯Matthew:18:28|) was wholly inadequate and even that (some thirty-five dollars) was probably all that or even more than they had with them. John's Gospel alone tells of the lad with his lunch which his mother had given him.

rwp@Mark:6:44 @{Men} (\andres\). Men as different from women as in strkjv@Matthew:14:21|. This remarkable miracle is recorded by all Four Gospels, a nature miracle that only God can work. No talk about accelerating natural processes will explain this miracle. And three eyewitnesses report it: the Logia of Matthew, the eyes of Peter in Mark, the witness of John the Beloved Disciple (Gould). The evidence is overwhelming.

rwp@Mark:6:52 @{For they understood not} (\ou gar sunˆkan\). Explanation of their excessive amazement, viz., their failure to grasp the full significance of the miracle of the loaves and fishes, a nature miracle. Here was another, Jesus walking on the water. Their reasoning process (\kardia\ in the general sense for all the inner man) {was hardened} (\ˆn pep“r“menˆ\). See on ¯3:5| about \p“r“sis\. Today some men have such intellectual hardness or denseness that they cannot believe that God can or would work miracles, least of all nature miracles.

rwp@Mark:7:9 @{Full well do ye reject the commandment of God that ye may keep your traditions} (\kal“s atheteite tˆn entolˆn tou theou hina tˆn paradosin hum“n tˆrˆsˆte\). One can almost see the scribes withering under this terrible arraignment. It was biting sarcasm that cut to the bone. The evident irony should prevent literal interpretation as commendation of the Pharisaic pervasion of God's word. See my _The Pharisees and Jesus_ for illustrations of the way that they placed this oral tradition above the written law. See on ¯Matthew:15:7|.

rwp@Mark:7:19 @{Making all meats clean} (\kathariz“n panta ta br“mata\). This anacoluthon can be understood by repeating {he says} (\legei\) from verse 18|. The masculine participle agrees with Jesus, the speaker. The words do not come from Jesus, but are added by Mark. Peter reports this item to Mark, probably with a vivid recollection of his own experience on the housetop in Joppa when in the vision Peter declined three times the Lord's invitation to kill and eat unclean animals (Acts:10:14-16|). It was a riddle to Peter as late as that day. "Christ asserts that _Levitical_ uncleanness, such as eating with unwashed hands, is of small importance compared with _moral_ uncleanness" (Vincent). The two chief words in both incidents, here and in Acts, are {defile} (\koino“\) and {cleanse} (\kathariz“\). "What God cleansed do not thou treat as defiled" (Acts:10:15|). It was a revolutionary declaration by Jesus and Peter was slow to understand it even after the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Jesus was amply justified in his astonished question: {Perceive ye not?} (\ou noeite;\). They were making little use of their intelligence in trying to comprehend the efforts of Jesus to give them a new and true spiritual insight.

rwp@Mark:8:31 @{He began to teach them} (\ˆrxato didaskein autous\). Mark is fond of this idiom, but it is not a mere rhetorical device. strkjv@Matthew:16:21| expressly says "from that time." They had to be told soon about the approaching death of Jesus. The confession of faith in Jesus indicated that it was a good time to begin. Death at the hands of the Sanhedrin (elders, chief priests, and scribes) in which Pharisees and Sadducees had about equal strength. The resurrection on the third day is mentioned, but it made no impression on their minds. This rainbow on the cloud was not seen. {After three days} (\meta treis hˆmeras\). strkjv@Matthew:16:21| has "the third day" (\tˆi tritˆi hˆmerƒi\) in the locative case of point of time (so also strkjv@Luke:9:22|). There are some people who stickle for a strict interpretation of "after three days" which would be "on the fourth day," not "on the third day." Evidently Mark's phrase here has the same sense as that in Matthew and Luke else they are hopelessly contradictory. In popular language "after three days" can and often does mean "on the third day," but the fourth day is impossible.

rwp@Mark:9:3 @{Glistering, exceeding white} (\stilbonta leuka lian\). Old words, all of them. strkjv@Matthew:17:2| has {white as the light} (\leuka h“s to ph“s\), strkjv@Luke:9:29| "white and dazzling" (\leukos exastrapt“n\) like lightning. {Songs:as no fuller on earth can whiten them} (\hoia gnapheus epi tˆs gˆs ou dunatai hout“s leukƒnai\). \Gnaph“\ is an old word to card wool. Note \hout“s\, so, so white. Some manuscripts in Matthew add \h“s chi“n\, as snow. Probably the snow-capped summit of Hermon was visible on this very night. See on ¯Matthew:17:2| for "transfigured."

rwp@Mark:9:19 @{Bring him unto me} (\pherete auton pros me\). The disciples had failed and their unbelief had led to this fiasco. Even the disciples were like and part of the {faithless} (\apistos\, unbelieving) generation in which they lived. The word {faithless} does not here mean treacherous as it does with us. But Jesus is not afraid to undertake this case. We can always come to Jesus when others fail us.

rwp@Mark:9:22 @{But if thou canst} (\all 'ei ti dunˆi\). Jesus had asked (verse 21|) the history of the case like a modern physician. The father gave it and added further pathetic details about the fire and the water. The failure of the disciples had not wholly destroyed his faith in the power of Jesus, though the conditional form (first class, assuming it to be true) does suggest doubt whether the boy can be cured at all. It was a chronic and desperate case of epilepsy with the demon possession added. {Help us} (\boethˆson hemin\). Ingressive aorist imperative. Do it now. With touching tenderness he makes the boy's case his own as the Syrophoenician woman had said, "Have mercy on me" (Matthew:15:21|). The leper had said: "If thou wilt" (Mark:1:40|). This father says: "If thou canst."

rwp@Mark:9:23 @{If thou canst} (\to ei dunˆi\). The Greek has a neat idiom not preserved in the English translation. The article takes up the very words of the man and puts the clause in the accusative case of general reference. "As to the 'if thou canst,' all things can (\dunata\) to the one who believes." The word for "possible" is \dunata\, the same root as \dunˆi\ (canst). This quick turn challenges the father's faith. On this use of the Greek article see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 766.

rwp@Mark:9:48 @{Their worm} (\ho sk“lˆx aut“n\). "The worm, i.e. that preys upon the inhabitants of this dread realm" (Gould). Two bold figures of Gehenna combined (the gnawing worm, the burning flame). No figures of Gehenna can equal the dread reality which is here described. See strkjv@Isaiah:66:24|.

rwp@Mark:9:50 @{Have salt in yourselves} (\echete en heautois hala\). Jesus had once called them the salt of the earth (Matthew:5:13|) and had warned them against losing the saltness of the salt. If it is \analon\, nothing can {season} (\artu“\) it and it is of no use to season anything else. It is like an exploded shell, a burnt-out crater, a spent force. This is a warning for all Christians.

rwp@Mark:14:33 @{Greatly amazed and sore troubled} (\ekthambeisthai kai adˆmonein\). strkjv@Matthew:26:37| has "sorrowful and sore troubled." See on Matt. about \adˆmonein\. Mark alone uses \exthambeisthai\ (here and in strkjv@9:15|). There is a papyrus example given by Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_. The verb \thambe“\ occurs in strkjv@Mark:10:32| for the amazement of the disciples at the look of Jesus as he went toward Jerusalem. Now Jesus himself feels amazement as he directly faces the struggle in the Garden of Gethsemane. He wins the victory over himself in Gethsemane and then he can endure the loss, despising the shame. For the moment he is rather amazed and homesick for heaven. "Long as He had foreseen the Passion, when it came clearly into view its terror exceeded His anticipations" (Swete). "He learned from what he suffered," (Hebrews:5:8|) and this new experience enriched the human soul of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:14:35 @{Fell on the ground} (\epipten epi tˆs gˆs\). Descriptive imperfect. See him falling. Matthew has the aorist \epesen\. {Prayed} (\prosˆucheto\). Imperfect, prayed repeatedly or inchoative, began to pray. Either makes good sense. {The hour} (\hˆ h“ra\). Jesus had long looked forward to this "hour" and had often mentioned it (John:7:30; strkjv@8:20; strkjv@12:23,27; strkjv@13:1|). See again in strkjv@Mark:14:41|. Now he dreads it, surely a human trait that all can understand.

rwp@Mark:14:68 @{I neither know nor understand} (\oute oida oute epistamai\). This denial is fuller in Mark, briefest in John. {What thou sayest} (\su ti legeis\). Can be understood as a direct question. Note position of {thou} (\su\), proleptical. {Into the porch} (\eis to proaulion\). Only here in the New Testament. Plato uses it of a prelude on a flute. It occurs also in the plural for preparations the day before the wedding. Here it means the vestibule to the court. strkjv@Matthew:26:71| has \pul“na\, a common word for gate or front porch. {And the cock crew} (\kai alekt“r eph“nˆsen\). Omitted by Aleph B L Sinaitic Syriac. It is genuine in verse 72| where "the second time" (\ek deuterou\) occurs also. It is possible that because of verse 72| it crept into verse 68|. Mark alone alludes to the cock crowing twice, originally (Mark:14:30|), and twice in verse 72|, besides verse 68| which is hardly genuine.

rwp@Mark:16:2 @{When the sun was risen} (\anateilantos tou hˆliou\). Genitive absolute, aorist participle, though some manuscripts read \anatellontos\, present participle. strkjv@Luke:24:1| has it "at early dawn" (\orthrou batheos\) and strkjv@John:20:1| "while it was yet dark." It was some two miles from Bethany to the tomb. Mark himself gives both notes of time, "very early" (\lian pr“i\), "when the sun was risen." Probably they started while it was still dark and the sun was coming up when they arrived at the tomb. All three mention that it was on the first day of the week, our Sunday morning when the women arrive. The body of Jesus was buried late on Friday before the sabbath (our Saturday) which began at sunset. This is made clear as a bell by strkjv@Luke:23:54| "and the sabbath drew on." The women rested on the sabbath (Luke strkjv@23:56|). This visit of the women was in the early morning of our Sunday, the first day of the week. Some people are greatly disturbed over the fact that Jesus did not remain in the grave full seventy-two hours. But he repeatedly said that he would rise on the third day and that is precisely what happened. He was buried on Friday afternoon. He was risen on Sunday morning. If he had really remained in the tomb full three days and then had risen after that, it would have been on the fourth day, not on the third day. The occasional phrase "after three days" is merely a vernacular idiom common in all languages and not meant to be exact and precise like "on the third day." We can readily understand "after three days" in the sense of "on the third day." It is impossible to understand "on the third day" to be "on the fourth day." See my _Harmony of the Gospels_, pp. 289-91.

rwp@Matthew:1:1 @{The Book} (\biblos\). There is no article in the Greek, but the following genitives make it definite. It is our word Bible that is here used, _the_ Book as Sir Walter Scott called it as he lay dying. The usual word for book is a diminutive form (\biblion\), a little book or roll such as we have in strkjv@Luke:4:17|, "The roll of the prophet Isaiah." The pieces of papyrus (\papuros\), our paper, were pasted together to make a roll of varying lengths according to one's needs. Matthew, of course, is not applying the word book to the Old Testament, probably not to his own book, but to "the genealogical table of Jesus Christ" (\biblos genese“s Iˆsou Christou\), "the birth roll of Jesus Christ" Moffatt translates it. We have no means of knowing where the writer obtained the data for this genealogy. It differs radically from that in strkjv@Luke:3:23-38|. One can only give his own theory of the difference. Apparently in Matthew we have the actual genealogy of Joseph which would be the legal pedigree of Jesus according to Jewish custom. In Luke we apparently have the actual genealogy of Mary which would be the real line of Jesus which Luke naturally gives as he is writing for the Gentiles.

rwp@Matthew:1:18 @{Of the Holy Ghost} (\ek pneumatos hagiou\). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was found with child" (\heurethˆ en gastri echousa\). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|; and involved in strkjv@Colossians:1:15-19|) and by John (John:1:14; strkjv@17:5|). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though strkjv@John:1:14| seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world's Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God's will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. strkjv@John:3:16| is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us.

rwp@Matthew:1:24 @{Took unto him his wife} (\parelaben tˆn gunaika autou\). The angel had told him not to be afraid to "take to his side" Mary his wife (1:20|). Songs:when he awoke from his sleep he promptly obeyed the angel and "took his wife home" (Moffatt). One can only imagine the relief and joy of Mary when Joseph nobly rose to his high duty toward her. I have tried to sketch Mary's problems in _Mary the Mother of Jesus: Her Problems and Her Glory._

rwp@Matthew:2:3 @{He was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him} (\etarachthˆ kai pƒsa Ierosoluma met' autou\). Those familiar with the story of Herod the Great in Josephus can well understand the meaning of these words. Herod in his rage over his family rivalries and jealousies put to death the two sons of Mariamne (Aristobulus and Alexander), Mariamne herself, and Antipater, another son and once his heir, besides the brother and mother of Mariamne (Aristobulus, Alexandra) and her grandfather John Hyrcanus. He had made will after will and was now in a fatal illness and fury over the question of the Magi. He showed his excitement and the whole city was upset because the people knew only too well what he could do when in a rage over the disturbance of his plans. "The foreigner and usurper feared a rival, and the tyrant feared the rival would be welcome" (Bruce). Herod was a hated Idumaean.

rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{For this is he that was spoken of by Isaiah the prophet} (\houtos gar estin ho rhˆtheis dia Esaiou tou prophˆtou\). This is Matthew's way of interpreting the mission and message of the Baptist. He quotes strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| where "the prophet refers to the return of Israel from the exile, accompanied by their God" (McNeile). He applies it to the work of John as "a voice crying in the wilderness" for the people to make ready the way of the Lord who is now near. He was only a voice, but what a voice he was. He can be heard yet across the centuries.

rwp@Matthew:3:8 @{Fruit worthy of repentance} (\Karpon axion tˆs metanoias\). John demands proof from these men of the new life before he administers baptism to them. "The fruit is not the change of heart, but the acts which result from it" (McNeile). It was a bold deed for John thus to challenge as unworthy the very ones who posed as lights and leaders of the Jewish people. "Any one can do (\poiˆsate, vide\ strkjv@Genesis:1:11|) acts externally good but only a good man can grow a crop of right acts and habits" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:5:3 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). The English word "blessed" is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal \eulogˆtoi\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle \eulogˆmenos\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:42| of Mary by Elizabeth and in strkjv@Matthew:21:9|. Both forms come from \euloge“\, to speak well of (\eu, logos\). The Greek word here (\makarioi\) is an adjective that means "happy" which in English etymology goes back to hap, chance, good-luck as seen in our words haply, hapless, happily, happiness. "Blessedness is, of course, an infinitely higher and better thing than mere happiness" (Weymouth). English has thus ennobled "blessed" to a higher rank than "happy." But "happy" is what Jesus said and the _Braid Scots New Testament_ dares to say "Happy" each time here as does the _Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version_. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. "Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love" (Vincent). Jesus takes this word "happy" and puts it in this rich environment. "This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult" (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word "happy" to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. "If you know these things, happy (\makarioi\) are you if you do them" (John:13:17|). "Happy (\makarioi\) are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John:20:29|). And Paul applies this adjective to God, "according to the gospel of the glory of the happy (\makariou\) God" (1Timothy:1:11|. Cf. also strkjv@Titus:2:13|). The term "Beatitudes" (Latin _beatus_) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by \makarioi\. It will repay one to make a careful study of all the "beatitudes" in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (3-11|), though the beatitudes in verses 10 and 11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, "for" (\hoti\), that shows the spiritual quality involved. Some of the phrases employed by Jesus here occur in the Psalms, some even in the Talmud (itself later than the New Testament, though of separate origin). That is of small moment. "The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces " (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. {The poor in spirit} (\hoi pt“choi t“i pneumati\). Luke has only "the poor," but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, "the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted" (McNeile). The word used here (\pt“choi\) is applied to the beggar Lazarus in strkjv@Luke:16:20,22| and suggests spiritual destitution (from \pt“ss“\ to crouch, to cower). The other word \penˆs\ is from \penomai\, to work for one's daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word \pt“chos\ is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than \penˆs\. "The kingdom of heaven" here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the _summum bonum_ and is what matters most.

rwp@Matthew:5:4 @{They that mourn} (\hoi penthountes\). This is another paradox. This verb "is most frequent in the LXX for mourning for the dead, and for the sorrows and sins of others" (McNeile). "There can be no comfort where there is no grief" (Bruce). Sorrow should make us look for the heart and hand of God and so find the comfort latent in the grief.

rwp@Matthew:5:5 @{The meek} (\hoi praeis\). Wycliff has it "Blessed be mild men." The ancients used the word for outward conduct and towards men. They did not rank it as a virtue anyhow. It was a mild equanimity that was sometimes negative and sometimes positively kind. But Jesus lifted the word to a nobility never attained before. In fact, the Beatitudes assume a new heart, for the natural man does not find in happiness the qualities mentioned here by Christ. The English word "meek" has largely lost the fine blend of spiritual poise and strength meant by the Master. He calls himself "meek and lowly in heart" (Matthew:11:29|) and Moses is also called meek. It is the gentleness of strength, not mere effeminacy. By "the earth" (\tˆn gˆn\) Jesus seems to mean the Land of Promise (Psalms:37:11|)...is the whole earth. Can it...

rwp@Matthew:5:8 @{Shall see God} (\ton theon opsontai\). Without holiness no man will see the Lord in heaven (Hebrews:12:14|). The Beatific Vision is only possible here on earth to those with pure hearts. No other can see the King now. Sin befogs and beclouds the heart so that one cannot see God. Purity has here its widest sense and includes everything.

rwp@Matthew:5:11 @{Falsely, for my sake} (\pseudomenoi heneken emou\). Codex Bezae changes the order of these last Beatitudes, but that is immaterial. What does matter is that the bad things said of Christ's followers shall be untrue and that they are slandered for Christ's sake. Both things must be true before one can wear a martyr's crown and receive the great reward (\misthos\) in heaven. No prize awaits one there who deserves all the evil said of him and done to him here.

rwp@Matthew:6:2 @{Sound not a trumpet} (\mˆ salpisˆis\). Is this literal or metaphorical? No actual instance of such conduct has been found in the Jewish writings. McNeile suggests that it may refer to the blowing of trumpets in the streets on the occasion of public fasts. Vincent suggests the thirteen trumpet-shaped chests of the temple treasury to receive contributions (Luke:21:2|). But at Winona Lake one summer a missionary from India named Levering stated to me that he had seen Hindu priests do precisely this very thing to get a crowd to see their beneficences. Songs:it looks as if the rabbis could do it also. Certainly it was in keeping with their love of praise. And Jesus expressly says that "the hypocrites" (\hoi hupokritai\) do this very thing. This is an old word for actor, interpreter, one who personates another, from \hupokrinomai\ to answer in reply like the Attic \apokrinomai\. Then to pretend, to feign, to dissemble, to act the hypocrite, to wear a mask. This is the hardest word that Jesus has for any class of people and he employs it for these pious pretenders who pose as perfect. {They have received their reward} (\apechousin ton misthon aut“n\). This verb is common in the papyri for receiving a receipt, "they have their receipt in full," all the reward that they will get, this public notoriety. "They can sign the receipt of their reward" (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 229). Songs:_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 110f. \Apochˆ\ means "receipt." Songs:also in strkjv@6:5|.

rwp@Matthew:6:6 @{Into thy closet} (\eis to tameion\). The word is a late syncopated form of \tamieion\ from \tamias\ (steward) and the root \tam-\ from \temn“\, to cut. Songs:it is a store-house, a separate apartment, one's private chamber, closet, or "den" where he can withdraw from the world and shut the world out and commune with God.

rwp@Matthew:6:11 @{Our daily bread} (\ton arton hˆm“n ton epiousion\). This adjective "daily" (\epiousion\) coming after "Give us this day" (\dos hˆmŒn sˆmeron\) has given expositors a great deal of trouble. The effort has been made to derive it from \epi\ and \“n\ (\ousa\). It clearly comes from \epi\ and \i“n\ (\epi\ and \eimi\) like \tˆi epiousˆi\ ("on the coming day," "the next day," strkjv@Acts:16:12|). But the adjective \epiousios\ is rare and Origen said it was made by the Evangelists Matthew and Luke to reproduce the idea of an Aramaic original. Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_ say: "The papyri have as yet shed no clear light upon this difficult word (Matthew:6:11; strkjv@Luke:11:3|), which was in all probability a new coinage by the author of the Greek Q to render his Aramaic Original" (this in 1919). Deissmann claims that only about fifty purely New Testament or "Christian" words can be admitted out of the more than 5,000 used. "But when a word is not recognizable at sight as a Jewish or Christian new formation, we must consider it as an ordinary Greek word until the contrary is proved. \Epiousios\ has all the appearance of a word that originated in trade and traffic of the everyday life of the people (cf. my hints in _Neutestamentliche Studien Georg Heinrici dargebracht_, Leipzig, 1914, pp. 118f.). The opinion here expressed has been confirmed by A. Debrunner's discovery (_Theol. Lit. Ztg_. 1925, Col. 119) of \epiousios\ in an ancient housekeeping book" (_Light from the Ancient East_, New ed. 1927, p. 78 and note 1). Songs:then it is not a word coined by the Evangelist or by Q to express an Aramaic original. The word occurs also in three late MSS. after 2Macc. strkjv@1:8, \tous epiousious\ after \tous artous\. The meaning, in view of the kindred participle (\epiousˆi\) in strkjv@Acts:16:12|, seems to be "for the coming day," a daily prayer for the needs of the next day as every housekeeper understands like the housekeeping book discovered by Debrunner.

rwp@Matthew:6:13 @{From the evil one} (\apo tou ponˆrou\). The ablative case in the Greek obscures the gender. We have no way of knowing whether it is \ho ponˆros\ (the evil one) or \to ponˆron\ (the evil thing). And if it is masculine and so \ho ponˆros\, it can either refer to the devil as the Evil One _par excellence_ or the evil man whoever he may be who seeks to do us ill. The word \ponˆros\ has a curious history coming from \ponos\ (toil) and \pone“\ (to work). It reflects the idea either that work is bad or that this particular work is bad and so the bad idea drives out the good in work or toil, an example of human depravity surely.

rwp@Matthew:6:19 @{Break through} (\diorussousin\). Literally "dig through." Easy to do through the mud walls or sun-dried bricks. Today they can pierce steel safes that are no longer safe even if a foot thick. The Greeks called a burglar a "mud-digger" (\toichoruchos\).

rwp@Matthew:6:24 @{No man can serve two masters} (\oudeis dunatai dusi kuriois douleuein\). Many try it, but failure awaits them all. Men even try "to be slaves to God and mammon" (\The“i douleuein kai mam“nƒi\). Mammon is a Chaldee, Syriac, and Punic word like _Plutus_ for the money-god (or devil). The slave of mammon will obey mammon while pretending to obey God. The United States has had a terrible revelation of the power of the money-god in public life in the Sinclair-Fall-Teapot-Air-Dome-Oil case. When the guide is blind and leads the blind, both fall into the ditch. The man who cannot tell road from ditch sees falsely as Ruskin shows in _Modern Painters_. He will hold to one (\henos anthexetai\). The word means to line up face to face (\anti\) with one man and so against the other.

rwp@Matthew:6:25 @Vincent quotes Bacon (Henry VII): "Harris, an alderman of London, was put in trouble and died with thought and anguish." But words change with time and now this passage is actually quoted (Lightfoot) "as an objection to the moral teaching of the Sermon on the Mount, on the ground that it encouraged, nay, commanded, a reckless neglect of the future." We have narrowed the word to mere planning without any notion of anxiety which is in the Greek word. The verb \merimna“\ is from \meris, meriz“\, because care or anxiety distracts and divides. It occurs in Christ's rebuke to Martha for her excessive solicitude about something to eat (Luke:10:41|). The notion of proper care and forethought appears in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:32; strkjv@12:25; strkjv@Phillipians:2:20|. It is here the present imperative with the negative, a command not to have the habit of petulant worry about food and clothing, a source of anxiety to many housewives, a word for women especially as the command not to worship mammon may be called a word for men. The command can mean that they must stop such worry if already indulging in it. In verse 31| Jesus repeats the prohibition with the ingressive aorist subjunctive: "Do not become anxious," "Do not grow anxious." Here the direct question with the deliberative subjunctive occurs with each verb (\phag“men, pi“men, peribal“metha\). This deliberative subjunctive of the direct question is retained in the indirect question employed in verse 25|. A different verb for clothing occurs, both in the indirect middle (\peribal“metha\, fling round ourselves in 31|, \endusˆsthe\, put on yourselves in 25|).

rwp@Matthew:8:17 @{Himself took our infirmities and bare our diseases} (\autos tas astheneias elaben kai tas nosous ebastasen\). A quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:53:4|. It is not clear in what sense Matthew applies the words in Isaiah whether in the precise sense of the Hebrew or in an independent manner. Moffatt translates it: "He took away our sicknesses, and bore the burden of our diseases." Goodspeed puts it: "He took our sickness and carried away our diseases." Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 102f.) thinks that Matthew has made a free interpretation of the Hebrew, has discarded the translation of the Septuagint, and has transposed the two Hebrew verbs so that Matthew means: "He took upon himself our pains, and bore our diseases." Plummer holds that "It is impossible, and also unnecessary, to understand what the Evangelist understood by 'took ' (\elaben\) and 'bare' (\ebastasen\). It at least must mean that Christ removed their sufferings from the sufferers. He can hardly have meant that the diseases were transferred to Christ." \Bastaz“\ occurs freely in the papyri with the sense of lift, carry, endure, carry away (the commonest meaning, Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_), pilfer. In strkjv@Matthew:3:11| we have the common vernacular use to take off sandals. The Attic Greek did not use it in the sense of carrying off. "This passage is the cornerstone of the faith-cure theory, which claims that the atonement of Christ includes provision for _bodily_ no less than for spiritual healing, and therefore insists on translating 'took away'" (Vincent). We have seen that the word \bastaz“\ will possibly allow that meaning, but I agree with McNeile: "The passage, _as Mt. employs it_, has no bearing on the doctrine of the atonement." But Jesus does show his sympathy with us. "Christ's sympathy with the sufferers was so intense that he really felt their weaknesses and pains." In our burdens Jesus steps under the load with us and helps us to carry on.

rwp@Matthew:8:21 @{The Son of man} (\tho huios tou anthr“pou\). This remarkable expression, applied to himself by Jesus so often, appears here for the first time. There is a considerable modern literature devoted to it. "It means much for the Speaker, who has chosen it deliberately, in connection with private reflections, at whose nature we can only guess, by study of the many occasions on which the name is used" (Bruce). Often it means the Representative Man. It may sometimes stand for the Aramaic _barnasha_, the man, but in most instances that idea will not suit. Jesus uses it as a concealed Messianic title. It is possible that this scribe would not understand the phrase at all. Bruce thinks that here Jesus means "the unprivileged Man," worse off than the foxes and the birds. Jesus spoke Greek as well as Aramaic. It is inconceivable that the Gospels should never call Jesus "the Son of man" and always credit it to him as his own words if he did not so term himself, about eighty times in all, thirty-three in Matthew. Jesus in his early ministry, except at the very start in strkjv@John:4|, abstains from calling himself Messiah. This term suited his purpose exactly to get the people used to his special claim as Messiah when he is ready to make it openly.

rwp@Matthew:8:28 @{The country of the Gadarenes} (\ten ch“ran t“n Gadarˆn“n\). This is the correct text in Matthew while in strkjv@Mark:5:1| and strkjv@Luke:8:26| it is "the country of the Gerasenes." Dr. Thomson discovered by the lake the ruins of Khersa (Gerasa). This village is in the district of the city of Gadara some miles southeastward so that it can be called after Gerasa or Gadara. Songs:Matthew speaks of "two demoniacs" while Mark and Luke mention only one, the leading one. "{The tombs}" (\t“n mnˆmei“n\) were chambers cut into the mountain side common enough in Palestine then and now. On the eastern side of the lake the precipitous cliffs are of limestone formation and full of caves. It is one of the proofs that one is a maniac that he haunts the tombs. People shunned the region as dangerous because of the madmen.

rwp@Matthew:10:10 @{No wallet} (\mˆ pˆran\). Better than "scrip." It can be either a travelling or bread bag. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 108f.) shows that it can mean the beggar's collecting bag as in an inscription on a monument at Kefr Hanar in Syria: "While Christianity was still young the beggar priest was making his rounds in the land of Syria on behalf of the national goddess." Deissmann also quotes a pun in the _Didaskalia=Const. Apost_. 3, 6 about some itinerant widows who said that they were not so much \chˆrai\ (spouseless) as \pˆrai\ (pouchless). He cites also Shakespeare, _Troilus and Cressida_ III. iii. 145: "Time hath, my lord, a wallet at his back, wherein he puts alms for oblivion." {For the labourer is worthy of his food} (\axios gar ho ergatˆs tˆs trophˆs autou\). The sermon is worth the dinner, in other words. Luke in the charge to the seventy (Luke:10:7|) has the same words with \misthou\ (reward) instead of \trophˆs\ (food). In strkjv@1Timothy:5:18| Paul quotes Luke's form as scripture (\hˆ graphˆ\) or as a well-known saying if confined to the first quotation. The word for workman here (\ergatˆs\) is that used by Jesus in the prayer for labourers (Matthew:9:38|). The well-known _Didachˆ_ or _Teaching of the Twelve_ (xiii) shows that in the second century there was still a felt need for care on the subject of receiving pay for preaching. The travelling sophists added also to the embarrassment of the situation. The wisdom of these restrictions was justified in Galilee at this time. Mark (Mark:6:6-13|) and Luke (Luke:9:1-6|) vary slightly from Matthew in some of the details of the instructions of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:11:12 @{Suffereth violence} (\biazetai\). This verb occurs only here and in strkjv@Luke:16:16| in the N.T. It seems to be middle in Luke and Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 258) quotes an inscription "where \biazomai\ is without doubt reflexive and absolute" as in strkjv@Luke:16:16|. But there are numerous papyri examples where it is passive (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.) so that "there seems little that promises decisive help for the difficult Logion of strkjv@Matthew:11:12; strkjv@Luke:16:16|." Songs:then in strkjv@Matthew:11:12| the form can be either middle or passive and either makes sense, though a different sense. The passive idea is that the kingdom is forced, is stormed, is taken by men of violence like "men of violence take it by force" (\biastai harpazousin autˆn\) or seize it like a conquered city. The middle voice may mean "experiences violence" or "forces its way" like a rushing mighty wind (so Zahn holds). These difficult words of Jesus mean that the preaching of John "had led to a violent and impetuous thronging to gather round Jesus and his disciples" (Hort, _Judaistic Christianity_, p. 26).

rwp@Matthew:12:31 @{But the blasphemy against the Spirit} (\hˆ de tou pneumatos blasphˆmia\). Objective genitive. This is the unpardonable sin. In 32| we have \kata tou pneumatos tou hagiou\ to make it plainer. What is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? These Pharisees had already committed it. They had attributed the works of the Holy Spirit by whose power Jesus wrought his miracles (12:28|) to the devil. That sin was without excuse and would not be forgiven in their age or in the coming one (12:32|). People often ask if they can commit the unpardonable sin. Probably some do who ridicule the manifest work of God's Spirit in men's lives and attribute the Spirit's work to the devil.

rwp@Matthew:12:36 @{Every idle word} (\pan rhˆma argon\). An ineffective, useless word (\a\ privative and \ergon\). A word that does no good and so is pernicious like pernicious anaemia. It is a solemn thought. Jesus who knows our very thoughts (12:25|) insists that our words reveal our thoughts and form a just basis for the interpretation of character (12:37|). Here we have judgment by words as in strkjv@25:31-46| where Jesus presents judgment by deeds. Both are real tests of actual character. Homer spoke of "winged words" (\pteroenta epea\). And by the radio our words can be heard all round the earth. Who knows where they stop?

rwp@Matthew:12:38 @{A sign from thee} (\apo sou sˆmeion\). One wonders at the audacity of scribes and Pharisees who accused Jesus of being in league with Satan and thus casting out demons who can turn round and blandly ask for a "sign from thee." As if the other miracles were not signs! "The demand was impudent, hypocritical, insulting" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:12:41 @{In the judgment} (\en tˆi krisei\). Except here and in the next verse Matthew has "day of judgment" (\hˆmera krise“s\) as in strkjv@10:15; strkjv@11:22,24; strkjv@12:36|. Luke (Luke:10:14|) has \en tˆi krisei\. {They repented at the preaching of Jonah} (\metenoˆson eis to kˆrugma I“na\). Note this use of \eis\ just like \en\. Note also \pleion\ (neuter), not \plei“n\ (masc.). See the same idiom in strkjv@12:6| and strkjv@12:48|. Jesus is something greater than the temple, than Jonah, than Solomon. "You will continue to disbelieve in spite of all I can say or do, and at last you will put me to death. But I will rise again, a sign for your confusion, if not for your conversion" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:13:15 @{Is waxed gross} (\epachunthˆ\). Aorist passive tense. From \pachus\, thick, fat, stout. Made callous or dull -- even fatty degeneration of the heart. {Dull of hearing} (\tois “sin bare“s ˆkousan\). Another aorist. Literally, "They heard (or hear) heavily with their ears." The hard of hearing are usually sensitive. {Their eyes they have closed} (\tous ophthalmous aut“n ekammusan\). The epic and vernacular verb \kammu“\ is from \katamu“\ (to shut down). We say shut up of the mouth, but the eyes really shut down. The Hebrew verb in strkjv@Isaiah:6:10| means to smear over. The eyes can be smeared with wax or cataract and thus closed. "Sealing up the eyes was an oriental punishment" (Vincent). See strkjv@Isaiah:29:10; strkjv@44:18|. {Lest} (\mˆpote\). This negative purpose as a judgment is left in the quotation from Isaiah. It is a solemn thought for all who read or hear the word of God. {And I should heal them} (\kai iasomai autous\). Here the LXX changes to the future indicative rather than the aorist subjunctive as before.

rwp@Matthew:13:18 @{Hear then ye the parable} (\humeis oun akousate tˆn parabolˆn\). Jesus has given in strkjv@13:13| one reason for his use of parables, the condemnation which the Pharisees have brought on themselves by their spiritual dulness: "Therefore I speak to them in parables" (\dia touto en parab“lais antois lal“\). He can go on preaching the mysteries of the kingdom without their comprehending what he is saying, but he is anxious that the disciples really get personal knowledge (\gn“nai\, verse 11|) of these same mysteries. Songs:he explains in detail what he means to teach by the Parable of the Sower. He appeals to them (note position of \h–meis\) to listen as he explains.

rwp@Matthew:14:24 @{Distressed} (\basanizomenon\). Like a man with demons (8:29|). One can see, as Jesus did (Mark:6:48|), the boat bobbing up and down in the choppy sea.

rwp@Matthew:14:33 @{Worshipped him} (\prosekunˆsan aut“i\). And Jesus accepted it. They were growing in appreciation of the person and power of Christ from the attitude in strkjv@8:27|. They will soon be ready for the confession of strkjv@16:16|. Already they can say: "Truly God's Son thou art." The absence of the article here allows it to mean a Son of God as in strkjv@27:54| (the centurion). But they probably mean "the Son of God" as Jesus was claiming to them to be.

rwp@Matthew:15:11 @{This defileth the man} (\touto koinoi ton anthr“pon\). This word is from \koinos\ which is used in two senses, either what is "common" to all and general like the _Koin‚_ Greek, or what is unclean and "common" either ceremonially or in reality. The ceremonial "commonness" disturbed Peter on the housetop in Joppa (Acts:10:14|). See also strkjv@Acts:21:28; strkjv@Hebrews:9:13|. One who is thus religiously common or unclean is cut off from doing his religious acts. "Defilement" was a grave issue with the rabbinical ceremonialists. Jesus appeals to the crowd here: {Hear and understand} (\akouete kai suniete\). He has a profound distinction to draw. Moral uncleanness is what makes a man common, defiles him. That is what is to be dreaded, not to be glossed over. "This goes beyond the tradition of the elders and virtually abrogates the Levitical distinctions between clean and unclean" (Bruce). One can see the pettifogging pretenders shrivel up under these withering words.

rwp@Matthew:23:2 @{Sit on Moses' seat} (\epi tˆs M“use“s kathedras ekathisan\). The gnomic or timeless aorist tense, \ekathisan\, not the aorist "for" the perfect. The "seat of Moses" is a brief form for the chair of the professor whose function it is to interpret Moses. "The heirs of Moses' authority by an unbroken tradition can deliver _ex cathedra_ pronouncements on his teaching" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:23:35 @{Zachariah son of Barachiah} (\Zachariou huiou Barachiou\). Broadus gives well the various alternatives in understanding and explaining the presence of "son of Barachiah" here which is not in strkjv@Luke:11:51|. The usual explanation is that the reference is to Zachariah the son of Jehoiada the priest who was slain in the court of the temple (2Chronicles:24:20ff.|). How the words, "son of Barachiah," got into Matthew we do not know. A half-dozen possibilities can be suggested. In the case of Abel a reckoning for the shedding of his blood was foretold (Genesis:4:10|) and the same thing was true of the slaying of Zachariah (2Chronicles:24:22|).

rwp@Matthew:24:24 @{Great signs and wonders} (\sˆmeia megala kai terata\). Two of the three words so often used in the N.T. about the works (\erga\) of Jesus, the other being \dunameis\ (powers). They often occur together of the same work (John:4:48; strkjv@Acts:2:22; strkjv@4:30; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:12; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|). \Teras\ is a wonder or prodigy, \dunamis\, a mighty work or power, \sˆmeion\, a sign of God's purpose. Miracle (\miraculum\) presents only the notion of wonder or portent. The same deed can be looked at from these different angles. But the point to note here is that mere "signs and wonders" do not of themselves prove the power of God. These charlatans will be so skilful that they will, {if possible} (\ei dunaton\), lead astray the very elect. The implication is that it is not possible. People become excited and are misled and are unable to judge of results. Often it is _post hoc, sed non propter hoc_. Patent-medicine men make full use of the credulity of people along this line as do spiritualistic mediums. Sleight-of-hand men can deceive the unwary.

rwp@Matthew:25:46 @{Eternal punishment} (\kolasin ai“nion\). The word \kolasin\ comes from \kolaz“\, to mutilate or prune. Hence those who cling to the larger hope use this phrase to mean age-long pruning that ultimately leads to salvation of the goats, as disciplinary rather than penal. There is such a distinction as Aristotle pointed out between \m“ria\ (vengeance) and \kolasis\. But the same adjective \ai“nios\ is used with \kolasin\ and \z“ˆn\. If by etymology we limit the scope of \kolasin\, we may likewise have only age-long \z“ˆn\. There is not the slightest indication in the words of Jesus here that the punishment is not coeval with the life. We can leave all this to the King himself who is the Judge. The difficulty to one's mind about conditional chastisement is to think how a life of sin in hell can be changed into a life of love and obedience. The word \ai“nios\ (from \ai“n\, age, \aevum, aei\) means either without beginning or without end or both. It comes as near to the idea of eternal as the Greek can put it in one word. It is a difficult idea to put into language. Sometimes we have "ages of ages" (\ai“nes t“n ai“n“n\).

rwp@Matthew:26:39 @{He went forward a little} (\proelth“n mikron\). As if he could not fight the battle in their immediate presence. He was on his face, not on his knees (McNeile). {This cup} (\to potˆrion touto\). The figure can mean only the approaching death. Jesus had used it of his coming death when James and John came to him with their ambitious request, "the cup which I am about to drink" (Matthew:20:22|). But now the Master is about to taste the bitter dregs in the cup of death for the sin of the world. He was not afraid that he would die before the Cross, though he instinctively shrank from the cup, but instantly surrendered his will to the Father's will and drank it to the full. Evidently Satan tempted Christ now to draw back from the Cross. Here Jesus won the power to go on to Calvary.

rwp@Matthew:27:11 @{Now Jesus stood before the governor} (\ho de Iˆsous estathˆ emprosthen tou hˆgemonos\). Here is one of the dramatic episodes of history. Jesus stood face to face with the Roman governor. The verb \estathˆ\, not \estˆ\ (second aorist active), is first aorist passive and can mean "was placed" there, but he stood, not sat. The term \hˆgem“n\ (from \hˆgeomai\, to lead) was technically a _legatus Caesaris_, an officer of the Emperor, more exactly procurator, ruler under the Emperor of a less important province than propraetor (as over Syria). The senatorial provinces like Achaia were governed by proconsuls. Pilate represented Roman law. {Art thou the King of the Jews?} (\Su ei ho basileus t“n Ioudai“n;\). This is what really mattered. Matthew does not give the charges made by the Sanhedrin (Luke:23:2|) nor the private interview with Pilate (John:18:28-32|). He could not ignore the accusation that Jesus claimed to be King of the Jews. Else he could be himself accused to Caesar for disloyalty. Rivals and pretenders were common all over the empire. Songs:here was one more. By his answer ({thou sayest}) Jesus confesses that he is. Songs:Pilate has a problem on his hands. What sort of a king does this one claim to be? {Thou} (\su\) the King of the Jews?

rwp@Matthew:27:52 @{The tombs were opened} (\ta mnˆmeia ane“ichthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative (double augment). The splitting of the rocks by the earthquake and the opening of tombs can be due to the earthquake. But the raising of the bodies of the dead after the resurrection of Jesus which appeared to many in the holy city puzzles many today who admit the actual bodily resurrection of Jesus. Some would brand all these portents as legends since they appear in Matthew alone. Others would say that "after his resurrection" should read "after their resurrection," but that would make it conflict with Paul's description of Christ as the first fruits of them that sleep (1Corinthians:15:20|). Some say that Jesus released these spirits after his descent into Hades. Songs:it goes. We come back to miracles connected with the birth of Jesus, God's Son coming into the world. If we grant the possibility of such manifestations of God's power, there is little to disturb one here in the story of the death of God's Son.

rwp@Philemon:1:5 @{Hearing} (\akou“n\). Through Epaphras (Colossians:1:7,8; strkjv@4:12|), possibly from Onesimus also. {And towards all the saints} (\kai eis pantas tous hagious\). He spoke of "thy love and faith" (\sou tˆn agapˆn kai tˆn pistin\) "towards the Lord Jesus" (\pros ton Kurion Iˆsoun\) and by a sort of momentum (Vincent) he carries both words over to the saints, though it can be explained as chiasm (Galatians:4:4|) also.

rwp@Philemon:1:19 @{Write} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist. {With mine hand} (\tˆi emˆi cheiri\). Instrumental case and a note of hand that can be collected. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21; strkjv@Colossians:4:18|. {I will repay it} (\eg“ apotis“\). Future active indicative of \apotin“\ (\apoti“\) to pay back, to pay off. The more usual word was \apod“s“\. This is Paul's promissory note. Deissmann (_Light, etc._, p. 331) notes how many of the papyri are concerning debts. {That I say not} (\hina mˆ leg“\). Neat idiom as in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:4|, delicately reminding Philemon that Paul had led him also to Christ. {Thou owest to me even thine own self besides} (\kai seauton moi prosopheileis\). Old verb, only here in N.T., Paul using the verb \opheil“\ of verse 18| with \pros\ added. He used every available argument to bring Philemon to see the higher ground of brotherhood in Christ about Onesimus.

rwp@Philemon:1:21 @{Obedience} (\hupakoˆi\). "Compliance" seems less harsh to us in the light of 9|. {I write} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist again. {Even beyond what I say} (\kai huper ha leg“\). That can only mean that Paul "knows" (\eid“s\, second perfect active participle of \oida\) that Philemon will set Onesimus free. He prefers that it come as Philemon's idea and wish rather than as a command from Paul. Paul has been criticized for not denouncing slavery in plain terms. But, when one considers the actual conditions in the Roman empire, he is a wise man who can suggest a better plan than the one pursued here for the ultimate overthrow of slavery.

rwp@Info_Philipians @ EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS FROM ROME ABOUT A.D. 61 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is something to be said for the idea that Paul wrote the Epistle to the Philippians while a prisoner in Ephesus if he ever was a prisoner there. All that can be said for that view has been presented by Professor George S. Duncan in _St. Paul's Ephesian Ministry_. But, when all is considered carefully in the light of the facts in the Acts and the Epistles, the best that one can say is that a possible case is made out with many difficulties remaining unexplained. The argument is more ingenious than convincing. It is not possible here to review the arguments _pro_ and _con_ that convince me that Paul was in Rome when he wrote this letter to Philippi. It is not clear whether it was written before the three that went together (Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) or afterwards. Probably there was no great difference in time, but there was time for Epaphroditus to come to Rome, to fall sick, for the news to reach Philippi and for Epaphroditus to hear of their concern about him. The church in Philippi was Paul's joy and pride and they had helped him before as they did this time.

rwp@Philippians:1:9 @{May abound} (\perisseuˆi\). Present active subjunctive of \perisseu“\, may keep on overflowing, a perpetual flood of love, "yet more and more" (\eti mallon kai mallon\), but with necessary limitations (river banks), "in knowledge" (\en epign“sei\, in full knowledge) "and all discernment" (\pƒsˆi aisthˆsei\). The delicate spiritual perception (\aisthˆsis\, old word from \aisthanomai\, only here in N.T. as the verb only in strkjv@Luke:9:45| in N.T.) can be cultivated as in \aisthˆtˆrion\ (Hebrews:5:14|)

rwp@Philippians:1:19 @{Will turn} (\apobˆsetai\). Future middle indicative of \apobain“\, old verb, to come from, to come back, to turn out. {To my salvation} (\eis s“tˆrian\). For his release from prison as he strongly hopes to see them again (1:26|). Lightfoot takes the word to be Paul's eternal salvation and it must be confessed that verse 20| (the close of this sentence)...suit that idea best. Can it...{Supply} (\epichorˆgias\). Late and rare word (one example in inscription of first century A.D.). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:4:16|. From the late verb \epichorˆge“\ (double compound, \epi, choros, hˆgeomai\, to furnish supply for the chorus) which see in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:10; strkjv@Galatians:3:5|.

rwp@Philippians:3:11 @{If by any means I may attain} (\ei p“s katantˆs“\). Not an expression of doubt, but of humility (Vincent), a modest hope (Lightfoot). For \ei p“s\, see strkjv@Romans:1:10; strkjv@11:14| where \parazˆl“s“\ can be either future indicative or aorist subjunctive like \katantˆs“\ here (see subjunctive \katalab“\ in verse 12|), late compound verb \katanta“\. {Resurrection} (\exanastasin\). Late word, not in LXX, but in Polybius and one papyrus example. Apparently Paul is thinking here only of the resurrection of believers out from the dead and so double \ex\ (\ten exanastasin tˆn ek nekr“n\). Paul is not denying a general resurrection by this language, but emphasizing that of believers.

rwp@Philippians:3:13 @{Not yet} (\oup“\). But some MSS. read \ou\ (not). {To have apprehended} (\kateilˆphenai\). Perfect active infinitive of same verb \katalamban“\ (perfective use of \kata\, to grasp completely). Surely denial enough. {But one thing} (\hen de\). No verb in the Greek. We can supply \poi“\ (I do) or \di“k“\ (I keep on in the chase), but no verb is really needed. "When all is said, the greatest art is to limit and isolate oneself" (Goethe), concentration. {Forgetting the things which are behind} (\ta men opis“ epilanthanomenos\). Common verb, usually with the genitive, but the accusative in the _Koin‚_ is greatly revived with verbs. Paul can mean either his old pre-Christian life, his previous progress as a Christian, or both (all of it). {Stretching forward} (\epekteinomenos\). Present direct middle participle of the old double compound \epektein“\ (stretching myself out towards). Metaphor of a runner leaning forward as he runs.

rwp@Philippians:3:15 @{As many as be perfect} (\hosoi teleioi\). Here the term \teleioi\ means relative perfection, not the absolute perfection so pointedly denied in verse 12|. Paul here includes himself in the group of spiritual adults (see He strkjv@5:13|). {Let us be thus minded} (\touto phron“men\). Present active volitive subjunctive of \phrone“\. "Let us keep on thinking this," viz. that we have not yet attained absolute perfection. {If ye are otherwise minded} (\ei ti heter“s phroneite\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. That is, if ye think that ye are absolutely perfect. {Shall God reveal unto you} (\ho theos humin apokalupsei\). He turns such cases over to God. What else can he do with them? {Whereunto we have already come} (\eis ho ephthasamen\). First aorist active indicative of \phthan“\, originally to come before as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:15|, but usually in the _Koin‚_ simply to arrive, attain to, as here.

rwp@Philippians:4:8 @{Finally} (\to loipon\). See on ¯3:1|. {Whatsoever} (\hosa\). Thus he introduces six adjectives picturing Christian ideals, old-fashioned and familiar words not necessarily from any philosophic list of moral excellencies Stoic or otherwise. Without these no ideals can exist. They are pertinent now when so much filth is flaunted before the world in books, magazines and moving-pictures under the name of realism (the slime of the gutter and the cess-pool). {Honourable} (\semna\). Old word from \seb“\, to worship, revere. Songs:revered, venerated (1Timothy:3:8|). {Pure} (\hagna\). Old word for all sorts of purity. There are clean things, thoughts, words, deeds. {Lovely} (\prosphilˆ\). Old word, here only in N.T., from \pros\ and \phile“\, pleasing, winsome. {Of good report} (\euphˆma\. Old word, only here in N.T., from \eu\ and \phˆmˆ\, fair-speaking, attractive. {If there be any} (\ei tis\). Paul changes the construction from \hosa\ (whatsoever) to a condition of the first class, as in strkjv@2:1|, with two substantives. {Virtue} (\aretˆ\). Old word, possibly from \aresk“\, to please, used very often in a variety of senses by the ancients for any mental excellence or moral quality or physical power. Its very vagueness perhaps explains its rarity in the N.T., only four times (Phillipians:4:8; strkjv@1Peter:2:9; strkjv@2Peter:1:3,5|). It is common in the papyri, but probably Paul is using it in the sense found in the LXX (Isaiah:42:12; strkjv@43:21|) of God's splendour and might (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 95) in connection with "praise" (\epainos\) as here or even meaning praise. {Think on these things} (\tauta logizesthe\). Present middle imperative for habit of thought. We are responsible for our thoughts and can hold them to high and holy ideals.

rwp@Philippians:4:13 @{I can do all things} (\panta ischu“\). Old verb to have strength (\ischus\). {In him that strengtheneth me} (\en t“i endunamounti me\). Late and rare verb (in LXX) from adjective \endunamos\ (\en, dunamis\). Causative verb to empower, to pour power into one. See same phrase in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12| \t“i endunam“santi me\ (aorist tense here). Paul has such strength so long as Jesus keeps on putting power (\dunamis\) into him.

rwp@Philippians:4:21 @{They that are of Caesar's household} (\hoi ek tˆs Kaisaros oikias\). Not members of the imperial family, but some connected with the imperial establishment. The term can apply to slaves and freedmen and even to the highest functionaries. Christianity has begun to undermine the throne of the Caesars. Some day a Christian will sit on this throne. The gospel works upward from the lower classes. lt was so at Corinth and in Rome. It is true today. It is doubtful if Nero had yet heard of Paul for his case may have been dismissed by lapse of time. But this obscure prisoner who has planted the gospel in Caesar's household has won more eternal fame and power than all the Caesars combined. Nero will commit suicide shortly after Paul has been executed. Nero's star went down and Paul's rose and rises still.

rwp@Revelation:2:3 @{Thou hast} (\echeis\). Continued possession of patience. {Didst bear} (\ebastasas\). First aorist indicative of \bastaz“\, repeated reference to the crisis in verse 2|. {And hast not grown weary} (\kai ou kekopiakes\). Perfect active indicative of \kopia“\, old verb, to grow weary (Matthew:6:28|), play on the word \kopos\, late form in \-es\, for the regular \-as\ (\lelukas\). like \aphˆkes\ (verse 4|) and \pept“kes\ (verse 5|). "Tired in loyalty, not of it. The Ephesian church can bear anything except the presence of impostors in her membership" (Moffatt).

rwp@Revelation:5:2 @{A strong angel} (\aggelon ischuron\). One needed (10:1; strkjv@18:21|) "whose call could reach to the farthest limits of the universe" (Beckwith) and so "with a great voice" (\en ph“nˆi megalˆi\, in a great voice, as in strkjv@14:7,9,15|, and without \en\ strkjv@5:12; strkjv@6:10; strkjv@7:2,10; strkjv@8:13; strkjv@10:3|, etc.). See \en ischurƒi ph“nˆi\ (18:2|). {Proclaiming} (\kˆrussonta\). Present active predicate participle of \kˆruss“\, to herald, to preach. {Worthy to open and to loose} (\axios anoixai kai lusai\). Worthy by rank and character (cf. strkjv@John:1:27|) as well as by ability (\edunato\, verse 3|), followed by two infinitives (first aorist active) of \anoig“\ and \lu“\, though \hina\ and the subjunctive can be used after \axios\ as in strkjv@John:1:27|. Here \axios\ is like \hikanos\ (capable, qualified) as in strkjv@Matthew:8:8|. The articles here (\to, tas\) refer to the book and the seals in verse 1|. It is a husteron-proteron, since the loosing of the seals precedes the opening of the book.

rwp@Revelation:7:17 @{In the midst} (\ana meson\). In strkjv@5:6| we have \en mes“i tou thronou\ as the position of the Lamb, and so that is apparently the sense of \ana meson\ here as in strkjv@Matthew:13:25|, though it can mean "between," as clearly so in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:5|. {Shall be their shepherd} (\paimanei autous\). "Shall shepherd them," future active of \poimain“\ (from \poimˆn\, shepherd), in strkjv@John:21:16; strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@1Peter:5:2; strkjv@Revelation:2:27; strkjv@7:17; strkjv@12:5; strkjv@19:15|. Jesus is still the Good Shepherd of his sheep (John:10:11,14ff.|). Cf. strkjv@Psalms:23:1|. {Shall guide them} (\hodˆ gˆsei autous\). Future active of \hodˆge“\, old word (from \hodˆgos\, guide, strkjv@Matthew:15:14|), used of God's guidance of Israel (Exodus:15:13|), of God's guidance of individual lives (Psalms:5:9|), of the guidance of the Holy Spirit (John:16:13|), of Christ's own guidance here (cf. strkjv@John:14:4; strkjv@Revelation:14:4|). {Unto fountains of waters of life} (\epi z“ˆs pˆgas hudat“n\). The language is like that in strkjv@Isaiah:49:10; strkjv@Jeremiah:2:13|. Note the order, "to life's water springs" (Swete) like the Vulgate _ad vitae fontes aquarum_, with emphasis on \z“ˆs\ (life's). For this idea see also strkjv@John:4:12,14; strkjv@7:38f.; strkjv@Revelation:21:6; strkjv@22:1,17|. No special emphasis on the plural here or in strkjv@8:10; strkjv@14:7; strkjv@16:4|. {And God shall wipe away} (\kai exaleipsei ho theos\). Repeated in strkjv@21:4| from strkjv@Isaiah:25:8|. Future active of \exaleiph“\, old compound, to wipe out (\ex\), off, away, already in strkjv@3:5| for erasing a name and in strkjv@Acts:3:19| for removing the stain (guilt) of sin. {Every tear} (\pƒn dakruon\). Old word, with other form, \dakru\, in strkjv@Luke:7:38,44|. Note repetition of \ek\ with \ophthalm“n\ (out of their eyes). "Words like these of vv. 15-17| must sound as a divine music in the ears of the persecuted. God will comfort as a mother comforts" (Baljon).

rwp@Revelation:8:13 @{An eagle} (\henos aetou\). "One eagle," perhaps \henos\ (\heis\) used as an indefinite article (9:13; strkjv@18:21; strkjv@19:17|). See strkjv@4:7| also for the flying eagle, the strongest of birds, sometimes a symbol of vengeance (Deuteronomy:28:49; strkjv@Hosea:8:1; strkjv@Habbakkuk:1:8|). {Flying in mid-heaven} (\petomenou en mesouranˆmati\). Like the angel in strkjv@14:6| and the birds in strkjv@19:17|. \Mesouranˆma\ (from \mesourane“\ to be in mid-heaven) is a late word (Plutarch, papyri) for the sun at noon, in N.T. only these three examples. This eagle is flying where all can see, and crying so that all can hear. {Woe, woe, woe} (\ouai, ouai, ouai\). Triple because three trumpets yet to come. In strkjv@18:10,16,19| the double \ouai\ is merely for emphasis. {For them that dwell on the earth} (\tous katoikountas\). Accusative of the articular present active participle of \katoike“\, is unusual (Aleph Q here and also in strkjv@12:12|) as in strkjv@Matthew:11:21|. There is even a nominative in strkjv@18:10|. {By reason of the other voices} (\ek t“n loip“n ph“n“n\). "As a result of (\ek\) the rest of the voices." There is more and worse to come, "of the three angels who are yet to sound" (\t“n tri“n aggel“n t“n mellont“n salpizein\).

rwp@Revelation:9:20 @{Repented not} (\ou metenoˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \metanoe“\. The two-thirds of mankind still spared did not change their creed or their conduct. {Of the works} (\ek t“n erg“n\). For this use of \ek\ after \metanoe“\ see strkjv@2:21; strkjv@9:21; strkjv@16:11|. By "works" (\erg“n\) here idolatries are meant, as the next verse shows. {That they should not worship} (\hina mˆ proskunˆsousin\). Negative purpose clause with \hina mˆ\ and the future active of \proskune“\ as in strkjv@9:5|. {Devils} (\ta daimonia\). Both in the O.T. (Deuteronomy:32:17; strkjv@Psalms:96:5; strkjv@106:37|) and in the N.T. (1Corinthians:10:21|) the worship of idols is called the worship of unclean spirits. Perhaps this is one explanation of the hideous faces given these images. "The idols" (\ta eid“la\ strkjv@1John:5:21|, from \eidos\, form, appearance) represented "demons," whether made of gold (\ta chrusƒ\) or of silver (\ta argurƒ\) or of brass (\ta chalkƒ\) or of stone (\ta lithina\) or of wood (\ta xulina\). See strkjv@Daniel:5:23| for this picture of heathen idols. The helplessness of these idols, "which can neither see nor hear nor walk" (\ha oute blepein dunantai oute akouein oute peripatein\), is often presented in the O.T. (Psalms:113:12ff.; strkjv@115:4|).

rwp@Revelation:11:2 @{The court} (\tˆn aulˆn\). The uncovered yard outside the house. There were usually two, one between the door and the street, the outer court, the other the inner court surrounded by the buildings (Mark:14:66|). This is here the outer court, "which is without the temple" (\tˆn ex“then tou naou\), outside of the sanctuary, but within the \hieron\ where the Gentiles could go (carrying out the imagery of the Jerusalem temple). {Leave without} (\ekbale ex“then\). Literally, "cast without" (second aorist active imperative of \ekball“\. {Do not measure it} (\mˆ autˆn metrˆsˆis\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and the first aorist active (ingressive) subjunctive of \metre“\. This outer court is left to its fate. In Herod's temple the outer court was marked off from the inner by "the middle wall of partition" (\to mesoitoichon tou phragmou\, strkjv@Ephesians:2:15|), beyond which a Gentile could not go. In this outer court was a house of prayer for the Gentiles (Mark:11:17|), but now John is to cast it out and leave to its fate (given to the Gentiles in another sense) to be profaned by them. {They shall tread under foot} (\patˆsousin\). Future active of \pate“\, here to trample with contempt as in strkjv@Luke:21:24|, even the holy city (Matthew:4:5; strkjv@Isaiah:48:2; strkjv@Nehemiah:11:1|). Charles thinks that only the heavenly city can be so called here (21:2,10; strkjv@22:19|) because of strkjv@11:8| (Sodom and Gomorrah). But the language may be merely symbolical. See strkjv@Daniel:9:24|. {Forty and two months} (\mˆnas tesserakonta kai duo\). Accusative of extent of time. This period in strkjv@Daniel:7:25; strkjv@12:7|. It occurs in three forms in the Apocalypse (forty-two months, here and strkjv@13:5|; 1260 days, strkjv@11:3; strkjv@12:6|; time, times and half a time or 3 1/2 years, strkjv@12:14| and so in Daniel). This period, however its length may be construed, covers the duration of the triumph of the Gentiles, of the prophesying of the two witnesses, of the sojourn of the woman in the wilderness.

rwp@Revelation:11:7 @{When they shall have finished} (\hotan teles“sin\). Merely the first aorist active subjunctive of \tele“\ with \hotan\ in an indefinite temporal clause with no _futurum exactum_ (future perfect), "whenever they finish." {The beast} (\to thˆrion\). "The wild beast comes out of the abyss" of strkjv@9:1f|. He reappears in strkjv@13:1; strkjv@17:8|. In strkjv@Daniel:7:3| \thˆria\ occurs. Nothing less than antichrist will satisfy the picture here. Some see the abomination of strkjv@Daniel:7:7; strkjv@Matthew:24:15|. Some see Nero _redivivus_. {He shall make war with them} (\poiˆsei met' aut“n polemon\). This same phrase occurs in strkjv@12:17| about the dragon's attack on the woman. It is more the picture of single combat (2:16|). {He shall overcome them} (\nikˆsei autous\). Future active of \nika“\. The victory of the beast over the two witnesses is certain, as in strkjv@Daniel:7:21|. {And kill them} (\kai apoktenei\). Future active of \apoktein“\. Without attempting to apply this prophecy to specific individuals or times, one can agree with these words of Swete: "But his words cover in effect all the martyrdoms and massacres of history in which brute force has seemed to triumph over truth and righteousness."

rwp@Revelation:12:7 @{There was war in heaven} (\egeneto polemos en t“i ouran“i\). "There came to be war in heaven" (\egeneto\, not \ˆn\). "Another \tableau\, not a \sˆmeion\ (vv. 1,3|), but consequent upon the two \sˆmeia\ which precede it. The birth and rapture of the Woman's Son issue in a war which invades the \epourania\" (Swete). The reference is not to the original rebellion of Satan, as Andreas held. As the coming of Christ brought on fresh manifestations of diabolic power (Mark:1:13; strkjv@Luke:22:3,31; strkjv@John:12:31; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|), just so Christ's return to heaven is pictured as being the occasion of renewed attacks there. We are not to visualize it too literally, but certainly modern airplanes help us to grasp the notion of battles in the sky even more than the phalanxes of storm-clouds (Swete). John even describes this last conflict as in heaven itself. Cf. strkjv@Luke:10:18; strkjv@1Kings:22:1ff.; strkjv@Job:1; 2; strkjv@Zechariah:3:1ff|. {Michael and his angels} (\ho Michaˆl kai hoi aggeloi autou\). The nominative here may be in apposition with \polemos\, but it is an abnormal construction with no verb, though \egeneto\ (arose) can be understood as repeated. Michael is the champion of the Jewish people (Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@12:1|) and is called the archangel in strkjv@Jude:9|. {Going forth to war} (\tou polemˆsai\). This genitive articular infinitive is another grammatical problem in this sentence. If \egeneto\ (arose) is repeated as above, then we have the infinitive for purpose, a common enough idiom. Otherwise it is anomalous, not even like strkjv@Acts:10:25|. {With the dragon} (\meta tou drakontos\). On the use of \meta\ with \poleme“\ see strkjv@2:16; strkjv@13:4; strkjv@17:14| (nowhere else in N.T.). The devil has angels under his command (Matthew:25:41|) and preachers also (2Corinthians:11:14f.|). {Warred} (\epolemˆsen\). Constative aorist active indicative of \poleme“\, picturing the whole battle in one glimpse.

rwp@Revelation:12:9 @{Was cast down} (\eblˆthˆ\). Effective first aorist passive indicative of \ball“\, cast down for good and all, a glorious consummation. This vision of final victory over Satan is given by Jesus in strkjv@Luke:10:18; strkjv@John:12:31|. It has not come yet, but it is coming, and the hope of it should be a spur to missionary activity and zeal. The word megas (great) occurs here with \drak“n\ as in strkjv@12:3|, and the whole picture is repeated in strkjv@20:2|. The dragon in both places is identified with the old serpent (Genesis:3:1ff.|) and called \archaios\ (from \archˆ\, beginning), as Jesus said that the devil was a murderer "from the beginning" (John:8:44|). Both \diabolos\ (slanderer) and Satan (\Satanƒs\) are common in N.T. for this great dragon and old serpent, the chief enemy of mankind. See on ¯Matthew:4:1; strkjv@Revelation:2:10| for \diabolos\ and strkjv@Luke:10:18| for \Satanƒs\. {The deceiver of the whole world} (\ho plan“n tˆn oikoumenˆn holˆn\). This is his aim and his occupation, pictured here by the nominative articular present active participle of \plana“\, to lead astray. For "the inhabited world" see strkjv@Luke:2:1; strkjv@Revelation:3:10; strkjv@16:14|. Satan can almost "lead astray" the very elect of God (Matthew:24:24|), so artful is he in his beguilings as he teaches us how to deceive ourselves (1John:1:8|). {He was cast down to the earth} (\eblˆthˆ eis tˆn gˆn\). Effective aorist repeated from the beginning of the verse. "The earth was no new sphere of Satan's working" (Swete). {Were cast down} (\eblˆthˆsan\). Triple use of the same verb applied to Satan's minions. The expulsion is complete.

rwp@Revelation:12:10 @{A great voice saying} (\ph“nˆn megalˆn legousan\). Accusative after \ˆkousa\ in this phrase as in strkjv@5:11; strkjv@10:4; strkjv@14:2; strkjv@18:4|, but the genitive \ph“nˆs legousˆs\ in strkjv@11:12; strkjv@14:13|. We are not told whence this voice or song comes, possibly from one of the twenty-four elders (Swete) or some other heavenly beings (11:15|) who can sympathize with human beings (19:10|), the martyrs in heaven (Charles). {Now is come} (\arti egeneto\). \Arti\ (John:13:33|) shows how recent the downfall of Satan here proleptically pictured as behind us in time (aorist tense \egeneto\). {The salvation} (\hˆ s“tˆria\). Here "the victory" as in strkjv@7:10; strkjv@19:1|. {The power} (\hˆ dunamis\). Gods power over the dragon (cf. strkjv@7:12; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@19:1|). {The kingdom} (\hˆ basileia\). "The empire of God" as in strkjv@11:15|. {The authority of his Christ} (\hˆ exousia tou Christou autou\). Which Christ received from the Father (Matthew:28:18; strkjv@John:17:2|). See strkjv@11:15| (Psalms:2:2|) for "his Anointed." {The accuser} (\ho katˆg“r\). The regular form, \katˆgoros\, occurs in strkjv@John:8:10; strkjv@Acts:23:30,35; strkjv@25:16,18| and in many MSS. here in strkjv@Revelation:12:10|, but A reads \katˆg“r\, which Westcott and Hort accept. It was once considered a Greek transliteration of a Hebrew word, but Deissmann (_Light_, etc., p. 93f.) quotes it from a vernacular magical papyrus of the fourth century A.D. with no sign of Jewish or Christian influence, just as \diak“n\ appears as a vernacular form of \diakonos\. Only here is the word applied to Satan in the N.T. In late Judaism Satan is the accuser, and Michael the defender, of the faithful. {Of our brethren} (\t“n adelph“n hˆm“n\). The saints still on earth battling with Satan and his devices. {Which accuseth them} (\ho katˆgor“n autous\). Articular present active participle of \katˆgore“\, old verb, to accuse, usually with the genitive of the person (John:5:45|), but here with the accusative. This is the devil's constant occupation (Job:1:6f.|). {Day and night} (\hˆmeras kai nuktos\). Genitive of time. "By day and by night."

rwp@Revelation:13:14 @{And he deceiveth} (\kai planƒi\). Present active (dramatic) indicative of \plana“\, the very thing that Jesus had said would happen (Matthew:24:24|, "Songs:as to lead astray" \h“ste planƒsthai\, the word used here, if possible the very elect). It is a constant cause for wonder, the gullibility of the public at the hands of new charlatans who continually bob up with their pipe-dreams. {That they should make an image to the beast} (\poiˆsai eikona t“i thˆri“i\). Indirect command (this first aorist active infinitive of \poie“\) after \leg“n\ as in strkjv@Acts:21:21|, not indirect assertion. This "image" (\eik“n\, for which word see strkjv@Matthew:22:20; strkjv@Colossians:1:15|) of the emperor could be his head upon a coin (Mark:12:16|), an _imago_ painted or woven upon a standard, a bust in metal or stone, a statue, anything that people could be asked to bow down before and worship. This test the priests in the provinces pressed as it was done in Rome itself. The phrase "the image of the beast," occurs ten times in this book (13:14,15| _ter_; strkjv@14:9,11; strkjv@15:2; strkjv@16:2; strkjv@19:20; strkjv@20:4|). Emperor-worship is the issue and that involves worship of the devil. {The stroke of the sword} (\tˆn plˆgˆn tˆs machairˆs\). This language can refer to the death of Nero by his own sword. {And lived} (\kai ezˆsen\). "And he came to life" (ingressive first aorist active indicative of \za“\). Perhaps a reference to Domitian as a second Nero in his persecution of Christians.

rwp@Revelation:13:18 @{Here is wisdom} (\h“de hˆ sophia\). The puzzle that follows as in strkjv@17:9|. See strkjv@Ephesians:1:17| for "a spirit of wisdom and of understanding." {He that understands} (\ho ech“n noun\). "The one having intelligence" in such matters. Cf. the adverb \nounech“s\ (discreetly) in strkjv@Mark:12:34|. {Let him count} (\psˆphisat“\). First active imperative of \psˆphiz“\, old verb (from \psˆphos\ pebble), to count, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:14:28|. {The number of a man} (\arithmos anthr“pou\). "A man's number." But what man and what name? {Six hundred and sixty-six} (\hexakosioi hexˆkonta hex\). Unfortunately some MSS. here read 616 instead of 666. All sorts of solutions are offered for this conundrum. Charles is satisfied with the Hebrew letters for Nero Caesar, which give 666, and with the Latin form of Nero (without the final n), which makes 616. Surely this is ingenious and it may be correct. But who can really tell?

rwp@Revelation:14:4 @{Were not defiled with women} (\meta gunaik“n ouk emolunthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \molun“\, old verb, to stain, already in strkjv@3:4|, which see. The use of this word rules out marriage, which was not considered sinful. {For they are virgins} (\parthenoi gar eisin\). \Parthenos\ can be applied to men as well as women. Swete takes this language "metaphorically, as the symbolical character of the Book suggests." Charles considers it an interpolation in the interest of celibacy for both men and women. If taken literally, the words can refer only to adultery or fornication (Beckwith). Jesus recognised abstinence only for those able to receive it (Matthew:19:12|), as did Paul (1Corinthians:7:1,8,32,36|). Marriage is approved by Paul in strkjv@1Timothy:4:3| and by strkjv@Hebrews:13:4|. The New Testament exalts marriage and this passage should not be construed as degrading it. {Whithersoever he goeth} (\hopou an hupagei\). Indefinite local clause with modal \an\ and the present active indicative of \hupag“\. The Christian life is following the Lamb of God as Jesus taught (Mark:2:14; strkjv@10:21; strkjv@Luke:9:59; strkjv@John:1:43; strkjv@21:19|, etc.) and as Peter taught (1Peter:2:21|) and John (1John:2:6|). {Were purchased from among men} (\ˆgorasthˆsan apo t“n anthr“p“n\). First aorist passive indicative of \agoraz“\, repeating the close of verse 3|. {First fruits} (\aparchˆ\). See for this word strkjv@1Corinthians:16:15; strkjv@Romans:11:16; strkjv@16:5|. This seems to mean that the 144,000 represent not the whole, but only a portion of the great harvest to come (Matthew:9:37|), not only the first installment, but those marked by high spiritual service to God and the Lamb (Romans:12:1; strkjv@Hebrews:13:15; strkjv@1Peter:2:5|).

rwp@Revelation:14:8 @{Another, a second angel} (\allos deuteros aggelos\). This second angel "followed" (\ˆkolouthˆsen\, first aorist active indicative of \akolouthe“\) and interpreted in part the first one. {Fallen, fallen} (\epesen, epesen\). Prophetic aorist active indicative of \pipt“\, repeated as a solemn dirge announcing the certainty of the fall. The English participle "fallen, fallen" is more musical and rhythmical than the literal rendering "fell, fell." The language is an echo of strkjv@Isaiah:21:9|, though B in the LXX has \pept“ken, pept“ken\ (perfect). {Babylon the great} (\Babul“n hˆ magalˆ\). The adjective \megalˆ\ occurs with \Babul“n\ each time in the Apocalypse (14:8; strkjv@16:19; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@18:2,10,21|) as a reminder of Nebuchadrezzar. There is no doubt that Rome is meant by Babylon, as is probably seen already in strkjv@1Peter:5:13|. As a prisoner in Patmos John can speak his mind by this symbolism. {Hath made to drink} (\pepotiken\). Perfect active indicative of \potiz“\, old causative verb (from \potos\ drinking, strkjv@1Peter:4:3|), as in strkjv@Matthew:25:35|. The remarkable phrase that follows seems based on strkjv@Jeremiah:51:8| (Jeremiah:25:15|). It is a combination also of strkjv@Revelation:14:10| (the wine of God's wrath, also in strkjv@16:19; strkjv@19:15|) and strkjv@17:2|. There is no doubt of the dissoluteness of the old Babylon of Jeremiah's day as of the Rome of John's time. Rome is pictured as the great courtesan who intoxicates and beguiles the nations to fornication (17:2,4,6|), but the cup of God's wrath for her and her paramours is full (14:10; strkjv@16:19; strkjv@18:2|).

rwp@Revelation:14:13 @{Write} (\Grapson\). First aorist active imperative of \graph“\ as in strkjv@1:11|. John's meditation is broken by this command. This new beatitude (\makarioi\, Blessed) for the Christian dead goes farther than Paul's words (1Thessalonians:4:14-16; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:18|). Probably "from henceforth" (\ap' arti\) goes with "those who die in the Lord," giving comfort to those facing persecution and death. {That they may rest} (\hina anapaˆsontai\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second future passive of \anapau“\. {From their labours} (\ek t“n kop“n aut“n\). From the toils, the wearinesses, but not from the activities (\erga\), for these "follow with them." There is this to comfort us for all our growth here. Even if cut short, it can be utilized in heaven, which is not a place of idleness, but of the highest form of spiritual service.

rwp@Revelation:16:14 @{Spirits of devils} (\pneumata daimoni“n\). "Spirits of demons." Explanation of the simile \h“s batrachoi\. See strkjv@1Timothy:4:1| about "deceiving spirits and teachings of demons." {Working signs} (\poiounta sˆmeia\). "Doing signs" (present active participle of \poie“\). The Egyptian magicians wrought "signs" (tricks), as did Simon Magus and later Apollonius of Tyana. Houdini claimed that he could reproduce every trick of the spiritualistic mediums. {Which go forth} (\ha ekporeuetai\). Singular verb with neuter plural (collective) subject. {Unto the kings} (\epi tous basileis\). The three evil spirits (dragon and the two beasts) spur on the kings of the whole world to a real world war. "There have been times when nations have been seized by a passion for war which the historian can but imperfectly explain" (Swete). {To gather them together} (\sunagagein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \sunag“\, to express purpose (that of the unclean spirits). {Unto the war of the great day of God, the Almighty} (\eis ton polemon tˆs hˆmeras tˆs megalˆs tou theou tou pantokratoros\). Some take this to be war between nations, like strkjv@Mark:13:8|, but it is more likely war against God (Psalms:2:2|) and probably the battle pictured in strkjv@17:14; strkjv@19:19|. Cf. strkjv@2Peter:3:12|, "the day of God," his reckoning with the nations. See strkjv@Joel:2:11; strkjv@3:4|. Paul uses "that day" for the day of the Lord Jesus (the Parousia) as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:10; strkjv@2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:1:6; strkjv@2:16; strkjv@2Timothy:1:12,18; strkjv@4:8|.

rwp@Revelation:17:16 @{These shall hate the harlot} (\houtoi misˆsousin tˆn pornˆn\). Future active of \mise“\. \Houtoi\ is resumptive demonstrative pronoun (masculine) referring to the ten horns and the beast (neuter); construction according to sense. The downfall of Rome will come from the sudden change in subject peoples. {Shall make her desolate and naked} (\ˆrˆm“menˆn poiˆsousin autˆn kai gumnˆn\). Future active of \poie“\ and perfect passive predicate accusative participle of \erˆmo“\, old verb (from \erˆmos\ desolate), again in strkjv@18:16,19|. \Gumnˆn\ (naked) is predicate adjective. {Shall eat her flesh} (\tas sarkas autˆs phagontai\). Future middle of the defective verb \esthi“\, to eat. Note plural \sarkas\, portions of flesh (James:5:3|) as in strkjv@Psalms:27:2; strkjv@Micah:3:3|. {Shall burn her utterly with fire} (\autˆn katakausousin en puri\). Future active of \katakai“\, to burn down (perfective use of \kai“\). John wrote before the days of Alaric, Genseric, Ricimer, Totila, with their hordes which devastated Rome and the west in the fifth and sixth centuries. "No reader of the _Decline and Fall_ can be at a loss for materials which will at once illustrate and justify the general trend of St. John's prophecy" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:18:14 @{The fruits} (\hˆ op“ra\). The ripe autumn fruit (Jeremiah:40:10,12|). Here only in N.T. Of uncertain etymology (possibly \opos\, sap, \h“ra\, hour, time for juicy sap). See strkjv@Jude:1:12| for \dendra phthinop“rinos\ (autumn trees). {Which thy soul lusteth after} (\sou tˆs epithumias tˆs psuchˆs\). "Of the lusting of thy soul." {Are gone from thee} (\apˆlthen apo sou\). Prophetic aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\ with repetition of \apo\. {All things that were dainty and sumptuous} (\panta ta lipara kai ta lampra\). "All the dainty and the gorgeous things." \Liparos\ is from \lipos\ (grease) and so fat, about food (here only in N.T.), while \lampros\ is bright and shining (James:2:2f.|), about clothing. {Are perished from thee} (\ap“leto apo sou\). Prophetic second aorist middle indicative of \apollumi\ (intransitive). {Shall find them no more at all} (\ouketi ou mˆ auta heurˆsousin\). Doubled double negative with future active, as emphatic a negation as the Greek can make.

rwp@Revelation:19:13 @{Arrayed} (\peribeblˆmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \periball“\, to clothe, often in this book. {In a garment} (\himation\). Accusative case after the passive participle \peribeblˆmenos\. {Sprinkled} (\rerantismenon\). Perfect passive participle of \rantiz“\, in the predicate accusative case agreeing with \himation\. A Q here read \bebammenon\ (perfect passive participle of \bapt“\, to dip). Probably \rerantismenon\ (sprinkled) is correct, because the picture comes from strkjv@Isaiah:63:3|, where Aquila and Symmachus use \rantiz“\. The use of \bebammenon\ (dipped) is a bolder figure and Charles considers it correct. In either case it is the blood of Christ's enemies with which his raiment (\himation\, perhaps a \chlamus\ strkjv@Matthew:27:28,31|) is sprinkled or dipped as the case may be, not his own blood on Calvary (1:5; strkjv@5:9; strkjv@7:14; strkjv@12:11|), but proleptically and prophetically the blood of Christ's enemies. \Haimati\ can be either locative case with \bebammenon\ (dipped in blood) or instrumental with \rerantismenon\ (sprinkled with blood). {The Word of God} (\ho Logos tou theou\). Some scholars hold this addition inconsistent with verse 12|, but it may be merely the explanation of the secret name or still another name besides that known only to himself. The personal use of the Logos applied to Christ occurs only in the Johannine writings unless that is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. In strkjv@John:1:1,14| it is merely \ho Logos\ (the Word), in strkjv@1John:1:1| \ho Logos tˆs z“ˆs\ (the Word of Life), while here it is \ho Logos tou theou\ (the Word of God), one of the strongest arguments for identity of authorship. The idiom here is one common in Luke and Paul for the teaching of Christ (Luke:5:1; strkjv@8:11|, etc.; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:36; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:17|, etc.). Jesus is himself the final and perfect revelation of God to men (Hebrews:1:1f.|).

rwp@Revelation:22:4 @{They shall see his face} (\opsontai to pros“pon autou\). Future active of \hora“\. This vision of God was withheld from Moses (Exodus:33:20,23|), but promised by Jesus to the pure in heart (Matthew:5:8|) and mentioned in strkjv@Hebrews:12:14| as possible only to the holy, and promised in strkjv@Psalms:17:15|. Even here on earth we can see God in the face of Christ (2Corinthians:4:6|), but now in the New Jerusalem we can see Christ face to face (1Corinthians:13:12|), even as he is after we are made really like him (2Corinthians:3:18; strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@1John:3:2|). It is anthropomorphic language, to be sure, but it touches the essential reality of religion. "The supreme felicity is reached, immediate presence with God and the Lamb" (Beckwith). {His name on their foreheads} (\to onoma autou epi t“n met“p“n aut“n\). As in strkjv@3:12; strkjv@7:3; strkjv@14:1|.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE AUTHOR The writer calls himself John (Revelation:1:1,4,9; strkjv@22:8|). But what John? The book can hardly be pseudonymous, though, with the exception of the Shepherd of Hermas, that is the rule with apocalypses. There would have been a clearer claim than just the name. The traditional and obvious way to understand the name is the Apostle John, though Dionysius of Alexandria mentions John Mark as held by some and he himself suggests another John, like the so-called Presbyter John of Papias as quoted by Eusebius. The uncertain language of Papias has raised a deal of questioning. Swete thinks that the majority of modern critics ascribe the Apocalypse to this Presbyter John, to whom Moffatt assigns probably II and III John. Irenaeus represents the Apostle John as having lived to the time of Trajan, at least to A.D. 98. Most ancient writers agree with this extreme old age of John. Justin Martyr states expressly that the Apostle John wrote the Apocalypse. Irenaeus called it the work of a disciple of Jesus. In the ninth century lived Georgius Hamartolus, and a MS. of his alleges that Papias says that John the son of Zebedee was beheaded by the Jews and there is an extract in an Oxford MS. of the seventh century which alleges that Papias says John and James were put to death by the Jews. On the basis of this slim evidence some today argue that John did not live to the end of the century and so did not write any of the Johannine books. But a respectable number of modern scholars still hold to the ancient view that the Apocalypse of John is the work of the Apostle and Beloved Disciple, the son of Zebedee.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THEORIES OF INTERPRETATION They are literally many. There are those who make the book a chart of Christian and even of human history even to the end. These divide into two groups, the continuous and the synchronous. The continuous historical theory takes each vision and symbol in succession as an unfolding panorama. Under the influence of this theory there have been all sorts of fantastic identifications of men and events. The synchronous theory takes the series of sevens (seals, trumpets, bowls) as parallel with each other, each time going up to the end. But in neither case can any satisfactory program be arranged. Another historical interpretation takes it all as over and done, the preterist theory. This theory again breaks into two, one finding the fulfilment all in the Neronic period, the other in the Domitianic era. Something can be said for each view, but neither satisfies the whole picture by any means. Roman Catholic scholars have been fond of the preterist view to escape the Protestant interpretation of the second beast in chapter strkjv@Revelation:13| as papal Rome. There is still another interpretation, the futurist, which keeps the fulfilment all in the future and which can be neither proved nor disproved. There is also the purely spiritual theory which finds no historical allusion anywhere. This again can be neither proved nor disproved. One of the lines of cleavage is the millennium in chapter strkjv@Revelation:20|. Those who take the thousand years literally are either pre-millennialists who look for the second coming of Christ to be followed by a thousand years of personal reign here on earth or the postmillennialists who place the thousand years before the second coming. There are others who turn to strkjv@2Peter:3:8| and wonder if, after all, in a book of symbols this thousand years has any numerical value at all. There seems abundant evidence to believe that this apocalypse, written during the stress and storm of Domitian's persecution, was intended to cheer the persecuted Christians with a view of certain victory at last, but with no scheme of history in view.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE READERS OF THE BOOK The whole book is sent to the seven churches in Asia (Revelation:1:4|). There is a special message to each of the seven (chapters strkjv@Revelation:2; 3|), suited to the peculiar needs of each church and with a direct reference to the geography and history of each church and city, so Ramsay holds (_The Letters to the Seven Churches_). The book is to be read aloud in each church (1:3|). One can imagine the intense interest that the book would arouse in each church. Children are charmed to hear the Apocalypse read. They do not understand the symbols, but they see the pictures in the unfolding panorama. There were other churches in the Province of Asia besides these seven, but these form a circle from Ephesus where John had lived and wrought. They do present a variety of churches, not necessarily all types, and by no means a chart of seven dispensations of Christian history.

rwp@Romans:1:17 @{For therein} (\gar en aut“i\). In the gospel (verse 16|) of which Paul is not ashamed. {A righteousness of God} (\dikaiosunˆ theou\). Subjective genitive, "a God kind of righteousness," one that each must have and can obtain in no other way save "from faith unto faith" (\ek piste“s eis pistin\), faith the starting point and faith the goal (Lightfoot). {Is revealed} (\apokaluptetai\). It is a revelation from God, this God kind of righteousness, that man unaided could never have conceived or still less attained. In these words we have Paul's statement in his own way of the theme of the Epistle, the content of the gospel as Paul understands it. Every word is important: \s“tˆrian\ (salvation), \euaggelion\ (gospel), \apokaluptetai\ (is revealed), \dikaiosunˆ theou\ (righteousness of God), \pistis\ (faith) and \pisteuonti\ (believing). He grounds his position on strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:4| (quoted also in strkjv@Galatians:3:11|). By "righteousness" we shall see that Paul means both "justification" and "sanctification." It is important to get a clear idea of Paul's use of \dikaiosunˆ\ here for it controls the thought throughout the Epistle. Jesus set up a higher standard of righteousness (\dikaiosunˆ\) in the Sermon on the Mount than the Scribes and Pharisees taught and practised (Matthew:5:20|) and proves it in various items. Here Paul claims that in the gospel, taught by Jesus and by himself there is revealed a God kind of righteousness with two ideas in it (the righteousness that God has and that he bestows). It is an old word for quality from \dikaios\, a righteous man, and that from \dikˆ\, right or justice (called a goddess in strkjv@Acts:28:4|), and that allied with \deiknumi\, to show, to point out. Other allied words are \dikaio“\, to declare or make \dikaios\ (Romans:3:24,26|), \dikai“ma\, that which is deemed \dikaios\ (sentence or ordinance as in strkjv@1:32; strkjv@2:26; strkjv@8:4|), \dikai“sis\, the act of declaring \dikaios\ (only twice in N.T., strkjv@4:25; strkjv@5:18|). \Dikaiosunˆ\ and \dikaio“\ are easy to render into English, though we use justice in distinction from righteousness and sanctification for the result that comes after justification (the setting one right with God). Paul is consistent and usually clear in his use of these great words.

rwp@Romans:2:15 @{In that they} (\hoitines\). "The very ones who," qualitative relative. {Written in their hearts} (\grapton en tais kardiais aut“n\). Verbal adjective of \graph“\, to write. When their conduct corresponds on any point with the Mosaic law they practise the unwritten law in their hearts. {Their conscience bearing witness therewith} (\sunmarturousˆs aut“n tˆs suneidˆse“s\). On conscience (\suneidˆsis\) see on ¯1Corinthians:8:7; strkjv@10:25f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:12|. Genitive absolute here with present active participle \sunmarturousˆs\ as in strkjv@9:1|. The word \suneidˆsis\ means co-knowledge by the side of the original consciousness of the act. This second knowledge is personified as confronting the first (Sanday and Headlam). The Stoics used the word a great deal and Paul has it twenty times. It is not in the O.T., but first in this sense in Wisdom strkjv@17:10. All men have this faculty of passing judgment on their actions. It can be over-scrupulous (1Corinthians:10:25|) or "seared" by abuse (1Timothy:4:12|). It acts according to the light it has. {Their thoughts one with another accusing or also excusing them} (\metaxu allˆl“n t“n logism“n katˆgorount“n ˆ kai apologoumen“n\). Genitive absolute again showing the alternative action of the conscience, now accusing, now excusing. Paul does not say that a heathen's conscience always commends everything that he thinks, says, or does. In order for one to be set right with God by his own life he must always act in accord with his conscience and never have its disapproval. That, of course, is impossible else Christ died for naught (Galatians:2:21|). Jesus alone lived a sinless life. For one to be saved without Christ he must also live a sinless life.

rwp@Romans:3:3 @{For what if?} (\ti gar ei?\). But Westcott and Hort print it, \Ti gar? ei\. See strkjv@Phillipians:1:18| for this exclamatory use of \ti gar\ (for how? How stands the case?). {Some were without faith} (\ˆpistˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \apiste“\, old verb, to disbelieve. This is the common N.T. meaning (Luke:24:11,41; strkjv@Acts:28:24; strkjv@Romans:4:20|). Some of them "disbelieved," these "depositaries and guardians of revelation" (Denney). But the word also means to be unfaithful to one's trust and Lightfoot argues for that idea here and in strkjv@2Timothy:2:13|. The Revised Version renders it "faithless" there. Either makes sense here and both ideas are true of some of the Jews, especially concerning the Messianic promises and Jesus. {The faithfulness of God} (\tˆn pistin tou theou\). Undoubtedly \pistis\ has this sense here and not "faith." God has been faithful (2Timothy:2:13|) whether the Jews (some of them) were simply disbelievers or untrue to their trust. Paul can use the words in two senses in verse 3|, but there is no real objection to taking \ˆpistˆsan, apistian, pistin\, all to refer to faithfulness rather than just faith.

rwp@Romans:3:8 @{And why not} (\kai mˆ\). We have a tangled sentence which can be cleared up in two ways. One is (Lightfoot) to supply \genˆtai\ after \mˆ\ and repeat \ti\ (\kai ti mˆ genˆtai\, deliberative subjunctive in a question): And why should it not happen? The other way (Sanday and Headlam) is to take \mˆ\ with \poiˆs“men\ and make a long parenthesis of all in between. Even so it is confusing because \hoti\ also (recitative \hoti\) comes just before \poiˆs“men\. The parenthesis is necessary anyhow, for there are two lines of thought, one the excuse brought forward by the unbeliever, the other the accusation that Paul affirms that very excuse that we may do evil that good may come. Note the double indirect assertion (the accusative and the infinitive \hˆmƒs legein\ after \phasin\ and then the direct quotation with recitative \hoti\ after \legein\, a direct quotation dependent on the infinitive in indirect quotation. {Let us do evil that good may come} (\poiˆs“men ta kaka hina elthˆi ta agatha\). The volitive aorist subjunctive (\poiˆs“men\) and the clause of purpose (\hina\ and the aorist subjunctive \elthˆi\). It sounds almost uncanny to find this maxim of the Jesuits attributed to Paul in the first century by Jews. It was undoubtedly the accusation of Antinomianism because Paul preached justification by faith and not by works.

rwp@Romans:3:24 @{Being justified} (\dikaioumenoi\). Present passive participle of \dikaio“\, to set right, repeated action in each case, each being set right. {Freely} (\d“rean\). As in strkjv@Galatians:2:21|. {By his grace} (\tˆi autou chariti\). Instrumental case of this wonderful word \charis\ which so richly expresses Paul's idea of salvation as God's free gift. {Through the redemption} (\dia tˆs apolutr“se“s\). A releasing by ransom (\apo, lutr“sis\ from \lutro“\ and that from \lutron\, ransom). God did not set men right out of hand with nothing done about men's sins. We have the words of Jesus that he came to give his life a ransom (\lutron\) for many (Mark:10:45; strkjv@Matthew:20:28|). \Lutron\ is common in the papyri as the purchase-money in freeing slaves (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 327f.). {That is in Christ Jesus} (\tˆi en Christ“i Iˆsou\). There can be no mistake about this redemption. It is like strkjv@John:3:16|.

rwp@Romans:3:31 @{Nay, we establish the law} (\alla nomon histanomen\). Present indicative active of late verb \histan“\ from \histˆmi\. This Paul hinted at in verse 21|. How he will show in chapter 4 how Abraham himself is an example of faith and in his life illustrates the very point just made. Besides, apart from Christ and the help of the Holy Spirit no one can keep God's law. The Mosaic law is only workable by faith in Christ.

rwp@Romans:5:1 @{Being therefore justified by faith} (\dikai“thentes oun ek piste“s\). First aorist passive participle of \dikaio“\, to set right and expressing antecedent action to the verb \ech“men\. The \oun\ refers to the preceding conclusive argument (chapters 1 to 4) that this is done by faith. {Let us have peace with God} (\eirˆnˆn ech“men pros ton theon\). This is the correct text beyond a doubt, the present active subjunctive, not \echomen\ (present active indicative) of the Textus Receptus which even the American Standard Bible accepts. It is curious how perverse many real scholars have been on this word and phrase here. Godet, for instance. Vincent says that "it is difficult if not impossible to explain it." One has only to observe the force of the _tense_ to see Paul's meaning clearly. The mode is the volitive subjunctive and the present tense expresses linear action and so does not mean "make peace" as the ingressive aorist subjunctive \eirˆnˆn sch“men\ would mean. A good example of \sch“men\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:38| (\sch“men tˆn klˆronomian autou\) where it means: "Let us get hold of his inheritance." Here \eirˆnˆn ech“men\ can only mean: "Let us enjoy peace with God" or "Let us retain peace with God." We have in strkjv@Acts:9:31| \eichen eirˆnˆn\ (imperfect and so linear), the church "enjoyed peace," not "made peace." The preceding justification (\dikai“thentes\) "made peace with God." Observe \pros\ (face to face) with \ton theon\ and \dia\ (intermediate agent) with \tou kuriou\.

rwp@Romans:8:1 @{Therefore now} (\ara nun\). Two particles. Points back to the triumphant note in strkjv@7:25| after the preceding despair. {No condemnation} (\ouden katakrima\). As sinners we deserved condemnation in our unregenerate state in spite of the struggle. But God offers pardon "to those in Christ Jesus (\tois en Christ“i Iˆsou\). This is Paul's Gospel. The fire has burned on and around the Cross of Christ. There and there alone is safety. Those in Christ Jesus can lead the consecrated, the crucified, the baptized life.

rwp@Romans:8:7 @{Is not subject} (\ouch hupotassetai\). Present passive indicative of \hupotass“\, late verb, military term for subjection to orders. Present tense here means continued insubordination. {Neither indeed can it be} (\oude gar dunatai\). "For it is not even able to do otherwise." This helpless state of the unregenerate man Paul has shown above apart from Christ. Hope lies in Christ (7:25|) and the Spirit of life (8:2|).

rwp@Romans:8:8 @{Cannot please God} (\the“i aresai ou dunantai\). Because of the handicap of the lower self in bondage to sin. This does not mean that the sinner has no responsibility and cannot be saved. He is responsible and can be saved by the change of heart through the Holy Spirit.

rwp@Romans:8:14 @{Sons of God} (\huioi theou\). In the full sense of this term. In verse 16| we have \tekna theou\ (children of God). Hence no great distinction can be drawn between \huios\ and \teknon\. The truth is that \huios\ is used in various ways in the New Testament. In the highest sense, not true of any one else, Jesus Christ is God's Son (8:3|). But in the widest sense all men are "the offspring" (\genos\) of God as shown in strkjv@Acts:17:28| by Paul. But in the special sense here only those are "sons of God" who are led by the Spirit of God, those born again (the second birth) both Jews and Gentiles, "the sons of Abraham" (\huioi Abraam\, strkjv@Galatians:3:7|), the children of faith.

rwp@Romans:8:19 @{The earnest expectation of creation} (\hˆ apokaradokia tˆs ktise“s\). This substantive has so far been found nowhere save here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:20|, though the verb \apokaradoke“\ is common in Polybius and Plutarch. Milligan (_Vocabulary_) thinks that Paul may have made the substantive from the verb. It is a double compound (\apo\, off from, \kara\, head, \doke“\, Ionic verb, to watch), hence to watch eagerly with outstretched head. {Waiteth for} (\apekdechetai\). See on ¯1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@Galatians:5:5| for this rare word (possibly formed by Paul, Milligan). "To wait it out" (Thayer). {The revealing of the sons of God} (\tˆn apokalupsin t“n hui“n tou theou\). Cf. strkjv@1John:3:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8; strkjv@Colossians:3:4|. This mystical sympathy of physical nature with the work of grace is beyond the comprehension of most of us. But who can disprove it?

rwp@Romans:8:20 @{Was subjected} (\hupetagˆ\). Second aorist passive indicative of \hupatass“\ (cf. verse 7|). {To vanity} (\tˆi mataiotˆti\). Dative case. Rare and late word, common in LXX. From \mataios\, empty, vain. strkjv@Ephesians:4:17; strkjv@2Peter:2:18|. {Not of its own will} (\ouch hekousa\). Common adjective, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:9:27|. It was due to the effect of man's sin. {But by reason of him} (\alla dia ton\). Because of God. {In hope that} (\eph' helpidi hoti\). Note the form \helpidi\ rather than the usual \elpidi\ and so \eph'\. \Hoti\ can be causal "because" instead of declarative "that."

rwp@Romans:8:34 @{Shall condemn} (\katakrin“n\). Can be either present active participle (condemns) or the future (shall condemn). It is a bold accuser who can face God with false charges or with true ones for that matter for we have an "Advocate" at God's Court (1John:2:1|), "who is at the right hand of God" (\hos estin en dexiƒi tou theou\) "who also maketh intercession for us" (\hos kai entugchanei huper hˆm“n\). Our Advocate paid the debt for our sins with his blood. The score is settled. We are free (8:1|).

rwp@Romans:8:35 @{Shall separate} (\ch“risei\). Future active of old verb \choriz“\ from adverb \ch“ris\ and that from \ch“ra\, space. Can any one put a distance between Christ's love and us (objective genitive)? Can any one lead Christ to cease loving us? Such things do happen between husband and wife, alas. Paul changes the figure from "who" (\tis\) to "what" (\ti\). The items mentioned will not make Christ love us less. Paul here glories in tribulations as in strkjv@5:3ff|.

rwp@Romans:9:3 @{I could wish} (\ˆuchomˆn\). Idiomatic imperfect, "I was on the point of wishing." We can see that \euchomai\ (I do wish) would be wrong to say. \An ˆuchomˆn\ would mean that he does not wish (conclusion of second class condition). \An ˆuchomˆn\ would be conclusion of fourth class condition and too remote. He is shut up to the imperfect indicative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 886). {Anathema} (\anathema\). See for this word as distinct from \anathˆma\ (offering) strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@Galatians:1:8f.| {I myself} (\autos eg“\). Nominative with the infinitive \einai\ and agreeing with subject of \ˆuchomˆn\. {According to the flesh} (\kata sarka\). As distinguished from Paul's Christian brethren.

rwp@Romans:9:14 @{Is there unrighteousness with God?} (\mˆ adikia para t“i the“i?\). Paul goes right to the heart of the problem. \Mˆ\ expects a negative answer. "Beside" (\para\) God there can be no injustice to Esau or to any one because of election.

rwp@Romans:9:16 @{Songs:then} (\ara oun\). In view of this quotation. {It is not of} (\ou\). We must supply \estin eleos\ with \ou\. "Mercy is not of." The articular participles (\tou thelontos, tou trechontos, tou ele“ntos\) can be understood as in the genitive with \eleos\ understood (mercy is not a quality of) or as the predicate ablative of source like \epiluse“s\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:20|. Paul is fond of the metaphor of running.

rwp@Romans:11:11 @{Did they stumble that they might fall?} (\mˆ eptaisan hina pes“sin?\). Negative answer expected by \mˆ\ as in verse 1|. First aorist active indicative of \ptai“\, old verb, to stumble, only here in Paul (see strkjv@James:3:2|), suggested perhaps by \skandalon\ in verse 9|. If \hina\ is final, then we must add "merely" to the idea, "merely that they might fall" or make a sharp distinction between \ptai“\, to stumble, and \pipt“\, to fall, and take \pes“sin\ as effective aorist active subjunctive to fall completely and for good. \Hina\, as we know, can be either final, sub-final, or even result. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:7:29; strkjv@Galatians:5:17|. Paul rejects this query in verse 11| as vehemently as he did that in verse 1|. {By their fall} (\t“i aut“n parapt“mati\). Instrumental case. For the word, a falling aside or a false step from \parapipt“\, see strkjv@5:15-20|. {Is come}. No verb in the Greek, but \ginetai\ or \gegonen\ is understood. {For to provoke them to jealousy} (\eis to parazˆl“sai\). Purpose expressed by \eis\ and the articular infinitive, first aorist active, of \parazˆlo“\, for which verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:10:22|. As an historical fact Paul turned to the Gentiles when the Jews rejected his message (Acts:13:45ff.; strkjv@28:28|, etc.). {The riches of the world} (\ploutos kosmou\). See strkjv@10:12|. {Their loss} (\to hˆttˆma aut“n\). Songs:perhaps in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:7|, but in strkjv@Isaiah:31:8| defeat is the idea. Perhaps so here. {Fulness} (\plˆr“ma\). Perhaps "completion," though the word from \plˆro“\, to fill, has a variety of senses, that with which anything is filled (1Corinthians:10:26,28|), that which is filled (Ephesians:1:23|). {How much more?} (\pos“i mallon\). Argument _a fortiori_ as in verse 24|. Verse 25| illustrates the point.

rwp@Romans:11:24 @{Contrary to nature} (\para phusin\). This is the gist of the argument, the power of God to do what is contrary to natural processes. He put the wild olive (Gentile) into the good olive tree (the spiritual Israel) and made the wild olive (contrary to nature) become the good olive (\kallielaios\, the garden olive, \kallos\ and \elaia\ in Aristotle and a papyrus). {Into their own olive tree} (\tˆi idiƒi elaiƒi\). Dative case. Another argument _a fortiori_, "how much more" (\poll“i mallon\). God can graft the natural Israel back upon the spiritual Israel, if they become willing.

rwp@Romans:11:33 @{O the depth} (\O bathos\). Exclamation with omega and the nominative case of \bathos\ (see on ¯2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:8:39|). Paul's argument concerning God's elective grace and goodness has carried him to the heights and now he pauses on the edge of the precipice as he contemplates God's wisdom and knowledge, fully conscious of his inability to sound the bottom with the plummet of human reason and words. {Unsearchable} (\anexeraunˆta\). Double compound (\a\ privative and \ex\) verbal adjective of \ereuna“\ (old spelling \-eu-\), late and rare word (LXX, Dio Cassius, Heraclitus), only here in N.T. Some of God's wisdom can be known (1:20f.|), but not all. {Past tracing out} (\anexichniastoi\). Another verbal adjective from \a\ privative and \exichniaz“\, to trace out by tracks (\ichnos\ strkjv@Romans:4:12|). Late word in Job:(Job:5:9; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@34:24|) from which use Paul obtained it here and strkjv@Ephesians:3:8| (only N.T. examples). Also in ecclesiastical writers. Some of God's tracks he has left plain to us, but others are beyond us.

rwp@Romans:12:7 @{Let us give ourselves}. There is no verb in the Greek. We must supply \d“men heautous\ or some such phrase. {Or he that teacheth} (\eite ho didask“n\). Here the construction changes and no longer do we have the accusative case like \diakonian\ (general word for Christian service of all kinds including ministers and deacons) as the object of \echontes\, but the nominative articular participle. A new verb must be supplied of which \ho didask“n\ is the subject as with the succeeding participles through verse 8|. Perhaps in each instance the verb is to be repeated from the participle like \didasket“\ here (let him teach) or a general term \poieit“\ (let him do it) can be used for all of them as seems necessary before "with liberality" in verse 8| (\en haplotˆti\, in simplicity, for which word, see strkjv@Matthew:6:22; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@9:11,13|). {He that ruleth} (\ho proistamenos\). "The one standing in front" for which see strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12|. {With diligence} (\en spoudˆi\). "In haste" as if in earnest (Mark:6:25; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11f., strkjv@8:8,16|), from \speud“\, to hasten. Again verse 11|. {With cheerfulness} (\en hilarotˆti\). Late word, only here in N.T., from \hilaros\ (2Corinthians:9:7|) cheerful, hilarious.

rwp@Romans:12:9 @{Without hypocrisy} (\anupokritos\). Late double compound adjective for which see strkjv@2Corinthians:6:6|. Hypocritical or pretended love is no love at all as Paul describes \agapˆ\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:13|. {Abhor} (\apostugountes\). Old verb with intensive (\apo\) dislike, only here in N.T. The present active participle is here employed in the sense of the present active indicative as sometimes happens with the independent participle (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1132ff.). This same idiom appears with \koll“menoi\ (cleaving) for which verb see on ¯1Corinthians:6:17|, with \proˆgoumenoi\ (preferring) in verse 10| (old verb here only in N.T.), and with the participles in verses 11-13| and again in verses 16-18|. One can supply \este\ if he prefers.

rwp@Romans:13:8 @{Save to love one another} (\ei mˆ to allˆlous agapƒin\). "Except the loving one another." This articular infinitive is in the accusative case the object of \opheilete\ and partitive apposition with \mˆden\ (nothing). This debt can never be paid off, but we should keep the interest paid up. {His neighbour} (\ton heteron\). "The other man," "the second man." "Just as in the relations of man and God \pistis\ has been substituted for \nomos\, so between man and man \agapˆ\ takes the place of definite legal relations" (Sanday and Headlam). See strkjv@Matthew:22:37-40| for the words of Jesus on this subject. Love is the only solution of our social relations and national problems.

rwp@Romans:13:11 @{And this} (\kai touto\). Either nominative absolute or accusative of general reference, a common idiom for "and that too" (1Corinthians:6:6,8|, etc.). {Knowing} (\eidotes\). Second perfect active participle, nominative plural without a principal verb. Either we must supply a verb like \poiˆs“men\ (let us do it) or \poiˆsate\ (do ye do it) or treat it as an independent participle as in strkjv@12:10f|. {The season} (\ton kairon\). The critical period, not \chronos\ (time in general). {High time} (\h“ra\). Like our the "hour" has come, etc. MSS. vary between \hˆmas\ (us) and \humƒs\ (you), accusative of general reference with \egerthˆnai\ (first aorist passive infinitive of \egeir“\, to awake, to wake up), "to be waked up out of sleep" (\ex hupnou\). {Nearer to us} (\egguteron hˆm“n\). Probably so, though \hˆm“n\ can be taken equally well with \hˆ s“tˆria\ (our salvation is nearer). Final salvation, Paul means, whether it comes by the second coming of Christ as they all hoped or by death. It is true of us all.

rwp@Romans:15:20 @{Yea} (\hout“s de\). "And so," introducing a limitation to the preceding statement. {Making it my aim} (\philotimoumenon\). Present middle participle (accusative case agreeing with \me\) of \philotimeomai\, old verb, to be fond of honour (\philos, timˆ\). In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:9|. A noble word in itself, quite different in aim from the Latin word for {ambition} (\ambio\, to go on both sides to carry one's point). {Not where} (\ouch hopou\). Paul was a pioneer preacher pushing on to new fields after the manner of Daniel Boone in Kentucky. {That I might now build upon another man's foundation} (\hina mˆ ep' allotrion themelion oikodom“\). For \allotrios\ (not \allos\) see strkjv@14:4|. For \themelion\, see strkjv@Luke:6:48f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11|. This noble ambition of Paul's is not within the range of some ministers who can only build on another's foundation as Apollos did in Corinth. But the pioneer preacher and missionary has a dignity and glory all his own.

rwp@Romans:16:7 @{Andronicus and Junias} (\Andronicou kai Iounian\). The first is a Greek name found even in the imperial household. The second name can be either masculine or feminine. {Kinsmen} (\suggeneis\). Probably only fellow-countrymen as in strkjv@9:13|. {Fellow-prisoners} (\sunaichmal“tus\). Late word and rare (in Lucian). One of Paul's frequent compounds with \sun\. Literally, fellow captives in war. Perhaps they had shared one of Paul's numerous imprisonments (2Corinthians:11:23|). In N.T. only here, strkjv@Philemon:1:23; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|. {Of note} (\episˆmoi\). Stamped, marked (\epi sˆma\). Old word, only here and strkjv@Matthew:27:16| (bad sense) in N.T. {Among the apostles} (\en tois apostolois\). Naturally this means that they are counted among the apostles in the general sense true of Barnabas, James, the brother of Christ, Silas, and others. But it can mean simply that they were famous in the circle of the apostles in the technical sense. {Who have been in Christ before me} (\hoi kai pro emou gegonan en Christ“i\). Andronicus and Junias were converted before Paul was. Note \gegonan\ (_Koin‚_ form by analogy) instead of the usual second perfect active indicative form \gegonasin\, which some MSS. have. The perfect tense notes that they are still in Christ.

rwp@Titus:1:4 @{My true child} (\gnˆsi“i tekn“i\). See strkjv@1Timothy:1:2| for this adjective with Timothy. Titus is not mentioned in Acts, possibly because he is Luke's brother. But one can get a clear picture of him by turning to strkjv@2Corinthians:2:13; strkjv@7:6-15; strkjv@8:6-24; strkjv@12:16-18; strkjv@Galatians:2:1-3; strkjv@Titus:1:4f.; strkjv@3:12; strkjv@2Timothy:4:10|. He had succeeded in Corinth where Timothy had failed. Paul had left him in Crete as superintendent of the work there. Now he writes him from Nicopolis (Titus:3:12|). {After a common faith} (\kata koinˆn pistin\). Here \kata\ does mean standard, not aim, but it is a faith (\pistin\) common to a Gentile (a Greek) like Titus as well as to a Jew like Paul and so common to all races and classes (Jude:1:3|). \Koinos\ does not here have the notion of unclean as in strkjv@Acts:10:14; strkjv@11:8|.

rwp@Titus:2:3 @{Aged women} (\presbutidas\). Old word, feminine of \presbutˆs\, only here in N.T. See \presbuteras\ in strkjv@1Timothy:5:2|. {Reverent} (\hieroprepeis\). Old word (\heiros, prepei\). Only here in N.T. Same idea in strkjv@1Timothy:2:10|. Like people engaged in sacred duties (Lock). {In demeanour} (\en katastˆmati\). Late and rare word (inscriptions) from \kathistˆmi\, deportment, only here in N.T. {Not slanderers} (\mˆ diabolous\). See strkjv@1Timothy:3:11; strkjv@2Timothy:3:3|. {Nor enslaved to much wine} (\mˆde oin“i poll“i dedoul“menas\). Perfect passive participle of \doulo“\, with dative case \oin“i\. See strkjv@1Timothy:3:8|. "It is proved by experience that the reclamation of a woman drunkard is almost impossible" (White). But God can do the "impossible." {Teachers of that which is good} (\kalodidaskalous\). Compound word found here alone, _bona docentes_ (teaching good and beautiful things). A sorely needed mission.

Seeker Overlay: Off On

[BookofCONCORD] [CONCORD:-1] [CONCORD:Can] [CONCORD:1] [Discuss] Tag Can [Audio][Presentation]
Bible:
Bible:
Book:

[pBiblx2]
Sun Jun 30 07:20:43 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020